Research has shown that the COVID-19 recession was particularly harmful for working women. A recent report from the Brookings Institution highlights two primary reasons why this was the case. Firstly, the COVID-19 recession had an outsized impact on low-wage jobs and women are disproportionately represented in low-wage jobs. According to their findings, 46% of working women earn low hourly wages compared to 37% of men. Secondly, many working women shouldered an outsized portion of the burden stemming from disruptions that COVID-19 caused in childcare and school systems.
Given the strain COVID-19 has placed on working women nationally, SmartAsset examined the extent to which women workers in different parts of the country were impacted economically last year. In this study, we ranked the states where COVID-19 has affected women workers the most. We compared all 50 states and the District of Columbia across two categories and six metrics. They include employment (one-year change in female employment, difference between female and male unemployment rates and one-year change in the female unemployment rate) and pay (one-year in median earnings for women, female-to-male earnings ratio and one-year change in the female-to-male earnings ratio). For details on our data sources and how we ranked areas, read our Data and Methodology section below.
Key Findings
- Nationally, women’s employment was more affected than women’s pay. From 2019 to 2020, the number of female, full-time workers fell by 4.78% and the female unemployment rate rose from 3.6% to 8.3%. In contrast, median earnings for full-time working women actually rose slightly between 2019 and 2020 by 7.67%. Over that same time, the female-to-male earnings ratio stayed fairly constant at about 82%.
- In many Western states, women workers were less affected by COVID-19. Seven of the 10 states where COVID-19 affected women workers the least are in the West. They include Alaska, South Dakota, New Mexico, North Dakota, Colorado, Arizona and Montana. In all but one of the seven states – Arizona – the 2020 female unemployment was not significantly higher than the 2020 male unemployment. Additionally, across these seven Western states, median earnings for women rose by an average of about 6% between 2019 and 2020.
1. Hawaii
Hawaii ranks fourth-worst for women’s employment during COVID-19 and third-worst for women’s pay. It ranks in the bottom third of states for five out of six individual metrics considered. It had the largest one-year decrease in female employment (-11.55%) and the highest one-year increase in the female unemployment rate (9.6 percentage points). In terms of pay, Hawaii had the sixth-lowest one-year change in women’s earnings (1.85%), the 16th-worst female-to-male earnings ratio (78.93%) and the largest one-year change in the female-to-male earnings ratio (-10.48%).
2. New Jersey
Female workers in New Jersey felt COVID-19’s economic impact more than male workers. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data shows that the female unemployment rate was 2.2 percentage points higher than the male unemployment in 2020. Additionally, between 2019 and 2020, the female-to-male earnings ratio slightly widened with women earning only about 80% of what men earned on average in 2020.
3. California
California ranks as the second-worst state for women’s employment during COVID-19 and the 22nd-worst state for women’s pay. Across the six individual metrics we considered, it ranks in the bottom 10 states for three. From 2019 to 2020, the female unemployment rose by the fifth-most (6.9 percentage points). The 2020 female unemployment rate was 1.5 percentage points higher than the 2020 male unemployment rate and the female-to-male earnings ratio widened by about 2.7 percentage points between 2019 and 2020.
4. Rhode Island (Tie)
Rhode Island ranks as the fourth-worst state for women’s pay during COVID-19 and the 24th-worst state for women’s employment. In the category of pay, Rhode Island saw the worst one-year change in women’s earnings (-0.23%) and second-largest decline in the female-to-male earnings ratio (-4.72%).
4. Missouri (Tie)
Missouri ties with Rhode Island as the fourth state where COVID-19 has most affected women workers. In 2020, the female unemployment rate was 1.7 percentage points higher than the male unemployment rate (7% vs. 5.3%). Additionally, from 2019 to 2020, median earnings for full-time, female workers rose only 2.08% – the seventh-lowest increase across all 50 states and the District of Columbia.
6. Ohio
Ohio ranks ninth-worst for its one-year change in the female-to-male earnings ratio and eighth-worst for its 2020 female-to-male earnings ratio. In 2019, median earnings for full-time, female workers made up more than 79% of median earnings for full-time, male workers. However, in 2020, that figure stood at just 77.66%.
7. Massachusetts
Women’s employment in Massachusetts took a bigger hit during COVID-19 than women’s pay. From 2019 to 2020, the unemployment rate for women rose by 7.3 percentage points – the fourth-most in our study. Additionally, in 2020, the female unemployment rate was more than one percentage point higher than the male unemployment rate. Meanwhile, however, average earnings for women increased. Census Bureau data shows that from 2019 to 2020, median earnings for full-time working women rose by 6.18%, the 19th-best rate in our study.
8. Oklahoma
Oklahoma ranks in the bottom 10 states for half of the metrics we considered. It has the ninth-highest difference between female and male unemployment rates in 2020, at 1.2%. Additionally, average earnings for women grew by only 2.77% in 2020 (the ninth-worst in our study) and the female-to-male earnings ratio is 75.38% (the sixth-worst overall).
9. Michigan
From 2019 to 2020, female employment in Michigan declined by more than -8%, a rate than places it in the bottom five states for that metric. Michigan also had the eighth-largest one-year change in the female unemployment rate (5.7%) and the 11th-lowest female-to-male earnings ratio (78.44%).
10. Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania is the 10th state where COVID-19 most affected women workers. From 2019 to 2020, the number of full-time, female workers declined by -5.73% (the 15th-worst decline) and the female unemployment rose by 5.3 percentage points (the 10th-largest increase). In 2020, the unemployment rate for women was 0.4 percentage points higher than the unemployment rate for men.
Data and Methodology
To find the states where COVID-19 affected women workers most, we looked at data on all 50 states and the District of Columbia. We compared states and D.C. across six metrics spanning two categories:
- Employment. For our employment category, we looked at three metrics: the one-year change in female employment, difference between female and male unemployment rates and one-year change in the female unemployment rate. One-year changes measure 2019 to 2020 while the difference between female and male unemployment rates is for 2020. Data comes from the Census Bureau’s 2019 and 2020 1-year American Community Surveys and the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
- Pay. Our pay category includes three metrics: the one-year in median earnings for women, female-to-male earnings ratio and one-year change in the female-to-male earnings ratio. One-year changes measure 2019 to 2020 while the female-to-male earnings ratio is for 2020. Data comes from the Census Bureau’s 2019 and 2020 1-year American Community Surveys.
We ranked each place in every metric and found an average ranking and score for each category. We then found a final score, averaging the two category scores. The state with the highest average ranking ranked as the state where COVID-19 most affected women workers. The state with the lowest average ranking placed as the state where COVID-19 least affected women workers.
To note, estimates from the Census Bureau’s 2020 1-year American Community Survey are experimental given the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and its effect on survey collection.
Tips for Managing Your Finances Through Economic Uncertainty
- Boost your emergency savings. One of the best ways to prepare for the unknown is by having an emergency fund. Though typical financial wisdom suggests you should have savings that can cover three months’ worth of expenses, six months’ may be a better figure to shoot for during a recession.
- Keep your budget top of mind. One of the best ways to save more is through budgeting. Our budget calculator can help with this. Beyond letting you see how much you spend each month and what sixth months of expenses would look like, you can see how cutting back on discretionary expenses can increase your savings rate.
- Consider professional help. If you are unsure of how big your emergency savings fund should be or how to improve maximizing your budget and investments, a financial advisor can help. Finding the right financial advisor that fits your needs doesn’t have to be hard. SmartAsset’s free tool matches you with financial advisors in your area in 5 minutes. If you’re ready to be matched with local advisors that will help you achieve your financial goals, get started now.
Questions about our study? Contact us at press@smartasset.com
Photo credit: iStock.com/kali9