WASHINGTON — U.S. employers added 172,000 jobs in May, exceeding expectations and marking the third consecutive month of solid gains, the Labor Department reported on Friday.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics said total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 172,000 in May, following an upwardly revised 179,000 gain in April. Economists polled by various outlets had forecast an increase of around 85,000. The unemployment rate held steady at 4.3 percent.
Job gains occurred in leisure and hospitality, local government, and health care, according to the BLS. Financial activities saw a decline of 22,000 jobs.
The stronger-than-expected report comes as the labor market has shown resilience amid various economic pressures. Revisions to prior months added a net 93,000 jobs to March and April combined, the BLS said.
Average hourly earnings rose 0.3 percent in May and were up 3.4 percent from a year earlier, in line with expectations.
The data was released as policymakers and markets monitor the strength of the economy. The report provides the latest snapshot of labor market conditions ahead of decisions by the Federal Reserve on interest rates.
Administration officials welcomed the figures. A White House spokesperson said the job gains reflect continued momentum in the economy under current policies.
Economists noted the labor market remains solid but cautioned that underlying trends warrant close attention. Some sectors continue to show strength while others face challenges.
“The labor market continues to demonstrate resilience with job growth exceeding forecasts for the third straight month,” said one economist at a major financial institution, speaking on condition of anonymity.
Details on wage growth and sector-specific performance were included in the full BLS report. The next employment situation report, covering June, is scheduled for release on July 2.
As of Friday afternoon, markets were reacting to the data, with some investors adjusting expectations for future monetary policy moves. Congressional leaders from both parties acknowledged the report but offered differing interpretations of its implications for broader economic policy.
