June 2003 mass layoffs by region
July 29, 2003
A total of 157,595 initial claims for unemployment insurance due to mass layoffs were reported in the U.S. in June 2003.
Among the four regions, the highest number of initial claims in June due to mass layoffs was reported in the West, 53,725. Educational services and administrative and support services accounted for 36 percent of all initial claims in that region during the month. The South followed, with 41,019 initial claims, then the Midwest, with 33,819, and the Northeast, with 29,032.
The number of initial claimants in mass layoffs declined over the year in three of the four regions, with the largest decrease in the West (-3,998).
The South had the only over-the-year increase (+3,460).
California recorded the largest number of initial claims filed in mass layoff events this June, 42,918, mostly in educational services and in administrative and support services. Pennsylvania reported 9,665 initial claims, followed by New Jersey (9,441), Florida (8,488), Texas (8,462), and Ohio (8,361). These six states accounted for 58 percent of all layoff events and 55 percent of initial claims for unemployment insurance.
Wisconsin reported the largest over-the-year decrease in the number of initial claims (-2,435). The largest over-the-year increase occurred in Ohio (+3,114).
These data are from the Mass Layoff Statistics program. Each mass layoff event involves at least 50 persons from a single establishment. Mass layoffs data for June 2003 are preliminary and subject to revision. For more information, see news release USDL 03-394, "Mass Layoffs in June 2003" (PDF) (TXT).
Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, The Editor's Desk, June 2003 mass layoffs by region on the Internet at http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2003/jul/wk4/art02.htm (visited April 23, 2014).
Spotlight on Statistics: Productivity
This edition of Spotlight on Statistics examines labor productivity trends from 2000 through 2010 for selected industries and sectors within the nonfarm business sector of the U.S. economy. Read more »