State jobless rate holds steady at 10 percent

Scott Olson
June 18, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The state’s unemployment rate held steady at 10 percent in May, according to figures released Friday morning by the Indiana Department of Workforce Development.

Before April, Indiana’s revised seasonally-adjusted unemployment rate had teetered between 9.7 percent and 9.9 percent in the previous six months, after topping 10 percent from March through September of last year.

Yet, the number of jobs in Indiana rose by 6,300 in May, marking a 2.1-percent gain since December, the state said.

“It is welcome news that private-sector employment grew in Indiana for the fifth consecutive month,” DWD Commissioner Mark W. Everson said in a prepared statement. “Since the start of the year, one in 10 of all jobs created across the country were in Indiana. While unemployment is still too high, we are seeing a sharp drop in new unemployment claims.”

Despite hitting 10 percent in unemployment, Indiana still has the lowest jobless rate among its neighboring states. Indiana’s unemployment rate in May 2009 was 10.6 percent.

Michigan’s 13.6-percent unemployment rate was tops in the Midwest in May, followed by Illinois at 10.8 percent, Ohio at 10.7 percent and Kentucky at 10.4 percent.

Indiana, however, was the only Midwestern state that did not post a decline in its May unemployment rate.

The national unemployment rate is 9.7 percent.

The DWD said there were more people working in several employment sectors statewide in March, including professional and business services, private education and health services, and manufacturing. Sectors reporting job declines included trade, transportation and utilities, construction and financial activities.
The number of unemployed Hoosiers declined, to 306,487, in May from a revised 308,694 in April.

In the Indianapolis metro area, the non-seasonally adjusted jobless rate was 8.9 percent in May, up from 8.6 percent in May 2009.

Comparisons of metro areas are most accurately made using the same months in prior years, because the government does not adjust the figures for factory furloughs and other seasonal fluctuations.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Looking at the two companies - in spite of their relative size to one another -- Ricker's image is (by all accounts) pretty solid and reputable. Their locations are clean, employees are friendly and the products they offer are reasonably priced. By contrast, BP locations are all over the place and their reputation is poor, especially when you consider this is the same "company" whose disastrous oil spill and their response was nothing short of irresponsible should tell you a lot. The fact you also have people who are experienced in franchising saying their system/strategy is flawed is a good indication that another "spill" has occurred and it's the AM-PM/Ricker's customers/company that are having to deal with it.

  2. Daniel Lilly - Glad to hear about your points and miles. Enjoy Wisconsin and Illinois. You don't care one whit about financial discipline, which is why you will blast the "GOP". Classic liberalism.

  3. Isn't the real reason the terrain? The planners under-estimated the undulating terrain, sink holes, karst features, etc. This portion of the route was flawed from the beginning.

  4. You thought no Indy was bad, how's no fans working out for you? THe IRl No direct competition and still no fans. Hey George Family, spend another billion dollars, that will fix it.

  5. I live downtown Indy and had to be in downtown Chicago for a meeting. In other words, I am the target demographic for this train. It leaves at 6:00-- early but doable. Then I saw it takes 5+ hours. No way. I drove. I'm sure I paid 3 to 5 times as much once you factor in gas, parking, and tolls, but it was reimbursed so not a factor for me. Any business traveler is going to take the option that gets there quickly and reliably... and leisure travelers are going to take the option that has a good schedule and promotional prices (i.e., Megabus). Indy to Chicago is the right distance (too short to fly but takes several hours to drive) that this train could be extremely successful even without subsidies, if they could figure out how to have several frequencies (at least 3x/day) and make the trip in a reasonable amount of time. For those who have never lived on the east coast-- Amtrak is the #1 choice for NY-DC and NY-Boston. They have the Acela service, it runs almost every hour, and it takes you from downtown to downtown. It beats driving and flying hands down. It is too bad that we cannot build something like this in the midwest, at least to connect the bigger cities.