The 10 Worst-Paying States for Women

November 2, 2012 by Mike Sauter

Source: Thinkstock

In 2011, men working full-time earned a median of $48,765. Women earned just $38,373. That difference of more than $10,000 only tells part of the story of the continuing gender wage gap in this country. Depending on the industry, men in some states earn as much as $20,000 to $30,000 more a year than women. In some cases, the difference is even more. Men in corporate managerial positions earn roughly $35,000 more than women working full time in the same field.

Income inequality is severe in some industries, and there are states with concentrations of these businesses. In these states, the gender earnings gap for full-time workers is extremely high. In Wyoming, where there are several of these ”pay disparity” occupations, women earned $17,838 less than men in 2011 — the largest disparity among all states. Based on data from the Census Bureau’s 2011 American Community Survey, 24/7 Wall St. identified the worst-paying states for women.



In an interview with 24/7 Wall St., Institute for Women’s Policy Research study director Ariane Hegewisch explained that the biggest reason for the pay gap between men and women in these states came down to where people are employed. While the gap in pay still exists in nearly every occupation, she said, it is much narrower in fields such as health care, education and real estate. Nationally, the income gap for educational services is $7,408, while in real estate it is less than $5,000.

In states where more people are employed in blue-collar work, women are more likely to work in sectors where the pay is much lower than men in blue-collar positions.

Hegewisch explained that in states where more workers are blue collar, men are able to find employment in jobs such as resource collection and construction — positions that are still predominantly male and allow for bonuses and overtime and generally higher pay. In North Dakota, for example, the booming natural gas industry employs hundreds of thousands of workers. In 2011, 90.9% of oil, mining and extraction workers in the state were male. Those few women who were employed in that industry earned $46,301 less than men. All five states with the highest proportions of workers in this field are among the 10 with the highest gender wage gap.

In states like North Dakota, women are often left to work in lower-paying fields, especially retail. While the income gender gap is closer to the national wage gap in this field, at less than $9,000, the fact that a disproportionately large number of women are employed in this field results in a wide income gap statewide. In West Virginia — which has one of the greatest gender wage gaps in the country — the largest employer is Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (NYSE: WMT). As of 2011, 54.8% of West Virginian retail workers were women, the third-highest proportion in the country. Women working full-time in retail in West Virginia earned a median of just $14,304.

In the states with the largest wage gap between men and women, it is not always the case that full-time income for women is lower than in other states. In five of the 10 states, income for women was among the top 10 in the country. However, in those states, earnings among men were even higher. For example, in Massachusetts, women working full-time earned a median of $47,302, the fourth highest in the country. Men in the state, however, earned more than $60,000.

The gap in pay in some of these states is even more pronounced in their cities. In five major metropolitan statistical areas, male pay exceeds female pay by at least $20,000. Most of the 10 metro areas with the widest gender pay gap are in the 10 states with the highest pay gaps. In Casper, Wy., which has the worst pay gap in the country, men earn more than $25,000 more than women.

To identify the states that pay women the least, 24/7 Wall St. compared the median incomes for the past 12 months of both men and women who worked full-time, year-round in each state, based on data collected by the U.S. Census Bureau and released as part of the 2011 American Community Survey report. From the ACS, we included in our analysis the proportion of workers in state employed in each industry, as well as the gender distribution and gender-specific income in each of these industries. We also reviewed 2011 unemployment rates.

These are the 10 worst-paying states for women.

10. North Dakota
>Difference in full-time, year-round income: $12,955
>Female full-time, year-round median income: $33,792 (11th lowest)
>Male full-time, year-round median income: $46,747 (25th highest)
>2011 unemployment rate: 3.5% (the lowest)
North Dakota’s unemployment rate was the lowest in the country in 2011 at 3.5%, but the jobs that pay larger salaries were primarily in male-dominated industries. The state is in the midst of an oil boom, an industry that is attracting predominantly young men to work in the oil fields for relatively high pay. More than 13% of state workers were employed in natural resources, construction and maintenance, while more than 9% were employed in agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting and mining, both the second highest among all-states. Meanwhile, 12% of North Dakota workers were employed in retail, which has a larger proportion of women working in it and tends to have lower wages.

9. West Virginia
>Difference in full-time, year-round income: $13,237
>Female full-time, year-round median income:$30,632 (2nd lowest)
>Male full-time, year-round median income: $43,869 (14th lowest)
>2011 unemployment rate: 8% (25th lowest)
At 12.3%, West Virginia had the sixth highest percentage of workers in agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting and mining, with men representing more than 91% of those workers men, the second highest percentage of all states. West Virginia has long had a robust coal mining industry, with wages for coal miners averaging $85,051 in 2011 compared to $38,567 across all industries. Conversely, 12.6% of West Virginia workers were employed in the lower paying retail trade, the sixth highest rate of all states. About 55% of retail workers in 2011 were women — the third highest rate of all states.

8. New Hampshire
>Difference in full-time, year-round income: $13,263
>Female full-time, year-round median income: $41,953 (8th highest)
>Male full-time, year-round median income: $55,216 (8th highest)
>2011 unemployment rate: 5.4% (4th lowest)
New Hampshire is by some measures one of the best states to be in as a female worker. The state had one of the lowest unemployment rates in the country in 2011, and full-time, year-round females earned more than all but seven states in the country. However, they still earned $13,263 less than New Hampshire men in 2011. In the state’s Manchester-Nashua metropolitan area, the difference was nearly $16,000. More than 165,000 New Hampshire workers were employed in education, more than in any other major industry. New Hampshire women employed in that industry earned $34,007, while men employed in the industry earned $44,288.

7. Virginia
>Difference in full-time, year-round income: $13,459
>Female full-time, year-round median income: $41,797 (10th highest)
>Male full-time, year-round median income: $55,256 (7th highest)
>2011 unemployment rate: 6.2% (8th lowest)
Virginia had a comparatively high-skilled workforce — it had the second highest percentage of workers in professional, scientific and management, and administrative and waste management services. Those jobs comprised nearly 15% of Virginia’s workforce in 2011, and men filled more than 60% of those jobs, the sixth highest rate of all states. But the wage gap was present across a wide range of different industries. Women in full-time management, business and financial occupations earned 72 cents for every $1 men earned in 2011. It was even worse in sales occupations, where women earned just 64 cents for every dollar men earned.

6. Massachusetts
>Difference in full-time, year-round income: $13,924
>Female full-time, year-round median income: $47,302 (4th highest)
>Male full-time, year-round median income: $61,226 (3rd highest)
>2011 unemployment rate: 7.4% (18th lowest)
Massachusetts workers earned a median of $30,463 in 2011, more than all but three states. The state’s women earned nearly $14,000 less than men. In the Boston metropolitan area, the wage gap was more than $15,000. In the state, nearly 70% of all managers of corporate enterprises were women, but women in those positions earned a median of $46,635, which was less than half what men in those position earned — a median of $108,262. Massachusetts had one of the largest proportions of its working population employed in education. In that industry, median earning among men exceeded those of women by more than $6,000.

5. Washington
>Difference in full-time, year-round income:$13,979
>Female full-time, year-round median income: $41,817 (9th highest)
>Male full-time, year-round median income: $55,796 (6th highest)
>2011 unemployment rate: 9.2% (16th highest)
As of 2011, Washington state had one of the highest proportions of workers in professional, scientific and management positions. Women in those positions earned nearly $22,500 less than men did. In Washington’s Bremerton-Silverdale metropolitan area, women earned $18,650 less than men — the ninth biggest earnings gap among all U.S. metropolitan areas. In the state’s professional, scientific and management positions, which account for a high 11.9% of all positions in the state, median earning for men exceeded that for women by $22,487. This was nearly $10,000 higher than the national wage gap in this industry.

4. Utah
>Difference in full-time, year-round income: $15,094
>Female full-time, year-round median income: $34,052 (13th lowest)
>Male full-time, year-round median income: $49,146 (19th highest)
>2011 unemployment rate: 6.7% (11th lowest)
In 2011, Utah women with full-time, year-round jobs earned $15,094 less than men in those positions. But if part-time jobs are included, women earned $16,236 less than men in 2011, a higher pay gap than any state but Alaska. Two metropolitan areas in Utah earned a spot among the 20 metro areas with the highest pay gap between men and women. Women in the Provo-Orem metro area with full-time, year-round positions earned $20,446 less than men in 2011, the third highest gap in the country. Meanwhile, women in the Ogden-Clearfield metro area earned $17,587 less than men, the 13th largest gap.

3. Louisiana
>Difference in full-time, year-round income: $15,130
>Female full-time, year-round median income: $32,633 (9th lowest)
>Male full-time, year-round median income: $47,763 (20th highest)
>2011 unemployment rate: 7.3% (16th lowest)
More than 8% of jobs in Louisiana were in construction, more than any other state, with more than 90% of those construction jobs filled by men. Meanwhile, the 10.6% of jobs in arts, entertainment, recreation and food services, which generally offer lower pay, were the seventh highest of all states. Women filled more than 55% of those jobs. Two Louisiana metropolitan areas were among the 10 areas with the highest wage gap between men and women. Women in the Houma-Bayou Cane-Thibodaux metro area with full-time, year-round jobs earned $20,315 less than men with similar positions, the fourth largest wage gap. Women in Lake Charles earned $18,462 less, the 10th largest gap.

2. Alaska
>Difference in full-time, year-round income: $15,285
>Female full-time, year-round median income: $41,529 (11th highest)
>Male full-time, year-round median income: $56,814 (5th highest)
>2011 unemployment rate: 7.6% (22nd lowest)
Alaska’s job market, similar to many other states on the list, has benefited from an oil and gas boom, which tends to pay solidly high wages but is a male-dominated field. Meanwhile, the finance, insurance, real estate and rental properties occupations, fields with a lower pay gap compared to others, comprised a national-low 4% of jobs in the state. Including part-time workers, the difference in median income between men and women was higher than any other state, with a $16,474 discrepancy. The National Women’s Law Center found that women made up roughly two out of every three minimum wage workers in Alaska. High educational attainment by women did not erase the pay gap. As a whole, Alaska women with a bachelor’s degree earned less than men with just some college completion or an associate degree.

1. Wyoming
>Difference in full-time, year-round income: $17,838
>Female full-time, year-round median income: $35,698 (24th lowest)
>Male full-time, year-round median income: $53,536 (9th highest)
>2011 unemployment rate: 6% (7th lowest)
Much of Wyoming’s pay gap can be attributed to the jobs available in the state. Wyoming had the highest percentage of people working in occupations involving both natural resources, construction and maintenance, as well as agriculture, forestry, fishing, hunting and mining. While those jobs, notably in mining and oil production, tend to be male-dominated and higher paying, the Wyoming Women’s Foundation found pay gaps still persisted in other jobs that are not necessarily male dominated. The Casper metropolitan area had the largest gap of all 366 metropolitan areas in terms of pay between men and women. The median income for a man working full-time was $25,222 higher than for a woman working full-time.
-By Michael B. Sauter and Samuel Weigley

October Jobs Report: 6 Signs It's Too Early To Declare Victory

Mark Gongloff

Posted: 11/02/2012 12:08 pm EDT Updated: 11/02/2012 1:20 pm EDT

The October jobs report was reason to drink Pabst Blue Ribbon, not champagne.
The employment data, released on Friday, were better than economists expected, offering decent news for the economy and possibly for President Barack Obama's reelection chances. But the numbers were still well below what one would expect to see in a truly healthy economy, and some troubling details suggest the job market is still a long way from a full recovery.
"All told, a good report in the current context, but an insufficient one in a larger sense," Dan Greenhaus, chief global strategist at BTIG, wrote in a research note.
First, the good news: Non-farm payrolls grew by 171,000, better than the 125,000 expected by economists. Revisions to prior months added another 84,000 jobs to payrolls. The unemployment rate ticked higher, to 7.9 percent from 7.8 percent, but that was mainly because more workers entered the labor force looking for work -- an encouraging sign.
The economy has added nearly 5 million private-sector jobs since February 2010, and job gains have been accelerating recently from a brief summer lull. Sudeep Reddy of the Wall Street Journal points out that average monthly job growth this year of 157,000 jobs has been just a bit stronger than it was in 2011 and nearly twice as strong as it was in 2010. Jobs were being sucked through a black hole into a parallel universe in 2009 and 2008 (so to speak).
So we're moving in the right direction. But the road is still very, very long.

Here are six cold buckets of water to splash on yourself before you get too excited:

Only 4.3 Million More To Go: Once you factor in big job cuts in the government sector in recent years, the economy has created about 4.5 million new non-farm payroll jobs since the job market bottomed out in February 2010. But there are still nearly 4.3 million jobs fewer than there were at the job market's peak in January 2008. This horrific graphic posted every month by the Calculated Risk blog demonstrates the sheer depths of the job losses in this recession, and just how far we have to go. This is the worst jobs recession and recovery since World War II. This is actually not at all inconsistent with how other job markets have fared after past financial crises. In fact, it has performed better than some other post-crisis job markets, notes Josh Lehner at the Oregon Office of Economic Analysis. That doesn't mean we have to throw a parade for it.

Not Nearly Enough: Adding 157,000 jobs a month is better than losing 157,000 jobs a month, but it is not strong enough to drive unemployment lower. Depending on who you ask, the economy needs roughly 150,000 jobs per month just to keep up with population growth and keep unemployment from rising, much less get 12 million unemployed people back to work. We're just barely getting that, which is one reason unemployment has been so slow to fall. At the current pace of job growth, it will take 27 more months just to recover those 4.3 million jobs that went missing during the recession. It has been accelerating, but needs to do more.

Flat Wages: Average hourly earnings in the private sector ticked down by a penny in October and are now up just 1.6 percent from a year ago, not enough to keep up with inflation. This is a sign that the jobs being created aren't exactly lucrative. It also suggests that the recent rebound in consumer confidence and spending may not be sustainable. "In the absence of meaningful earnings growth, consumers have been dipping into savings to fuel current consumption," writes Greenhaus.

Too Many On The Sidelines: The employment-to-population ratio, a measure of how many working-age Americans are actually working, ticked up a bit to 58.8 percent, the highest since August 2009. But that ratio is still far below the 63 percent before the recession began. That means millions of people are sitting out the job market, either because they've just given up on finding work or because they've decided to retire, possibly earlier than they wanted to or should have. Some of this labor-force desertion is due to purely demographic factors -- a lot of Baby Boomers are clearing retirement age. But some of it reflects a lack of decent work.

Bad Jobs vs. No Jobs: The U-6 unemployment rate, the broader measure of unemployment -- which Obama's Republican challenger Mitt Romney is talking about whenever he says "23 million people are looking for work" -- ticked down to 14.6 percent in October, and it's down from a high of more than 17 percent in 2009. But this rate, which measures unemployed people and discouraged workers and people working part-time against their preference, is still higher than roughly 8 percent before the recession. It's another sign that good work is hard to find.

Long Time, No Job: People who are unemployed are unemployed for a looong time. The median duration of unemployment jumped to 19.6 months in October from 18.5 months in September. Though the duration of unemployment is lower than it was at the worst of the crisis, it has risen for three months in a row, and it is far higher than the roughly 9 months' median duration before the recession. The longer people stay out of work, the harder it will be for them to get back to work, as their skills deteriorate.
Again, the numbers have mostly been moving in the right direction, which is encouraging. If the recent acceleration continues, the job market could look a lot better a year from now. But there are still plenty of risks and uncertainties ahead, including the fiscal cliff, the effects of superstorm Sandy and the European debt crisis, to name just a few.
We're still a long way from breaking out the champagne.

10. Farmworkers (Crop, Nursery, Greenhouse)

 
Hourly mean wages: $9.64
Yearly mean wages: $20,040
Number of people with job: 228,600

9. Cashiers

Hourly mean wages: $9.52
Yearly mean wages: $19,810
Number of people with job: 3,354,170

8. Amusement And Recreation Attendants

Hourly mean wages: $9.50
Yearly mean wages: $19,750
Number of people with job: 254,630

7. Hosts And Hostesses

Hourly mean wages: $9.43
Yearly mean wages: $19,600
Number of people with job: 329,020

6. Dining Room Attendants And Bartender Helpers

Hourly mean wages: $9.29
Yearly mean wages: $19,320
Number of people with job: 390,920

5. Counter Attendants

Hourly mean wages: $9.27
Yearly mean wages: $19,280
Number of people with job: 446,660

4. Shampooers

Hourly mean wages: $9.20
Yearly mean wages: $19,140
Number of people with job: 14,220

3. Dishwashers

Hourly mean wages: $8.98
Yearly mean wages: $18,680
Number of people with job: 505,950

2. Combined Food Preparation Workers

Hourly mean wages: $8.95
Yearly mean wages: $18,610
Number of people with job: 2,692,170

1. Cooks (Fast Food)

 
Hourly mean wages: $8.91
Yearly mean wages: $18,540
Number of people with job: 525,350

Around the Web:

US futures rise on October jobs report
US stocks are mixed following October jobs report
For Romney, Obama, a final jobs report fuels race
171000 jobs added in October; jobless rate 7.9%
Obamanometer: Jobs Report Gives Obama a Last-Minute Lift
ADP Employment Report Says 158000 Private Sector Jobs Gained for October ...
Romney: October jobs report a 'sad reminder' that economy is at a 'virtual ...
Payrolls in US Climbed More Than Forecast in October
The October Jobs Report - Business Insider
ADP October Jobs 2012 Report: Businesses Hired 158,000 Workers ...
October Jobs report: What to expect - Oct. 31, 2012
Jobs Report News, Photos and Videos - ABC News
ADP National Employment Report
Political analysis: Jobs report boosts Obama

Unemployment Rate

2000 - 2012

From : To : Check Unemployment Rate

Quick Links : 2000-2012 2007-2012 1990-2012 1980-2012

Unemployment Rate

2000 - 2012

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec	Year
2000	4.0	4.1	4.0	3.8	4.0	4.0	4.0	4.1	3.9	3.9	3.9	3.9	2000
2001	4.2	4.2	4.3	4.4	4.3	4.5	4.6	4.9	5.0	5.3	5.5	5.7	2001
2002	5.7	5.7	5.7	5.9	5.8	5.8	5.8	5.7	5.7	5.7	5.9	6.0	2002
2003	5.8	5.9	5.9	6.0	6.1	6.3	6.2	6.1	6.1	6.0	5.8	5.7	2003
2004	5.7	5.6	5.8	5.6	5.6	5.6	5.5	5.4	5.4	5.5	5.4	5.4	2004
2005	5.3	5.4	5.2	5.2	5.1	5.0	5.0	4.9	5.0	5.0	5.0	4.9	2005
2006	4.7	4.8	4.7	4.7	4.6	4.6	4.7	4.7	4.5	4.4	4.5	4.4	2006
2007	4.6	4.5	4.4	4.5	4.4	4.6	4.7	4.6	4.7	4.7	4.7	5.0	2007
2008	5.0	4.9	5.1	5.0	5.4	5.6	5.8	6.1	6.1	6.5	6.8	7.3	2008
2009	7.8	8.3	8.7	8.9	9.4	9.5	9.5	9.6	9.8	10.0	9.9	9.9	2009
2010	9.7	9.8	9.8	9.9	9.6	9.4	9.5	9.6	9.5	9.5	9.8	9.4	2010
2011	9.1	9.0	8.9	9.0	9.0	9.1	9.1	9.1	9.0	8.9	8.7	8.5	2011
2012	8.3	8.3	8.2	8.1	8.2	8.2	8.3	8.1	7.8	7.9

Unemployment Rate - U6 2000 - 2012 From : To : Check U6 Unemployment Rate Quick Links : 1994-2012 2000-2012 2005-2012 2007-2012 Unemployment Rate - U6 2000 - 2012 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Year 2000 7.1 7.2 7.1 6.9 7.1 7.0 7.0 7.1 7.0 6.8 7.1 6.9 2000 2001 7.3 7.4 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.9 7.8 8.1 8.7 9.3 9.4 9.6 2001 2002 9.5 9.5 9.4 9.7 9.5 9.5 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.7 9.8 2002 2003 10.0 10.2 10.0 10.2 10.1 10.3 10.3 10.1 10.4 10.2 10.0 9.8 2003 2004 9.9 9.7 10.0 9.6 9.6 9.5 9.5 9.4 9.4 9.7 9.4 9.2 2004 2005 9.3 9.3 9.1 8.9 8.9 9.0 8.8 8.9 9.0 8.7 8.7 8.6 2005 2006 8.4 8.4 8.2 8.1 8.2 8.4 8.5 8.4 8.0 8.2 8.1 7.9 2006 2007 8.4 8.2 8.0 8.2 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.8 2007 2008 9.2 9.0 9.1 9.2 9.7 10.1 10.5 10.8 11.1 11.8 12.7 13.5 2008 2009 14.2 15.1 15.7 15.8 16.4 16.5 16.5 16.7 16.8 17.2 17.1 17.1 2009 2010 16.7 16.9 16.9 17.0 16.6 16.5 16.5 16.6 16.9 16.8 16.9 16.6 2010 2011 16.1 15.9 15.7 15.9 15.8 16.2 16.1 16.2 16.4 16.0 15.6 15.2 2011 2012 15.1 14.9 14.5 14.5 14.8 14.9 15.0 14.7 14.7 14.6
Check U-1, U-2, U-3 (official), U-4, U-5 and U-6 unemployment rates in US
U-1 Unemployment Rate U-2 Unemployment Rate U-3 (Official)Unemployment Rate U-4 Unemployment Rate U-5 Unemployment Rate U-6 Unemployment Rate
What is U6 unemployment rate ?
The U6 unemployment rate counts not only people without work seeking full-time employment (the more familiar U-3 rate), but also counts "marginally attached workers and those working part-time for economic reasons." Note that some of these part-time workers counted as employed by U-3 could be working as little as an hour a week. And the "marginally attached workers" include those who have gotten discouraged and stopped looking, but still want to work. The age considered for this calculation is 16 years and over

Quick Links : Unemployment Rates during Presidencies
Franklin Delano Roosevelt ( 1929 - 1933 )	Harry S. Truman ( 1945 - 1953 )
Dwight David Eisenhower ( 1953 - 1961 )	John Fitzgerald Kennedy ( 1961 - 1963 )
Lyndon Baines Johnson ( 1963 - 1969 )	Richard Milhous Nixon ( 1969 - 1974 )
Gerald Rudolph Ford ( 1974 - 1977 )	James Earl Carter ( 1977 - 1981 )
Ronald Wilson Reagan ( 1981 - 1989 )	George Herbert Walker Bush ( 1989 - 1993 )
William Jefferson Clinton ( 1993 - 2001 )	George Walker Bush ( 2001 - 2009 )
Barack Hussein Obama ( 2009 - Till Now )

Quick Links : Unemployment Rates
USA	United Kingdom	Japan	Euro area
Euro area - 16	Euro area - 15	Euro area - 13	Euro area - 12
European Union - 27	European Union - 25	European Union - 15	Belgium
Bulgaria	Czech Republic	Denmark	Germany
Estonia	Ireland	Greece	Spain
France	Italy	Cyprus	Latvia
Lithuania	Luxembourg	Hungary	Malta
Netherlands	Austria	Poland	Portugal
Romania	Slovenia	Slovakia	Finland
Sweden	Croatia	Turkey	Norway

The Bureau of Labor Statistics measures employment and unemployment (of those over 16 years of age) using two different labor force surveys conducted by the United States Census Bureau (within the United States Department of Commerce) and/or the Bureau of Labor Statistics (within the United States Department of Labor) that gather employment statistics monthly. The Current Population Survey (CPS), or "Household Survey", conducts a survey based on a sample of 60,000 households. This Survey measures the unemployment rate based on the ILO definition. The data are also used to calculate 5 alternate measures of unemployment as a percentage of the labor force based on different definitions noted as U1 through U6: U1 : Percentage of labor force unemployed 15 weeks or longer. U2 : Percentage of labor force who lost jobs or completed temporary work. U3 : Official unemployment rate per ILO definition. U4 : U3 + "discouraged workers", or those who have stopped looking for work because current economic conditions make them believe that no work is available for them. U5 : U4 + other "marginally attached workers", or "loosely attached workers", or those who "would like" and are able to work, but have not looked for work recently. U6 : U5 + Part time workers who want to work full time, but cannot due to economic reasons. Below is the overview of these six measures. U1: This is the proportion of the civilian labor force that has been unemployed for 15 weeks or longer. This unemployment rate measures workers who are chronically unemployed. During business-cycle expansions, this rate captures structural unemployment. However, during lengthy business-cycle contractions, this rate is also likely to include a significant amount of cyclical unemployment. U1 tends to be relatively small, in the range of 1-2 percent. U2: This is the proportion of the civilian labor force that is classified as job losers (workers who have been involuntarily fired or laid off from their jobs) and people who have completed temporary jobs. During business-cycle expansions, this rate is likely to capture some degree of frictional unemployment. However, during business-cycle contractions, this rate is most likely to consist of cyclical unemployment. U2 is larger than U1, but still remains substantially less than the official unemployment rate (U3). U3: This is the official unemployment rate, which is the proportion of the civilian labor force that is unemployed but actively seeking employment. U4: This is the official unemployment rate that is adjusted for discouraged workers. In other words, discouraged workers are treated just like other workers who are officially classified as unemployed, being included in both the ranks of the unemployed and the labor force. It is technically specified as the proportion of the civilian labor force (plus discouraged workers) that is either unemployed but actively seeking employment or discouraged workers. The addition of discouraged workers generally adds a few tenths of a percentage point to the official unemployment rate. U5: This augments U4 by including marginally-attached workers to the unemployment rate calculation. Marginally attached workers are potential workers who have given up seeking employment for various reasons. One of these reasons is that the workers believe such effort would be futile, which places them in the discouraged worker category. Those who have other reasons for not seeking employment are placed in the broader marginally-attached workers category. The addition of marginally-attached workers adds a few more tenths of a percentage point to the official unemployment rate. U6: This augments U5 by including part-time workers to the unemployment rate calculation. The addition of part-time workers adds a full 2-3 percentage points to the official unemployment rate. This measure of unemployment is perhaps the most comprehensive measure of labor resource unemployment available. Who is counted as unemployed? Persons are classified as unemployed if they do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and are currently available for work. Actively looking for work may consist of any of the following activities: Contacting: An employer directly or having a job interview A public or private employment agency Friends or relatives A school or university employment center Sending out resumes or filling out applications Placing or answering advertisements Checking union or professional registers Some other means of active job search Who is not in the labor force? Labor force measures are based on the civilian noninstitutional population 16 years old and over. Excluded are persons under 16 years of age, all persons confined to institutions such as nursing homes and prisons, and persons on active duty in the Armed Forces. The labor force is made up of the employed and the unemployed. The remainder—those who have no job and are not looking for one—are counted as "not in the labor force." Many who are not in the labor force are going to school or are retired. Family responsibilities keep others out of the labor force.

Source : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics