Employer taxes are on the rise again — and the expected result is deeper cuts into benefits and comp budgets.

What’s happening? Due to high jobless rates, states’ unemployment funds are drying up. And to replenish the coffers, several states are raising employer taxes.

36 states will get hit

In total, businesses in 36 states are getting slapped with a higher tax bill.

The lucky ones will end up paying only a few dollars more per worker. Others will pay nearly $1,000 more.

The impact on benefits, comp

By taking more money from employers’ payroll budgets, economists predict this will spell even more trouble for employee compensation and benefit levels.

Some even fear that the hikes will contribute to further joblessness.

Where — and how much

Here’s what some states are getting hit with:

• the average tax for businesses in Pennsylvania will increase to $432 per worker (up from $384)
• Virginia employers will pay $171 per worker (up from $95), and
• employers in Hawaii face a gigantic increase to $1,070 per worker (up from $90 per worker).

More bad news: You don’t have to be in a state where the unemployment fund’s gone bankrupt to see an increase.

Even employers in states where unemployment funds are still in the black face tax hikes.

Example: Texas has increased the average tax on employers to $165 per worker (up from $89).

Here’s what’s on the table:

• Tax credits for hiring. One plan includes giving business a dollar-for-dollar tax credit for increasing payrolls by bringing on new hires. So, if you hired a new employee for a salary of $40,000 a year, your company would get a credit for that amount.
• Expanded credit for inner-city business. Whatever aid business gets, the boost probably will be bigger for companies locate in inner cities, where unemployment typically is higher than in suburban areas. In fact, a lot of Democrats who represent inner-city districts say they won’t vote to approve any package that doesn’t address acute unemployment in their districts.
• Public-works projects. Not exactly a fresh idea, but Congress is looking at projects that improve roads and infrastructure, as a way to lift the construction business and provide some aid to state and local governments.

Where’s the money coming from?

These days, even the most liberal members of Congress are skittish about increasing the federal deficit, so there’s little support for appropriating more funds. And an idea to tax financial transactions, such as stock sales, quickly got shot down.

What’s more likely: The majority of TARP money is still sitting unspent in the pipeline. We’re probably talking about some $400 billion, depending one whose figures you believe.

A couple of government reports show:

From September 2008 (the collapse of Lehman Brothers) until June 2009, the average weekly pay for hourly workers stayed stuck on $612. (Hourly pay actually rose a bit during that period, but that gain was canceled out because a lot of workers had their hours cut.)

Since June, however, both the length of the workweek and hourly pay growth have crept upward. In August, the average weekly pay hit $618.

Do the rising numbers indicate that the economy really improved? Some say it did, and of course Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke pronounced the recession over. Some economists have another explanation.

They say many companies have decided that cutting wages isn’t worth the aggravation and morale busting that inevitably follows the cuts. So even companies that have been forced to lay off workers have also given surviving employees a little boost in the paycheck. There’s even a economics term for the phenomenon: “The Sticky-Wage Theory.”

A shadow
Still, there’s the shadow of unemployment. It doesn’t translate into lower average wages, since the wage figure doesn’t take into account unemployed people, who have zero wages. That means the median household income has gone down even while weekly pay has gone up.

Another statistic from the reports: There’s very little “churn” among the unemployed. That is, unemployed people are likely to stay unemployed for longer periods, while people who are working are more likely to hang on to their jobs. That’s a switch from the past when the economy would produce rapid turnover among the employed and unemployed.

Click here to see the August labor summary from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

A local resident notified the Altoona, IA, police department after he discovered cop Abigail Keller’s MySpace page containing inappropriate photos of her at a bar. In one shot, she was mooning the camera, while in others she performed simulated sex acts, Associated Content reports.

Keller’s response: The pictures were posted a few years ago, before she was hired — and she (mistakenly) believed her profile was blocked from public view.

The department fired her. Was that the legal thing to do?

Yes. When Keller took the city to court, a judge ruled the firing was justified, since a police force must maintain a good reputation in the public’s eye.

However, the court did grant Keller unemployment pay, because she did not “intentionally disregard” the department’s interests.

The short version of how such programs operate: Instead of conducting a layoff or furlough, you cut employees’ hours by 20% to 40%. Then the state, partly using unemployment funds, pitches in to cover the employees’ lost income.

Result: No one gets laid off, and at least in the short term, no one loses a chunk of a paycheck. And you get to keep your staff intact, without the need to rehire when business picks up.

As you might have figured out, every state has slightly different rules regarding the program, so you’ll have to check with your state’s labor department to see if and how the program can work for you.

Here’s a list of the states offering such programs:

Arkansas
Arizona
California
Connecticut
Florida
Iowa
Kansas
Louisiana
Massachusetts
Maryland
Minnesota
Missouri
New York
Oregon
Rhode Island
Texas
Vermont
Washington State

A look at the U.S. Department of Labor statistics reveals who’s taking the worst hits — and if you’re hiring in one of these industries, you’ll have a lot of choices from among people who are job hunting:

Auto and auto-related. No surprise here. In February, manufacturing jobs got slashed by 168,000, bringing losses over the last year to 1.2 million. In Michigan, the heart of the auto industry, the unemployment rate has hit 10.6 percent, the highest of any state in the nation.

Financial services. This sector lost 44,000 jobs in February. Companies found themselves with a glut of traders, analysts and marketers who made a living during the housing boom. And we all know what happened with that. Many labor analysts say this industry will be reshaped — and downsized — for years to come.

Retail. Just pick up the newspaper and you’ll see the ongoing list of retailers who are closing shop, mainly because consumers no longer have access to easy credit — and money. Retailers  dropped 39,500 jobs in February, and a total of  more than 500,000 in the last 12 months.

Other. Some of the other worst-hit industries in February: transportation and warehousing, 49,000 jobs; employment services, 88,000 jobs; and hotels and restaurants, 32,000 jobs.

The bright spot: Health care added 30,000 jobs in February.

The first figure is for 2007; the second is for 2008:

Alabama 3.8% 6.4%
Anniston-Oxford 3.7% 6.5%

Auburn-Opelika 3.5% 5.4%

Birmingham-Hoover 3.4% 5.7%

Decatur 3.4% 6.5%

Dothan 3.6% 6.0%

Florence-Muscle Shoals 4.1% 7.0%

Gadsden 4.2% 6.9%

Huntsville 2.9% 4.7%

Mobile 3.9% 6.5%

Montgomery 3.7% 6.5%

Tuscaloosa 3.3% 5.6%

Alaska 6.7% 7.7%
Anchorage 5.6% 6.6%

Fairbanks 5.6% 6.9%

Arizona 4.3% 6.7%
Flagstaff 4.6% 6.4%

Lake Havasu City-Kingman 5.5% 8.5%

Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale 3.8% 6.1%

Prescott 4.2% 7.0%

Tucson 4.3% 6.3%

Yuma 11.4% 15.4%

Arkansas 5.6% 6.0%
Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers 4.0% 4.6%

Fort Smith 5.5% 6.1%

Hot Springs 5.8% 5.9%

Jonesboro 5.6% 5.5%

Little Rock-North Little Rock-Conway 4.7% 4.9%

Pine Bluff 7.7% 8.1%

California 5.9% 9.1%
Bakersfield 9.4% 11.8%

Chico 7.4% 10.3%

El Centro 18.7% 22.6%

Fresno 9.8% 13.2%

Hanford-Corcoran 9.9% 12.9%

Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana 5.0% 8.8%

Madera 8.8% 11.9%

Merced 11.9% 15.5%

Modesto 9.9% 13.6%

Napa 5.1% 7.4%

Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura 5.7% 8.0%

Redding 8.5% 12.2%

Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario 6.5% 10.1%

Sacramento–Arden-Arcade–Roseville 5.9% 8.7%

Salinas 10.9% 13.7%

San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos 5.0% 7.4%

San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont 4.6% 7.0%

San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara 5.1% 7.8%

San Luis Obispo-Paso Robles 4.7% 7.1%

Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Goleta 5.1% 7.2%

Santa Cruz-Watsonville 7.2% 10.0%

Santa Rosa-Petaluma 4.7% 7.0%

Stockton 9.4% 13.0%

Vallejo-Fairfield 5.9% 8.6%

Visalia-Porterville 10.8% 14.3%

Yuba City 11.1% 14.9%

Colorado 4.3% 5.9%
Boulder 3.7% 4.8%

Colorado Springs 4.9% 6.9%

Denver-Aurora 4.4% 6.3%

Fort Collins-Loveland 3.7% 4.9%

Grand Junction 3.5% 4.6%

Greeley 4.5% 6.3%

Pueblo 5.5% 7.4%

Connecticut 4.5% 6.
Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk 4.0% 6.0%

Danbury 3.4% 5.1%

Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford 4.6% 6.7%

New Haven 4.7% 6.6%

Norwich-New London 4.3% 6.9%

Waterbury 102.6.1% 8.6%

Delaware 3.4% 5.9%
Dover 3.4% 5.8%

District of Columbia 5.8% 8.9%
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria 3.0% 4.7%

Florida 4.5% 7.8%
Bradenton-Sarasota-Venice 4.8% 8.4%

Cape Coral-Fort Myers 6.0% 10.0%

Deltona-Daytona Beach-Ormond Beach 4.8% 8.6%

Fort Walton Beach-Crestview-Destin 3.4% 6.0%

Gainesville 3.2% 5.3%

Jacksonville 4.3% 7.4%

Lakeland-Winter Haven 4.8% 8.7%

Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach 4.1% 7.1%

Naples-Marco Island 4.9% 8.1%

Ocala 5.4% 10.1%

Orlando-Kissimmee 4.3% 7.7%

Palm Bay-Melbourne-Titusville 5.0% 8.4%

Palm Coast 7.4% 11.7%

Panama City-Lynn Haven 4.6% 9.0%

Pensacola-Ferry Pass-Brent 4.1% 7.5%

Port StLucie 5.8% 9.7%

Punta Gorda 6.3% 9.9%

Sebastian-Vero Beach 6.1% 9.7%

Tallahassee 3.4% 5.7%

Tampa-StPetersburg-Clearwater 4.7% 8.3%

Georgia 4.6% 7.8%
Albany 5.1% 7.4%

Athens-Clarke County 3.8% 6.1%

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta 4.5% 7.6%

Augusta-Richmond County 5.5% 7.8%

Brunswick 3.9% 7.1%

Columbus 5.3% 7.7%

Dalton 5.0% 11.2%

Gainesville 3.6% 7.0%

Hinesville-Fort Stewart 4.9% 7.4%

Macon 4.9% 7.8%

Rome 4.7% 8.0%

Savannah 3.9% 6.6%

Valdosta 4.2% 7.4%

Warner Robins 3.9% 6.3%

Hawaii 2.8% 5.1%
Honolulu 2.5% 4.2%

Idaho 2.9% 6.5%
Boise City-Nampa 3.0% 7.1%

Coeur d’Alene 3.2% 7.5%

Idaho Falls 2.1% 4.8%

Lewiston 3.3% 6.4%

Pocatello 2.8% 5.4%

Illinois 5.3% 7.4%

Bloomington-Normal 4.2% 5.4%

Champaign-Urbana 4.8% 6.1%

Chicago-Naperville-Joliet 5.0% 7.1%

Danville 7.1% 9.4%

Davenport-Moline-Rock Island 4.8% 6.1%

Decatur 6.1% 7.9%

Kankakee-Bradley 7.6% 10.5%

Peoria 5.0% 6.3%

Rockford 7.1% 12.5%

Springfield 4.9% 6.3%

Indiana 4.5% 8.1%
Anderson 5.9% 9.2%

Bloomington 3.7% 6.6%

Columbus 3.5% 6.5%

Elkhart-Goshen 4.7% 15.3%

Evansville 4.3% 6.7%

Fort Wayne 4.7% 8.2%

Indianapolis-Carmel 3.9% 6.7%

Kokomo 5.0% 9.9%

Lafayette 3.7% 6.2%

Michigan City-La Porte 5.1% 9.2%

Muncie 5.0% 8.3%

South Bend-Mishawaka 5.0% 9.5%

Terre Haute 5.1% 8.5%

Iowa 4.2% 4.8%
Ames 3.0% 3.2%

Cedar Rapids 4.2% 4.6%

Des Moines-West Des Moines 3.9% 4.5%

Dubuque 4.7% 5.3%

Iowa City 3.0% 3.4%

Sioux City 3.9% 4.3%

Waterloo-Cedar Falls 4.1% 4.2%

Kansas 4.0% 4.9%
Lawrence 3.6% 4.0%

Topeka 4.9% 5.3%

Wichita 3.9% 4.9%

Kentucky 5.4% 7.5%

Bowling Green 4.0% 6.3%

Elizabethtown 5.0% 7.4%

Lexington-Fayette 3.9% 5.4%

Louisville-Jefferson County 5.4% 7.6%

Owensboro 4.6% 6.7%

Louisiana 3.8% 5.5%
Alexandria 3.8% 5.5%

Baton Rouge 3.7% 5.3%

Houma-Bayou Cane-Thibodaux 2.6% 3.8%

Lafayette 2.7% 3.8%

Lake Charles 3.8% 4.8%

Monroe 4.4% 6.1%

New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner 3.3% 5.4%

Shreveport-Bossier City 4.3% 6.4%

Maine 5.0% 7.0%
Bangor 4.6% 6.4%

Lewiston-Auburn 4.8% 7.4%

Portland-South Portland-Biddeford 3.7% 5.5%

Maryland 3.5% 5.6%
Baltimore-Towson 3.6% 5.8%

Cumberland 4.9% 6.5%

Hagerstown-Martinsburg 4.3% 6.6%

Salisbury 4.4% 7.5%

Massachusetts 4.1% 6.5%
Barnstable Town 5 4.9% 8.2%

Boston-Cambridge-Quincy 3.7% 5.8%

Leominster-Fitchburg-Gardner 5.3% 8.5%

New Bedford 6.2% 9.7%

Pittsfield 3.8% 6.6%

Springfield 4.7% 7.2%

Worcester 4.4% 6.8%

Michigan 7.4% 10.4%
Ann Arbor 4.7% 6.9%

Battle Creek 6.8% 9.7%

Bay City 7.0% 9.9%

Detroit-Warren-Livonia 8.0% 10.6%

Flint 8.2% 12.3%

Grand Rapids-Wyoming 5.9% 8.8%

Holland-Grand Haven 5.8% 9.2%

Jackson 7.6% 11.1%

Kalamazoo-Portage 5.7% 8.7%

Lansing-East Lansing 5.7% 8.6%

Monroe 6.6% 11.3%

Muskegon-Norton Shores 7.0% 11.5%

Niles-Benton Harbor 7.2% 10.1%

Saginaw-Saginaw Township North 7.3% 10.4%

Minnesota 4.9% 6.8%
Duluth 5.5% 7.8%

Minneapolis-StPaul-Bloomington 4.5% 6.4%

Rochester 4.1% 5.4%

StCloud 5.2% 7.2%

Mississippi 6.3% 7.6%
Gulfport-Biloxi 5.3% 6.5%

Hattiesburg 5.0% 5.8%

Jackson 5.1% 6.0%

Pascagoula 5.9% 7.5%

Missouri 5.2% 7.0%
Columbia 3.6% 4.5%

Jefferson City 4.1% 5.7%

Joplin 4.4% 5.7%

Kansas City 5.1% 6.5%

StJoseph 4.5% 5.8%

StLouis 5.5% 7.6%

Springfield 4.1% 6.0%

Montana 3.6% 5.5%
Billings 2.5% 3.5%

Great Falls 3.4% 4.4%

Missoula 3.6% 5.5%

Nebraska 2.7% 3.8%
Lincoln 2.4% 3.3%

Omaha-Council Bluffs 3.1% 4.1%

Nevada 5.6% 9.0%
Carson City 5.9% 9.4%

Las Vegas-Paradise 5.6% 9.1%

Reno-Sparks 5.3% 9.0%

New Hampshire 3.3% 4.3%
Manchester 3.2% 4.1%

Portsmouth 3.1% 3.9%

Rochester-Dover 3.2% 4.4%

New Jersey 4.1% 6.8%
Atlantic City-Hammonton 5.8% 9.6%

Ocean City 8.5% 12.4%

Trenton-Ewing 3.6% 6.0%

Vineland-Millville-Bridgeton 6.4% 10.4%

New Mexico 3.1% 4.5%
Albuquerque 3.1% 4.7%

Farmington 2.7% 4.0%

Las Cruces 3.4% 4.6%

Santa Fe 2.4% 3.9%

New York 4.7% 6.8%
Albany-Schenectady-Troy 4.1% 5.9%

Binghamton 4.7% 7.1%

Buffalo-Niagara Falls 5.2% 7.2%

Elmira 4.6% 7.5%

Glens Falls 5.1% 7.7%

Ithaca 3.1% 4.7%

Kingston 4.6% 6.5%

New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island 4.4% 6.6%

New York City 3 5.2% 7.2%

Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-Middletown 4.1% 6.3%

Rochester 4.8% 6.7%

Syracuse 4.6% 6.9%

Utica-Rome 4.8% 6.9%

North Carolina 4.7% 8.5%
Asheville 3.5% 6.7%

Burlington 4.9% 9.4%

Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord 4.8% 8.9%

Durham 3.7% 6.1%

Fayetteville 5.1% 7.8%

Goldsboro 4.6% 7.9%

Greensboro-High Point 4.8% 8.6%

Greenville 4.8% 8.3%

Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton 5.9% 10.9%

Jacksonville 4.3% 6.8%

Raleigh-Cary 3.5% 6.5%

Rocky Mount 6.3% 11.7%

Wilmington 4.4% 8.4%

Winston-Salem 4.4% 7.6%

North Dakota 3.3% 3.4%
Bismarck 61.8 62.9 2.0 2 3.3% 3.1%

Fargo 2.8% 3.4%

Grand Forks 3.3% 3.8%

Ohio 5.8% 7.6%
Akron 5.6% 7.5%

Canton-Massillon 6.2% 8.2%

Cincinnati-Middletown 5.0% 6.7%

Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor 6.0% 7.1%

Columbus 4.8% 6.2%

Dayton 6.0% 8.1%

Lima 6.5% 9.0%

Mansfield 6.9% 9.9%

Sandusky 7.3% 9.8%

Springfield 7.3% 7.6%

Toledo 6.5% 9.8%

Weirton-Steubenville 6.3% 8.0%

Youngstown-Warren-Boardman 6.4% 8.9%

Oklahoma 14.3% 4.8%
Lawton 4.3% 4.4%

Oklahoma City 5 4.2% 4.6%

Tulsa 4.1% 4.9%

Oregon 5.4% 8.8%
Bend 6.1% 11.3%

Corvallis 3.8% 6.2%

Eugene-Springfield 5.4% 9.5%

Medford 5.9% 9.9%

Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton 4.8% 8.1%

Salem 5.5% 8.9%

Pennsylvania 4.3% 6.4%
Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton 4.3% 6.7%

Altoona 4.3% 6.4%

Erie 4.9% 6.6%

Harrisburg-Carlisle 3.6% 5.5%

Johnstown 5.5% 7.6%

Lancaster 3.2% 5.2%

Lebanon 3.4% 4.9%

Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington 4.1% 6.4%

Pittsburgh 4.4% 6.0%

Reading 4.2% 6.6%

Scranton–Wilkes-Barre 4.9% 7.4%

State College 3.5% 5.0%

Williamsport 5.1% 7.6%

York-Hanover 3.7% 5.8%

Rhode Island 5.2% 9.6%
Providence-Fall River-Warwick 5.3% 9.6%

South Carolina 6.4% 9.3%
Anderson 6.4% 9.6%

Charleston-North Charleston-Summerville 5.0% 7.4%

Columbia 5.4% 7.6%

Florence 7.0% 10.0%

Greenville-Mauldin-Easley 5.5% 7.9%

Myrtle Beach-North Myrtle Beach-Conway 6.8% 11.5%

Spartanburg 6.4% 9.4%

Sumter 8.4% 10.7%

South Dakota 3.1% 3.9%
Rapid City 3.0% 4.0%

Sioux Falls 2.5% 3.7%

Tennessee 5.0% 7.6%
Chattanooga 4.2% 7.0%

Clarksville 5.3% 7.4%

Cleveland 5.0% 7.4%

Jackson 5.4% 7.6%

Johnson City 4.8% 6.9%

Kingsport-Bristol-Bristol 4.4% 6.6%

Knoxville 4.0% 6.4%

Memphis 5.5% 7.6%

Morristown 5.5% 8.9%

Nashville-Davidson-Murfreesboro-Franklin 4.2% 6.5%

Texas 4.3% 5.7%
Abilene 3.5% 4.3%

Amarillo 3.2% 3.8%

Austin-Round Rock 3.6% 5.2%

Beaumont-Port Arthur 5.9% 7.9%

Brownsville-Harlingen 6.0% 8.2%

College Station-Bryan 3.3% 4.1%

Corpus Christi 4.4% 5.5%

Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington 4.2% 5.8%

El Paso 5.5% 7.0%

Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown 4.2% 5.5%

Killeen-Temple-Fort Hood 4.6% 5.6%

Laredo 4.7% 6.0%

Longview 3.8% 4.5%

Lubbock 3.3% 3.8%

McAllen-Edinburg-Mission 6.8% 9.1%

Midland 2.7% 3.1%

Odessa 3.1% 3.9%

San Angelo 3.5% 4.5%

San Antonio 4.0% 5.3%

Sherman-Denison 4.7% 6.0%

Texarkana 4.6% 5.1%

Tyler 4.4% 5.6%

Victoria 3.6% 4.9%

Waco 4.0% 4.8%

Wichita Falls 3.9% 5.5%

Utah 2.8% 4.0%
Logan 1.9% 2.8%

Ogden-Clearfield 3.1% 4.4%

Provo-Orem 2.6% 3.7%

StGeorge 3.3% 6.0%

Salt Lake City 2.7% 3.8%

Vermont 3.7% 6.0%
Burlington-South Burlington 3.1% 5.1%

Virginia 3.2% 5.2%
Blacksburg-Christiansburg-Radford 3.6% 6.3%

Charlottesville 2.6% 4.2%

Danville 5.9% 11.5%

Harrisonburg 2.6% 4.3%

Lynchburg 3.4% 5.3%

Richmond 3.4% 5.5%

Roanoke 3.4% 5.1%

Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News 3.5% 5.3%

Winchester 3.3% 6.1%

Washington 4.8% 7.1%
Bellingham 4.1% 6.1%

Bremerton-Silverdale 4.2% 6.0%

Kennewick-Pasco-Richland 5.9% 7.3%

Longview 6.8% 11.2%

Mount Vernon-Anacortes 5.0% 7.8%

Olympia 131.2 136.3 5.8 8.4 4.4% 6.1%

Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue 3.9% 6.3%

Spokane 5.1% 7.4%

Wenatchee 5.8% 7.4%

Yakima .9% 9.7%

West Virginia 4.5% 4.4%
Charleston 3.7% 3.5%

Huntington-Ashland 4.5% 5.5%

Morgantown 2.9% 2.7%

Parkersburg-Marietta-Vienna 4.8% 5.5%

Wheeling 5.2% 5.9%

Wisconsin 4.6% 5.8%
Appleton 4.4% 5.6%

Eau Claire 4.4% 5.5%

Fond du Lac 4.4% 5.9%

Green Bay 4.6% 5.7%

Janesville 5.1% 8.1%

La Crosse 3.9% 5.2%

Madison 3.4% 4.2%

Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis 4.7% 5.8%

Oshkosh-Neenah 4.0% 5.0%

Racine 5.7% 7.0%

Sheboygan 4.1% 5.9%

Wausau 3.9% 5.3%

Wyoming 3.5% 3.5%
Casper 3.2% 3.2%

Cheyenne 4.6% 4.4%

At the beginning of 2008, the unemployment rate for the two groups was almost the same. However, a breakdown of U.S. Labor Department statistics indicates that from December 2007 to December 2008, the unemployment rate for men went from 4.4% to 7.2%. For women. though, the rate rose from 4.3% to only 5.9%.

Why the difference? Some possible explanations:

• Women are more likely to work part time than men, and part-time workers — who often don’t get benefits — tend to hang onto their jobs in a economy where employers are cutting full-time jobs and benefits.
• According to most estimates, about 75% of the workers in the health care and education  are women. Those two sectors have been the least hard-hit by the downturn.
• The same estimates show that men make up 93% of the workers in construction and 72% in manufacturing. Those two sectors have taken a pounding in the last year. For instance, construction jobs dropped by 8.5% in 2008.

• dramatically higher state UI taxes. Trust funds are depleting rapidly, which means states will soon be borrowing to pay claims in unprecedented amounts. Employers should expect sharply higher state employer taxes in 2010 and beyond, and possibly higher federal FUTA taxes to repay loans.

• more pressure on reducing federal administrative funding for UI. That means employers may be paying higher state administrative assessments to make up for it.

• potential new taxes and reporting burdens, as many view the UI system as the natural vehicle for collection of health coverage information and possible new taxes. Both are likely in any national health insurance reform.

• possible new programs such as dramatically expanded Trade Adjustment Assistance, implementation a new “Wage Insurance” program, and a new employer tax credit to pay for COBRA health benefits for the unemployed.

Even if all of these proposals don’t pass, employers can count on continuing to fund the system through state and federal unemployment insurance taxes.

Adecco, one of North America’s biggest placement and outsourcing firms, released its analysis of the labor market, which included the cities where you’ll have a hard time filling positions:

• First of all, if you’re in the areas of Boston, Washington, DC, or Milwaukee, don’t expect a tide of unemployed workers to come knocking on your door. The unemployment rates in those areas are well below the latest national average of 7.2%.
• In contrast, you can expect lots of out-of-work applicants if you’re in or around Detroit, Las Vegas or Los Angeles. All three of those have unemployment rates well above the national average.
• Looking for college grads? The unemployment rate for those with a four-year degree is only 3.9%.  If you have low-skill jobs to fill, however, the field is wide and deep: Unemployment among workers who haven’t finished high school is 10.9%.

All HR managers should mark mid-February on their calendars. That’s when President-elect Obama hopes to pass his $800-billion stimulus plan that’s aimed at opening up millions of public-works jobs. If that plan passes, expect the labor market to tighten up a bit.