For release 10:00 a.m. (EDT), Thursday, March 19, 2015
USDL-15-0427
Technical Information: (202) 691-6567 • [email protected] • www.bls.gov/cew
Media Contact:
(202) 691-5902 • [email protected]
COUNTY EMPLOYMENT AND WAGES
Third Quarter 2014
From September 2013 to September 2014, employment increased in 306 of the 339 largest U.S.
counties, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Weld, Colo., had the largest increase, with
a gain of 8.8 percent over the year, compared with national job growth of 2.0 percent. Within Weld, the
largest employment increase occurred in natural resources and mining, which gained 2,299 jobs over the
year (22.1 percent). Atlantic, N.J., had the largest over-the-year decrease in employment among the
largest counties in the U.S. with a loss of 4.0 percent. County employment and wage data are compiled
under the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) program, which produces detailed
information on county employment and wages within 6 months after the end of each quarter.
The U.S. average weekly wage increased 2.9 percent over the year, growing to $949 in the third quarter
of 2014. Olmsted, Minn., had the largest over-the-year increase in average weekly wages with a gain of
11.1 percent. Within Olmsted, an average weekly wage gain of $238, or 19.7 percent, in education and
health services made the largest contribution to the county’s increase in average weekly wages. Collier,
Fla., experienced the largest decrease in average weekly wages with a loss of 3.9 percent over the year.
Chart 1. Large counties ranked by percent increase in
employment, September 2013-14
(U.S. average = 2.0 percent)
Chart 2. Large counties ranked by percent increase in
average weekly wages, third quarter 2013-14
(U.S. average = 2.9 percent)
Percent
Percent
10
12
8
10
8
6
6
4
4
2
2
0
0
Weld,
Colo.
Benton,
Ark.
Midland,
Texas
Lee,
Fla.
Sarasota,
Fla.
Olmsted,
Minn.
Santa Clara, San Mateo,
San
Calif.
Calif.
Francisco,
Calif.
Brazoria,
Texas
Table A. Large counties ranked by September 2014 employment, September 2013-14 employment
increase, and September 2013-14 percent increase in employment
Employment in large counties
September 2014 employment
(thousands)
United States
Los Angeles, Calif.
New York, N.Y.
Cook, Ill.
Harris, Texas
Maricopa, Ariz.
Dallas, Texas
Orange, Calif.
San Diego, Calif.
King, Wash.
Miami-Dade, Fla.
137,724.1
4,184.4
2,494.4
2,481.9
2,269.5
1,756.8
1,558.5
1,475.0
1,344.5
1,252.8
1,047.0
Increase in employment,
September 2013-14
(thousands)
United States
Los Angeles, Calif.
Harris, Texas
New York, N.Y.
Dallas, Texas
King, Wash.
Santa Clara, Calif.
Clark, Nev.
Maricopa, Ariz.
Orange, Calif.
San Francisco, Calif.
Percent increase in employment,
September 2013-14
2,708.5
87.6
79.2
65.7
53.1
41.5
41.4
39.8
34.1
32.6
31.4
United States
2.0
Weld, Colo.
Benton, Ark.
Midland, Texas
Lee, Fla.
Sarasota, Fla.
Adams, Colo.
Kings, N.Y.
Williamson, Tenn.
San Francisco, Calif.
Fort Bend, Texas
Montgomery, Texas
8.8
7.4
7.4
6.1
6.1
5.7
5.4
5.4
5.1
5.1
5.1
Large County Employment
In September 2014, national employment was 137.7 million (as measured by the QCEW program). Over
the year, employment increased 2.0 percent, or 2.7 million. The 339 U.S. counties with 75,000 or more
jobs accounted for 71.8 percent of total U.S. employment and 76.9 percent of total wages. These 339
counties had a net job growth of 2.0 million over the year, accounting for 74.1 percent of the overall
U.S. employment increase. (See chart 3.)
Weld, Colo., had the largest percentage increase in employment (8.8 percent) among the largest U.S.
counties. The five counties with the largest increases in employment level were Los Angeles, Calif.;
Harris, Texas; New York, N.Y.; Dallas, Texas; and King, Wash. These counties had a combined overthe-year employment gain of 327,100 jobs, which was 12.1 percent of the overall job increase for the
U.S. (See table A.)
Employment declined in 25 of the largest counties from September 2013 to September 2014. Atlantic,
N.J., had the largest over-the-year percentage decrease in employment (-4.0 percent). Within Atlantic,
leisure and hospitality had the largest decrease in employment, with a loss of 5,853 jobs (-12.0 percent).
Passaic, N.J., had the second largest percentage decrease in employment, followed by McLean, Ill.;
Peoria, Ill.; and Burlington, N.J. (See table 1.)
-2-
Table B. Large counties ranked by third quarter 2014 average weekly wages, third quarter 2013-14
increase in average weekly wages, and third quarter 2013-14 percent increase in average weekly wages
Average weekly wage in large counties
Average weekly wage,
third quarter 2014
United States
Santa Clara, Calif.
San Mateo, Calif.
New York, N.Y.
San Francisco, Calif.
Washington, D.C.
Arlington, Va.
Suffolk, Mass.
King, Wash.
Fairfax, Va.
Fairfield, Conn.
Increase in average weekly
wage, third quarter 2013-14
$949
$2,012
1,824
1,733
1,685
1,631
1,545
1,515
1,452
1,447
1,400
United States
Percent increase in average
weekly wage, third
quarter 2013-14
$27
Santa Clara, Calif.
San Francisco, Calif.
San Mateo, Calif.
Olmsted, Minn.
Suffolk, Mass.
Midland, Texas
Washington, Ore.
Arlington, Va.
King, Wash.
Howard, Md.
$138
134
121
108
84
80
71
71
71
67
United States
Olmsted, Minn.
San Francisco, Calif.
Santa Clara, Calif.
San Mateo, Calif.
Brazoria, Texas
Midland, Texas
Washington, Ore.
Howard, Md.
Hamilton, Ohio
Suffolk, Mass.
2.9
11.1
8.6
7.4
7.1
7.1
6.8
6.2
6.0
6.0
5.9
Large County Average Weekly Wages
Average weekly wages for the nation increased to $949, a 2.9 percent increase, during the year ending in
the third quarter of 2014. Among the 339 largest counties, 328 had over-the-year increases in average
weekly wages. (See chart 4.) Olmsted, Minn., had the largest wage increase among the largest U.S.
counties (11.1 percent).
Of the 339 largest counties, 10 experienced over-the-year decreases in average weekly wages. Collier,
Fla., had the largest percentage decrease in average weekly wages, with a loss of 3.9 percent. Within
Collier, professional and business services had the largest impact on the county’s average weekly wage
decrease. Within this industry, average weekly wages declined by $498 (-33.2 percent) over the year.
Dane, Wis., had the second largest percentage decrease in average weekly wages, followed by
Williamson, Texas; Hamilton, Ind.; and Shawnee, Kan. (See table 1.)
Ten Largest U.S. Counties
All of the 10 largest counties had over-the-year percentage increases in employment in September
2014. Harris, Texas, had the largest gain (3.6 percent). Within Harris, trade, transportation, and utilities
had the largest over-the-year employment level increase among all private industry groups with a gain of
15,547 jobs, or 3.4 percent. Cook, Ill., had the smallest percentage increase in employment (1.2 percent)
among the 10 largest counties. (See table 2.)
Average weekly wages increased over the year in all of the 10 largest U.S. counties. King, Wash.,
experienced the largest percentage gain in average weekly wages (5.1 percent). Within King,
information had the largest impact on the county’s average weekly wage growth. Within this industry,
average weekly wages increased by $437, or 9.3 percent, over the year. San Diego, Calif., had the
smallest increase in average weekly wages (0.8 percent) among the 10 largest counties.
-3-
For More Information
The tables and charts included in this release contain data for the nation and for the 339 U.S. counties
with annual average employment levels of 75,000 or more in 2013. September 2014 employment and
2014 third quarter average weekly wages for all states are provided in table 3 of this release.
The employment and wage data by county are compiled under the QCEW program, also known as the
ES-202 program. The data are derived from reports submitted by every employer subject to
unemployment insurance (UI) laws. The 9.4 million employer reports cover 137.7 million full- and parttime workers. The QCEW program provides a quarterly and annual universe count of establishments,
employment, and wages at the county, MSA, state, and national levels by detailed industry. Data for the
third quarter of 2014 will be available electronically later at www.bls.gov/cew/. For additional
information about the quarterly employment and wages data, please read the Technical Note. Additional
information about the QCEW data may be obtained by calling (202) 691-6567.
Several BLS regional offices are issuing QCEW news releases targeted to local data users. For links to
these releases, see www.bls.gov/cew/cewregional.htm.
The County Employment and Wages release for fourth quarter 2014 is scheduled to be released
on Wednesday, June 17, 2015.
-4-
Technical Note
These data are the product of a federal-state cooperative program,
the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) program,
also known as the ES-202 program. The data are derived from summaries of employment and total pay of workers covered by state and
federal unemployment insurance (UI) legislation and provided by
State Workforce Agencies (SWAs). The summaries are a result of
the administration of state unemployment insurance programs that
require most employers to pay quarterly taxes based on the employment and wages of workers covered by UI. QCEW data in this release are based on the 2012 North American Industry Classification
System. Data for 2014 are preliminary and subject to revision.
For purposes of this release, large counties are defined as having
employment levels of 75,000 or greater. In addition, data for San
Juan, Puerto Rico, are provided, but not used in calculating U.S. averages, rankings, or in the analysis in the text. Each year, these large
counties are selected on the basis of the preliminary annual average
of employment for the previous year. The 340 counties presented in
this release were derived using 2013 preliminary annual averages of
employment. For 2014 data, five counties have been added to the
publication tables: Shelby, Ala.; Osceola, Fla.; Black Hawk, Iowa;
Washington, Minn.; and Cleveland, Okla. These counties will be included in all 2014 quarterly releases. The counties in table 2 are selected and sorted each year based on the annual average employment
from the preceding year.
Summary of Major Differences between QCEW, BED, and CES Employment Measures
QCEW
BED
CES
Source
 Count of UI administrative records
submitted by 9.4 million establishments in first quarter of 2014
 Count of longitudinally-linked UI administrative records submitted by
7.5 million private-sector employers
 Sample survey: 588,000 establishments
Coverage
 UI and UCFE coverage, including
all employers subject to state and
federal UI laws
 UI coverage, excluding government,
private households, and establishments with zero employment
Nonfarm wage and salary jobs:
 UI coverage, excluding agriculture, private
households, and self-employed workers
 Other employment, including railroads,
religious organizations, and other nonUI-covered jobs
 Quarterly
— 8 months after the end of each
quarter
 Monthly
— Usually first Friday of following
month
Publication fre-  Quarterly
quency
— 6 months after the end of each
quarter
Use of UI file
 Directly summarizes and publishes
each new quarter of UI data
 Links each new UI quarter to longitu-  Uses UI file as a sampling frame and to
dinal database and directly summaannually realign sample-based estimates
rizes gross job gains and losses
to population counts (benchmarking)
Principal
products
 Provides a quarterly and annual universe count of establishments, employment, and wages at the county,
MSA, state, and national levels by
detailed industry
 Provides quarterly employer dynam-  Provides current monthly estimates of
ics data on establishment openings,
employment, hours, and earnings at the
closings, expansions, and contractions
MSA, state, and national level by indusat the national level by NAICS supertry
sectors and by size of firm, and at the
state private-sector total level
 Future expansions will include data
with greater industry detail and data
at the county and MSA level
Principal uses
 Major uses include:
— Detailed locality data
— Periodic universe counts for
benchmarking sample survey estimates
— Sample frame for BLS establishment surveys
Program Web
sites
 www.bls.gov/cew/
 Major uses include:
— Business cycle analysis
— Analysis of employer dynamics
underlying economic expansions
and contractions
— Analysis of employment expansion and contraction by size of
firm
 www.bls.gov/bdm/
 Major uses include:
— Principal national economic indicator
— Official time series for employment
change measures
— Input into other major economic indicators
 www.bls.gov/ces/
The preliminary QCEW data presented in this release may differ
from data released by the individual states. These potential differences
result from the states' continuing receipt of UI data over time and ongoing review and editing. The individual states determine their data
release timetables.
Differences between QCEW, BED, and CES employment
measures
The Bureau publishes three different establishment-based employment measures for any given quarter. Each of these measures—
QCEW, Business Employment Dynamics (BED), and Current Employment Statistics (CES)—makes use of the quarterly UI employment reports in producing data; however, each measure has a somewhat different universe coverage, estimation procedure, and publication product.
Differences in coverage and estimation methods can result in somewhat different measures of employment change over time. It is important to understand program differences and the intended uses of the
program products. (See table.) Additional information on each program can be obtained from the program Web sites shown in the table.
Coverage
Employment and wage data for workers covered by state UI laws
are compiled from quarterly contribution reports submitted to the
SWAs by employers. For federal civilian workers covered by the Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees (UCFE) program,
employment and wage data are compiled from quarterly reports submitted by four major federal payroll processing centers on behalf of
all federal agencies, with the exception of a few agencies which still
report directly to the individual SWA. In addition to the quarterly contribution reports, employers who operate multiple establishments
within a state complete a questionnaire, called the "Multiple Worksite
Report," which provides detailed information on the location and industry of each of their establishments. QCEW employment and wage
data are derived from microdata summaries of 9.2 million employer
reports of employment and wages submitted by states to the BLS in
2013. These reports are based on place of employment rather than
place of residence.
UI and UCFE coverage is broad and has been basically comparable
from state to state since 1978, when the 1976 amendments to the Federal Unemployment Tax Act became effective, expanding coverage to
include most State and local government employees. In 2013, UI and
UCFE programs covered workers in 134.0 million jobs. The estimated
128.7 million workers in these jobs (after adjustment for multiple jobholders) represented 95.8 percent of civilian wage and salary employment. Covered workers received $6.673 trillion in pay, representing
93.7 percent of the wage and salary component of personal income
and 39.8 percent of the gross domestic product.
Major exclusions from UI coverage include self-employed workers, most agricultural workers on small farms, all members of the
Armed Forces, elected officials in most states, most employees of railroads, some domestic workers, most student workers at schools, and
employees of certain small nonprofit organizations.
State and federal UI laws change periodically. These changes may
have an impact on the employment and wages reported by employers
covered under the UI program. Coverage changes may affect the overthe-year comparisons presented in this news release.
Concepts and methodology
Monthly employment is based on the number of workers who
worked during or received pay for the pay period including the 12th
of the month. With few exceptions, all employees of covered firms are
reported, including production and sales workers, corporation officials, executives, supervisory personnel, and clerical workers. Workers on paid vacations and part-time workers also are included.
Average weekly wage values are calculated by dividing quarterly
total wages by the average of the three monthly employment levels
(all employees, as described above) and dividing the result by 13, for
the 13 weeks in the quarter. These calculations are made using unrounded employment and wage values. The average wage values that
can be calculated using rounded data from the BLS database may differ from the averages reported. Included in the quarterly wage data are
non-wage cash payments such as bonuses, the cash value of meals and
lodging when supplied, tips and other gratuities, and, in some states,
employer contributions to certain deferred compensation plans such
as 401(k) plans and stock options. Over-the-year comparisons of average weekly wages may reflect fluctuations in average monthly employment and/or total quarterly wages between the current quarter and
prior year levels.
Average weekly wages are affected by the ratio of full-time to parttime workers as well as the number of individuals in high-paying and
low-paying occupations and the incidence of pay periods within a
quarter. For instance, the average weekly wage of the workforce could
increase significantly when there is a large decline in the number of
employees that had been receiving below-average wages. Wages may
include payments to workers not present in the employment counts
because they did not work during the pay period including the 12th of
the month. When comparing average weekly wage levels between industries, states, or quarters, these factors should be taken into consideration.
Wages measured by QCEW may be subject to periodic and sometimes large fluctuations. This variability may be due to calendar effects resulting from some quarters having more pay dates than others.
The effect is most visible in counties with a dominant employer. In
particular, this effect has been observed in counties where government
employers represent a large fraction of overall employment. Similar
calendar effects can result from private sector pay practices. However,
these effects are typically less pronounced for two reasons: employment is less concentrated in a single private employer, and private employers use a variety of pay period types (weekly, biweekly, semimonthly, monthly).
For example, the effect on over-the-year pay comparisons can be
pronounced in federal government due to the uniform nature of federal
payroll processing. Most federal employees are paid on a biweekly
pay schedule. As a result, in some quarters federal wages include six
pay dates, while in other quarters there are seven pay dates. Over-theyear comparisons of average weekly wages may also reflect this calendar effect. Growth in average weekly wages may be attributed, in
part, to a comparison of quarterly wages for the current year, which
include seven pay dates, with year-ago wages that reflect only six pay
dates. An opposite effect will occur when wages in the current quarter
reflecting six pay dates are compared with year-ago wages for a quarter including seven pay dates.
In order to ensure the highest possible quality of data, states verify
with employers and update, if necessary, the industry, location, and
ownership classification of all establishments on a 3-year cycle.
Changes in establishment classification codes resulting from this process are introduced with the data reported for the first quarter of the
year. Changes resulting from improved employer reporting also are
introduced in the first quarter.
QCEW data are not designed as a time series. QCEW data are
simply the sums of individual establishment records and reflect the
number of establishments that exist in a county or industry at a point
in time. Establishments can move in or out of a county or industry for
a number of reasons—some reflecting economic events, others reflecting administrative changes. For example, economic change
would come from a firm relocating into the county; administrative
change would come from a company correcting its county designation.
The over-the-year changes of employment and wages presented in
this release have been adjusted to account for most of the administrative corrections made to the underlying establishment reports. This is
done by modifying the prior-year levels used to calculate the over-theyear changes. Percent changes are calculated using an adjusted version of the final 2013 quarterly data as the base data. The adjusted
prior-year levels used to calculate the over-the-year percent change in
employment and wages are not published. These adjusted prior-year
levels do not match the unadjusted data maintained on the BLS Web
site. Over-the-year change calculations based on data from the Web
site, or from data published in prior BLS news releases, may differ
substantially from the over-the-year changes presented in this news
release.
The adjusted data used to calculate the over-the-year change
measures presented in this release account for most of the administrative changes—those occurring when employers update the industry,
location, and ownership information of their establishments. The most
common adjustments for administrative change are the result of updated information about the county location of individual establishments. Included in these adjustments are administrative changes involving the classification of establishments that were previously reported in the unknown or statewide county or unknown industry categories. Beginning with the first quarter of 2008, adjusted data account
for administrative changes caused by multi-unit employers who start
reporting for each individual establishment rather than as a single entity. Beginning with the second quarter of 2011, adjusted data account
for selected large administrative changes in employment and wages.
Beginning with the third quarter of 2014, adjusted data account for
state verified improvements in reporting of employment and wages.
These adjustments allow QCEW to include county employment and
wage growth rates in this news release that would otherwise not meet
publication standards.
The adjusted data used to calculate the over-the-year change
measures presented in any County Employment and Wages news release are valid for comparisons between the starting and ending points
(a 12-month period) used in that particular release. Comparisons may
not be valid for any time period other than the one featured in a release
even if the changes were calculated using adjusted data.
County definitions are assigned according to Federal Information
Processing Standards Publications (FIPS PUBS) as issued by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, after approval by the
Secretary of Commerce pursuant to Section 5131 of the Information
Technology Management Reform Act of 1996 and the Computer Security Act of 1987, Public Law 104-106. Areas shown as counties include those designated as independent cities in some jurisdictions and,
in Alaska, those designated as census areas where counties have not
been created. County data also are presented for the New England
states for comparative purposes even though townships are the more
common designation used in New England (and New Jersey). The regions referred to in this release are defined as census regions.
Additional statistics and other information
Employment and Wages Annual Averages Online features comprehensive information by detailed industry on establishments, employment, and wages for the nation and all states. The 2013 edition of this
publication, which was published in September 2014, contains selected data produced by Business Employment Dynamics (BED) on
job gains and losses, as well as selected data from the first quarter
2014 version of this news release. Tables and additional content from
Employment and Wages Annual Averages 2013 are now available
online at http://www.bls.gov/cew/cewbultn13.htm. The 2014 edition
of Employment and Wages Annual Averages Online will be available
in September 2015.
News releases on quarterly measures of gross job flows also are
available upon request from the Division of Administrative Statistics
and Labor Turnover (Business Employment Dynamics), telephone
(202)
691-6467;
(http://www.bls.gov/bdm/);
(e-mail:
[email protected]).
Information in this release will be made available to sensory impaired individuals upon request. Voice phone: (202) 691-5200; TDD
message referral phone number: 1-800-877-8339.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 340 largest counties,
third quarter 2014
Average weekly wage ²
Employment
County¹
Establishments,
third quarter
2014
(thousands)
September
2014
(thousands)
Percent
change,
September
2013-14³
Ranking by
percent
change
Third
quarter
2014
Percent
change,
third quarter
2013-14³
Ranking by
percent
change
United States⁴..............................
9,419.7
137,724.1
2.0
-
$949
2.9
-
Jefferson, AL................................
Madison, AL.................................
Mobile, AL....................................
Montgomery, AL...........................
Shelby, AL....................................
Tuscaloosa, AL.............................
Anchorage Borough, AK...............
Maricopa, AZ................................
Pima, AZ.......................................
Benton, AR...................................
17.8
9.1
9.6
6.3
5.1
4.3
8.4
93.4
18.7
5.7
339.0
183.2
165.7
128.1
80.1
90.6
156.2
1,756.8
352.4
106.5
0.4
1.0
1.0
0.5
2.7
4.5
-0.2
2.0
0.1
7.4
282
228
228
276
96
17
318
145
299
2
956
1,036
820
810
868
814
1,066
914
818
926
3.7
4.0
1.6
1.8
2.0
1.1
3.2
1.8
2.9
0.5
55
40
274
257
231
293
91
257
125
317
Pulaski, AR...................................
Washington, AR...........................
Alameda, CA................................
Contra Costa, CA.........................
Fresno, CA...................................
Kern, CA.......................................
Los Angeles, CA...........................
Marin, CA.....................................
Monterey, CA...............................
Orange, CA..................................
14.3
5.7
57.5
29.9
31.1
17.3
442.4
12.1
12.9
108.0
242.9
96.8
706.5
342.7
365.4
326.4
4,184.4
111.3
197.1
1,475.0
0.2
1.5
3.2
2.2
1.0
2.2
2.1
3.0
4.0
2.3
293
171
65
128
228
128
137
77
34
119
849
774
1,247
1,142
747
819
1,036
1,120
797
1,050
2.3
0.3
4.2
2.1
3.2
3.8
3.1
3.9
1.0
2.6
194
325
31
223
91
50
103
44
300
154
Placer, CA....................................
Riverside, CA...............................
Sacramento, CA...........................
San Bernardino, CA.....................
San Diego, CA..............................
San Francisco, CA.......................
San Joaquin, CA..........................
San Luis Obispo, CA....................
San Mateo, CA.............................
Santa Barbara, CA.......................
11.4
53.6
52.7
51.4
100.8
57.6
16.7
9.8
26.1
14.6
143.7
626.4
618.0
658.1
1,344.5
648.6
224.0
110.8
375.4
194.6
3.8
4.4
3.3
4.1
2.3
5.1
3.6
3.8
4.4
3.3
42
19
61
29
119
9
51
42
19
61
937
756
1,050
793
1,030
1,685
799
785
1,824
901
2.9
2.6
2.0
2.7
0.8
8.6
1.4
2.2
7.1
2.3
125
154
231
140
306
2
286
206
4
194
Santa Clara, CA...........................
Santa Cruz, CA............................
Solano, CA...................................
Sonoma, CA.................................
Stanislaus, CA..............................
Tulare, CA....................................
Ventura, CA..................................
Yolo, CA.......................................
Adams, CO...................................
Arapahoe, CO..............................
66.2
9.2
10.3
18.9
14.4
9.2
24.9
6.1
9.4
19.7
986.6
100.8
128.3
195.1
177.6
151.6
310.7
101.2
185.4
307.9
4.4
2.1
2.1
3.5
2.5
2.8
1.2
0.8
5.7
2.8
19
137
137
54
107
86
199
248
6
86
2,012
837
958
896
801
667
945
972
924
1,096
7.4
2.6
4.1
1.9
1.9
3.6
2.1
4.5
2.8
2.7
3
154
38
244
244
61
223
23
129
140
Boulder, CO..................................
Denver, CO..................................
Douglas, CO.................................
El Paso, CO..................................
Jefferson, CO...............................
Larimer, CO..................................
Weld, CO......................................
Fairfield, CT.................................
Hartford, CT..................................
New Haven, CT............................
13.7
28.0
10.3
17.2
18.2
10.6
6.3
34.1
26.4
23.1
170.1
467.4
107.9
250.4
223.8
143.7
100.7
420.4
503.0
361.2
2.8
4.9
3.7
1.8
3.2
3.8
8.8
0.8
1.0
0.7
86
13
48
153
65
42
1
248
228
263
1,129
1,175
1,037
859
951
859
869
1,400
1,123
987
3.0
4.6
0.4
2.3
3.0
3.4
4.3
1.7
0.0
2.0
117
22
323
194
117
74
28
264
329
231
See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 340 largest counties,
third quarter 2014 - Continued
Average weekly wage ²
Employment
County¹
Establishments,
third quarter
2014
(thousands)
September
2014
(thousands)
Percent
change,
September
2013-14³
Ranking by
percent
change
Third
quarter
2014
Percent
change,
third quarter
2013-14³
Ranking by
percent
change
New London, CT..........................
New Castle, DE............................
Washington, DC...........................
Alachua, FL..................................
Brevard, FL...................................
Broward, FL..................................
Collier, FL.....................................
Duval, FL.....................................
Escambia, FL...............................
Hillsborough, FL...........................
7.1
18.3
36.3
6.7
14.9
66.5
12.7
27.7
8.2
39.7
122.3
278.7
732.9
121.5
190.0
739.9
123.9
456.5
124.9
620.0
-0.6
2.3
1.5
2.5
1.7
2.8
4.3
1.3
2.1
2.9
330
119
171
107
162
86
24
192
137
83
$927
1,074
1,631
790
851
869
806
890
733
891
2.0
1.9
3.8
3.4
1.2
2.2
-3.9
2.8
3.2
2.6
231
244
50
74
291
206
339
129
91
154
Lake, FL.......................................
Lee, FL.........................................
Leon, FL.......................................
Manatee, FL.................................
Marion, FL....................................
Miami-Dade, FL............................
Okaloosa, FL................................
Orange, FL...................................
Osceola, FL..................................
Palm Beach, FL............................
7.7
20.1
8.4
10.0
8.1
94.3
6.2
38.7
6.1
52.6
86.2
223.2
142.2
106.5
94.9
1,047.0
78.2
735.7
80.9
538.4
2.8
6.1
2.8
3.1
3.2
3.0
0.1
3.6
3.0
3.9
86
4
86
73
65
77
299
51
77
36
656
743
771
706
644
891
779
821
656
903
2.5
1.6
1.7
1.0
1.1
2.2
2.8
2.1
2.2
1.9
165
274
264
300
293
206
129
223
206
244
Pasco, FL.....................................
Pinellas, FL...................................
Polk, FL........................................
Sarasota, FL................................
Seminole, FL................................
Volusia, FL...................................
Bibb, GA.......................................
Chatham, GA................................
Clayton, GA..................................
Cobb, GA......................................
10.3
31.7
12.7
15.1
14.2
13.7
4.5
8.2
4.3
22.6
105.7
397.8
196.2
152.5
169.0
156.2
81.8
141.8
113.0
325.4
4.2
2.1
1.9
6.1
4.1
2.6
1.8
4.4
2.4
3.8
26
137
147
4
29
102
153
19
113
42
650
826
730
754
777
664
737
800
892
988
2.7
2.5
1.5
1.3
1.8
2.3
1.5
1.7
1.9
2.7
140
165
282
290
257
194
282
264
244
140
De Kalb, GA.................................
Fulton, GA....................................
Gwinnett, GA................................
Muscogee, GA..............................
Richmond, GA..............................
Honolulu, HI..................................
Ada, ID.........................................
Champaign, IL..............................
Cook, IL........................................
Du Page, IL..................................
18.8
44.4
25.3
4.8
4.7
24.9
14.1
4.5
158.3
39.2
283.6
772.1
327.9
94.4
102.5
456.1
210.3
90.0
2,481.9
601.5
3.4
3.5
3.8
0.5
3.0
0.8
1.1
1.3
1.2
0.9
57
54
42
276
77
248
212
192
199
241
947
1,236
932
744
800
906
831
850
1,071
1,067
0.9
3.2
3.4
2.1
1.5
4.0
2.1
1.7
2.0
1.7
304
91
74
223
282
40
223
264
231
264
Kane, IL........................................
Lake, IL........................................
McHenry, IL..................................
McLean, IL....................................
Madison, IL...................................
Peoria, IL......................................
St. Clair, IL....................................
Sangamon, IL...............................
Will, IL..........................................
Winnebago, IL..............................
14.1
23.3
9.1
3.9
6.2
4.8
5.7
5.5
16.4
7.0
206.8
333.9
97.3
84.0
98.1
100.0
92.1
128.8
218.0
128.0
0.7
-0.4
1.7
-1.2
2.4
-1.2
-0.7
1.2
1.2
1.5
263
323
162
336
113
336
332
199
199
171
831
1,180
782
892
771
870
769
983
835
798
3.4
2.4
3.0
0.3
1.6
1.6
2.5
3.1
2.6
2.8
74
183
117
325
274
274
165
103
154
129
See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 340 largest counties,
third quarter 2014 - Continued
Average weekly wage ²
Employment
County¹
Establishments,
third quarter
2014
(thousands)
September
2014
(thousands)
Percent
change,
September
2013-14³
Ranking by
percent
change
Third
quarter
2014
Percent
change,
third quarter
2013-14³
Ranking by
percent
change
Allen, IN........................................
Elkhart, IN.....................................
Hamilton, IN..................................
Lake, IN........................................
Marion, IN.....................................
St. Joseph, IN...............................
Tippecanoe, IN.............................
Vanderburgh, IN...........................
Black Hawk, IA..........................
Johnson, IA..................................
8.8
4.7
8.8
10.2
23.4
5.8
3.3
4.7
3.8
4.0
179.2
121.3
127.7
187.3
580.5
118.8
81.9
106.0
75.9
81.1
1.3
3.7
4.1
-0.4
0.9
1.4
2.6
2.0
0.1
0.4
192
48
29
323
241
184
102
145
299
282
$775
778
891
848
947
772
800
759
802
891
2.0
2.6
-0.7
1.1
0.2
3.1
4.4
2.6
3.1
2.2
231
154
336
293
327
103
26
154
103
206
Linn, IA.........................................
Polk, IA........................................
Scott, IA........................................
Johnson, KS.................................
Sedgwick, KS...............................
Shawnee, KS................................
Wyandotte, KS.............................
Boone, KY...................................
Fayette, KY...................................
Jefferson, KY................................
6.5
16.5
5.5
21.6
12.4
4.8
3.3
4.2
10.4
24.4
128.6
287.2
90.4
328.7
245.5
97.7
88.3
78.7
184.8
446.1
0.5
1.7
1.1
2.4
1.2
1.5
4.1
3.3
0.8
2.5
276
162
212
113
199
171
29
61
248
107
915
958
764
955
825
769
914
803
844
897
3.5
3.5
1.1
2.5
1.4
-0.4
3.9
0.5
0.7
2.3
66
66
293
165
286
335
44
317
310
194
Caddo, LA....................................
Calcasieu, LA...............................
East Baton Rouge, LA..................
Jefferson, LA................................
Lafayette, LA................................
Orleans, LA..................................
St. Tammany, LA..........................
Cumberland, ME..........................
Anne Arundel, MD........................
Baltimore, MD...............................
7.3
4.9
14.6
13.5
9.2
11.6
7.6
12.7
14.5
21.0
114.1
88.6
271.7
191.4
142.1
186.4
83.1
174.8
255.5
365.5
-0.4
4.0
2.3
0.5
1.1
3.2
2.3
0.8
0.9
0.2
323
34
119
276
212
65
119
248
241
293
788
849
889
855
949
931
816
832
1,021
959
3.7
5.5
1.0
2.2
4.4
2.4
3.3
2.3
2.4
2.6
55
13
300
206
26
183
81
194
183
154
Frederick, MD...............................
Harford, MD..................................
Howard, MD.................................
Montgomery, MD..........................
Prince Georges, MD.....................
Baltimore City, MD.......................
Barnstable, MA.............................
Bristol, MA....................................
Essex, MA....................................
Hampden, MA..............................
6.3
5.6
9.4
32.5
15.6
13.7
9.2
16.5
22.8
16.6
96.1
88.8
161.2
455.9
306.2
337.3
98.9
220.5
316.3
202.2
0.8
0.1
0.8
0.4
1.6
2.2
1.4
1.7
1.4
0.7
248
299
248
282
167
128
184
162
184
263
905
904
1,183
1,243
1,033
1,123
782
839
1,000
860
4.0
3.1
6.0
2.2
2.9
2.7
2.2
0.8
3.4
2.4
40
103
8
206
125
140
206
306
74
183
Middlesex, MA..............................
Norfolk, MA...................................
Plymouth, MA...............................
Suffolk, MA...................................
Worcester, MA..............................
Genesee, MI.................................
Ingham, MI...................................
Kalamazoo, MI.............................
Kent, MI.......................................
Macomb, MI..................................
51.4
24.0
14.5
25.6
22.6
7.0
6.1
5.1
13.9
17.2
857.9
337.6
185.4
621.9
331.4
133.7
150.5
113.2
363.8
307.6
1.8
1.4
1.8
2.1
2.3
1.2
-0.4
0.2
2.7
1.0
153
184
153
137
119
199
323
293
96
228
1,382
1,079
880
1,515
949
777
899
875
837
942
1.7
2.5
2.3
5.9
0.7
2.5
3.2
3.2
3.3
2.4
264
165
194
10
310
165
91
91
81
183
See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 340 largest counties,
third quarter 2014 - Continued
Average weekly wage ²
Employment
County¹
Establishments,
third quarter
2014
(thousands)
September
2014
(thousands)
Percent
change,
September
2013-14³
Ranking by
percent
change
Third
quarter
2014
Percent
change,
third quarter
2013-14³
Ranking by
percent
change
Oakland, MI..................................
Ottawa, MI....................................
Saginaw, MI..................................
Washtenaw, MI.............................
Wayne, MI....................................
Anoka, MN....................................
Dakota, MN..................................
Hennepin, MN..............................
Olmsted, MN................................
Ramsey, MN.................................
38.1
5.5
4.0
8.0
30.4
6.9
9.6
40.3
3.4
13.3
693.8
119.1
83.9
198.9
694.5
118.2
181.5
872.8
92.5
326.1
1.4
4.2
-0.1
0.9
0.8
1.9
1.3
1.5
-0.3
0.3
184
26
315
241
248
147
192
171
322
290
$1,028
801
763
1,028
1,027
937
919
1,175
1,077
1,057
2.2
4.8
2.7
3.6
2.9
3.8
3.6
1.1
11.1
2.7
206
19
140
61
125
50
61
293
1
140
St. Louis, MN................................
Stearns, MN.................................
Washington, MN...........................
Harrison, MS................................
Hinds, MS.....................................
Boone, MO...................................
Clay, MO......................................
Greene, MO..................................
Jackson, MO................................
St. Charles, MO............................
5.3
4.2
5.3
4.5
6.0
4.7
5.2
8.2
19.9
8.6
97.6
83.6
76.7
82.9
119.5
91.0
95.0
159.6
349.2
133.6
0.5
0.7
0.4
-0.2
0.2
1.5
4.1
2.3
0.0
1.4
276
263
282
318
293
171
29
119
307
184
827
793
783
694
817
764
838
725
961
763
4.2
5.7
2.6
2.5
1.0
1.9
0.4
1.8
1.7
4.8
31
12
154
165
300
244
323
257
264
19
St. Louis, MO................................
St. Louis City, MO........................
Yellowstone, MT...........................
Douglas, NE.................................
Lancaster, NE...............................
Clark, NV.....................................
Washoe, NV.................................
Hillsborough, NH..........................
Rockingham, NH..........................
Atlantic, NJ...................................
34.1
11.1
6.3
18.8
10.2
51.8
13.9
12.2
10.6
6.6
582.5
224.7
79.5
326.7
164.4
883.2
196.6
195.0
142.1
131.2
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.2
4.7
2.7
1.8
1.2
-4.0
212
212
199
199
199
15
96
153
199
339
993
1,031
807
885
769
823
854
1,014
918
790
3.7
3.1
3.9
-0.1
2.5
0.5
0.6
2.7
5.8
3.3
55
103
44
330
165
317
315
140
11
81
Bergen, NJ...................................
Burlington, NJ...............................
Camden, NJ.................................
Essex, NJ....................................
Gloucester, NJ..............................
Hudson, NJ...................................
Mercer, NJ....................................
Middlesex, NJ..............................
Monmouth, NJ..............................
Morris, NJ.....................................
32.7
11.0
11.8
20.3
6.1
14.1
11.0
21.8
20.0
16.9
439.0
195.0
198.1
327.9
101.9
238.0
235.6
393.8
248.8
281.1
0.8
-1.1
2.4
-0.4
2.5
0.4
1.5
0.9
1.5
0.6
248
335
113
323
107
282
171
241
171
271
1,106
969
893
1,159
812
1,275
1,229
1,120
917
1,341
2.0
0.5
-0.1
0.7
-0.1
1.9
3.2
0.5
2.6
0.7
231
317
330
310
330
244
91
317
154
310
Ocean, NJ....................................
Passaic, NJ..................................
Somerset, NJ...............................
Union, NJ.....................................
Bernalillo, NM...............................
Albany, NY...................................
Bronx, NY.....................................
Broome, NY..................................
Dutchess, NY...............................
Erie, NY........................................
12.6
12.2
10.0
14.2
18.2
10.3
17.7
4.6
8.5
24.6
158.9
164.5
180.8
220.6
315.5
226.7
254.0
88.2
109.4
461.2
1.5
-2.2
2.2
0.3
1.1
1.6
3.1
0.0
0.2
0.6
171
338
128
290
212
167
73
307
293
271
749
926
1,372
1,146
826
1,008
901
737
943
836
1.6
3.5
2.2
1.8
2.2
3.5
0.9
1.9
2.3
2.8
274
66
206
257
206
66
304
244
194
129
See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 340 largest counties,
third quarter 2014 - Continued
Average weekly wage ²
Employment
County¹
Establishments,
third quarter
2014
(thousands)
September
2014
(thousands)
Percent
change,
September
2013-14³
Ranking by
percent
change
Third
quarter
2014
Percent
change,
third quarter
2013-14³
Ranking by
percent
change
Kings, NY.....................................
Monroe, NY..................................
Nassau, NY..................................
New York, NY...............................
Oneida, NY...................................
Onondaga, NY..............................
Orange, NY..................................
Queens, NY..................................
Richmond, NY..............................
Rockland, NY...............................
57.5
18.6
53.5
127.7
5.4
13.1
10.2
50.0
9.6
10.3
569.3
376.9
606.5
2,494.4
103.5
242.9
137.6
558.8
98.9
116.6
5.4
0.7
1.3
2.7
0.0
0.0
1.8
3.9
1.0
2.5
7
263
192
96
307
307
153
36
228
107
$789
905
1,022
1,733
746
856
777
884
805
955
4.1
0.1
3.2
3.8
3.2
1.9
2.5
2.8
0.6
-0.1
38
328
91
50
91
244
165
129
315
330
Saratoga, NY................................
Suffolk, NY...................................
Westchester, NY..........................
Buncombe, NC.............................
Catawba, NC................................
Cumberland, NC...........................
Durham, NC.................................
Forsyth, NC..................................
Guilford, NC..................................
Mecklenburg, NC..........................
5.8
52.1
36.6
8.2
4.3
6.2
7.6
9.1
14.2
33.8
81.2
640.3
413.6
120.2
81.5
116.5
188.7
179.0
270.9
612.5
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.9
1.3
-0.8
1.5
1.1
0.8
4.2
282
248
199
147
192
334
171
212
248
26
844
1,031
1,196
731
715
748
1,219
889
843
1,071
3.6
3.1
3.1
2.5
2.7
1.1
2.4
5.0
4.2
1.7
61
103
103
165
140
293
183
17
31
264
New Hanover, NC........................
Wake, NC.....................................
Cass, ND......................................
Butler, OH.....................................
Cuyahoga, OH..............................
Delaware, OH...............................
Franklin, OH.................................
Hamilton, OH................................
Lake, OH......................................
Lorain, OH....................................
7.4
30.6
6.7
7.5
35.5
4.7
30.3
23.3
6.3
6.1
104.1
491.8
116.3
143.5
707.9
82.5
709.8
502.1
94.8
97.0
3.2
3.1
4.4
2.2
0.1
-0.7
2.5
1.2
0.8
1.3
65
73
19
128
299
332
107
199
248
192
750
953
897
827
974
921
948
1,073
786
767
1.1
1.9
4.3
3.5
1.8
2.7
2.4
6.0
3.8
1.7
293
244
28
66
257
140
183
8
50
264
Lucas, OH....................................
Mahoning, OH..............................
Montgomery, OH..........................
Stark, OH.....................................
Summit, OH.................................
Warren, OH.................................
Cleveland, OK..............................
Oklahoma, OK..............................
Tulsa, OK.....................................
Clackamas, OR............................
10.0
5.9
12.0
8.7
14.1
4.4
5.3
26.5
21.4
13.3
205.2
99.5
247.4
159.1
261.3
83.9
80.2
445.2
344.4
147.9
0.0
0.6
1.9
1.6
1.0
1.9
1.1
1.4
1.4
2.2
307
271
147
167
228
147
212
184
184
128
827
683
814
755
851
824
709
949
893
874
4.2
1.6
1.4
4.3
2.5
3.5
2.2
4.5
3.4
1.9
31
274
286
28
165
66
206
23
74
244
Jackson, OR................................
Lane, OR......................................
Marion, OR...................................
Multnomah, OR............................
Washington, OR...........................
Allegheny, PA...............................
Berks, PA.....................................
Bucks, PA.....................................
Butler, PA.....................................
Chester, PA..................................
6.8
11.2
9.7
31.2
17.3
35.1
8.9
19.6
5.0
15.1
81.7
143.1
144.2
466.7
267.1
686.2
167.6
252.1
85.2
240.9
1.6
2.3
2.9
2.7
2.3
0.1
1.5
1.2
0.0
0.9
167
119
83
96
119
299
171
199
307
241
740
754
764
979
1,216
1,024
852
892
889
1,160
4.2
3.7
4.2
2.8
6.2
2.0
3.0
2.5
2.7
1.8
31
55
31
129
7
231
117
165
140
257
See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 340 largest counties,
third quarter 2014 - Continued
Average weekly wage ²
Employment
County¹
Establishments,
third quarter
2014
(thousands)
September
2014
(thousands)
Percent
change,
September
2013-14³
Ranking by
percent
change
Third
quarter
2014
Percent
change,
third quarter
2013-14³
Ranking by
percent
change
Cumberland, PA...........................
Dauphin, PA................................
Delaware, PA...............................
Erie, PA........................................
Lackawanna, PA..........................
Lancaster, PA...............................
Lehigh, PA....................................
Luzerne, PA..................................
Montgomery, PA...........................
Northampton, PA..........................
6.1
7.3
13.7
7.2
5.8
12.9
8.5
7.5
27.2
6.6
127.3
176.8
216.0
125.2
97.9
227.4
182.0
141.7
473.0
106.1
1.5
0.6
1.0
0.1
0.7
2.2
1.1
1.1
0.8
0.7
171
271
228
299
263
128
212
212
248
263
$867
939
994
755
735
790
926
751
1,133
824
1.9
2.7
2.7
2.0
3.2
3.0
2.3
2.3
2.4
1.4
244
140
140
231
91
117
194
194
183
286
Philadelphia, PA...........................
Washington, PA............................
Westmoreland, PA.......................
York, PA.......................................
Providence, RI..............................
Charleston, SC.............................
Greenville, SC..............................
Horry, SC.....................................
Lexington, SC...............................
Richland, SC................................
34.7
5.3
9.3
8.9
17.3
12.7
12.9
8.0
5.9
9.3
645.3
88.1
133.9
173.0
280.5
228.9
248.3
118.3
107.9
209.9
1.8
1.5
0.8
0.2
1.8
4.3
3.9
3.3
3.2
2.1
153
171
248
293
153
24
36
61
65
137
1,125
939
767
825
937
837
841
580
728
815
2.0
4.9
3.1
2.1
1.6
2.8
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.5
231
18
103
223
274
129
154
140
129
165
Spartanburg, SC...........................
York, SC.......................................
Minnehaha, SD.............................
Davidson, TN................................
Hamilton, TN................................
Knox, TN......................................
Rutherford, TN..............................
Shelby, TN....................................
Williamson, TN.............................
Bell, TX.........................................
5.9
5.0
6.8
19.8
8.9
11.3
4.8
19.6
7.2
4.9
124.1
81.6
121.9
459.7
188.1
227.6
113.0
476.1
109.5
111.2
2.9
3.9
2.8
3.8
0.6
2.7
3.2
1.0
5.4
-0.1
83
36
86
42
271
96
65
228
7
315
795
752
824
967
831
815
825
965
1,047
798
3.9
3.3
3.3
2.0
3.1
2.3
3.3
0.8
2.8
3.5
44
81
81
231
103
194
81
306
129
66
Bexar, TX.....................................
Brazoria, TX.................................
Brazos, TX....................................
Cameron, TX................................
Collin, TX......................................
Dallas, TX.....................................
Denton, TX..................................
El Paso, TX..................................
Fort Bend, TX...............................
Galveston, TX...............................
37.1
5.2
4.2
6.3
21.3
71.4
12.6
14.4
11.2
5.7
796.4
99.4
96.2
133.5
346.4
1,558.5
205.8
283.4
164.4
101.0
2.6
2.6
1.1
1.0
3.2
3.5
4.5
0.4
5.1
2.8
102
102
212
228
65
54
17
282
9
86
854
966
734
603
1,097
1,141
871
682
956
824
3.3
7.1
3.2
3.1
2.0
2.5
3.6
2.4
0.7
2.1
81
4
91
103
231
165
61
183
310
223
Gregg, TX.....................................
Harris, TX.....................................
Hidalgo, TX...................................
Jefferson, TX................................
Lubbock, TX.................................
McLennan, TX..............................
Midland, TX..................................
Montgomery, TX...........................
Nueces, TX..................................
Potter, TX.....................................
4.2
108.7
11.8
5.8
7.3
5.0
5.4
10.0
8.1
4.0
79.0
2,269.5
237.9
124.0
131.5
105.0
93.1
159.5
164.1
77.3
3.0
3.6
2.6
4.6
2.2
0.7
7.4
5.1
3.4
0.5
77
51
102
16
128
263
2
9
57
276
864
1,238
616
969
764
775
1,256
954
860
802
2.5
4.0
3.5
4.5
3.7
4.2
6.8
5.5
5.5
3.4
165
40
66
23
55
31
6
13
13
74
See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 340 largest counties,
third quarter 2014 - Continued
Average weekly wage ²
Employment
County¹
Establishments,
third quarter
2014
(thousands)
September
2014
(thousands)
Percent
change,
September
2013-14³
Ranking by
percent
change
Third
quarter
2014
Percent
change,
third quarter
2013-14³
Ranking by
percent
change
Smith, TX.....................................
Tarrant, TX...................................
Travis, TX.....................................
Webb, TX.....................................
Williamson, TX.............................
Davis, UT.....................................
Salt Lake, UT................................
Utah, UT.......................................
Weber, UT....................................
Chittenden, VT.............................
5.9
39.9
35.3
5.0
9.0
7.8
40.8
13.9
5.6
6.4
96.9
825.6
658.1
95.0
144.5
115.9
627.0
198.8
95.3
100.7
1.7
1.9
3.9
2.4
2.4
3.9
2.8
4.8
1.8
1.1
162
147
36
113
113
36
86
14
153
212
$818
944
1,074
653
923
762
897
747
721
916
3.9
3.9
3.7
3.3
-0.8
3.0
2.4
-0.1
1.7
2.1
44
44
55
81
337
117
183
330
264
223
Arlington, VA................................
Chesterfield, VA...........................
Fairfax, VA....................................
Henrico, VA..................................
Loudoun, VA................................
Prince William, VA........................
Alexandria City, VA......................
Chesapeake City, VA...................
Newport News City, VA................
Norfolk City, VA...........................
8.8
8.1
35.1
10.5
10.6
8.4
6.2
5.7
3.7
5.5
164.7
123.2
579.3
178.7
147.9
118.5
94.9
96.0
97.7
134.6
0.0
0.9
-0.4
1.1
1.0
1.0
-0.1
0.0
0.1
-0.4
307
241
323
212
228
228
315
307
299
323
1,545
825
1,447
922
1,105
845
1,345
743
928
931
4.8
2.2
1.2
2.2
1.9
0.8
2.3
2.2
2.4
3.3
19
206
291
206
244
306
194
206
183
81
Richmond City, VA.......................
Virginia Beach City, VA................
Benton, WA..................................
Clark, WA.....................................
King, WA......................................
Kitsap, WA....................................
Pierce, WA...................................
Snohomish, WA............................
Spokane, WA...............................
Thurston, WA...............................
7.1
11.3
5.7
14.0
84.3
6.7
21.7
20.2
15.7
7.9
149.5
172.3
82.7
143.0
1,252.8
83.1
282.3
269.9
208.5
104.3
1.0
1.1
3.4
5.0
3.4
3.0
2.8
2.2
2.1
3.7
228
212
57
12
57
77
86
128
137
48
1,041
751
930
890
1,452
904
870
1,019
823
877
2.2
2.0
1.5
2.8
5.1
3.3
3.0
0.5
3.1
1.6
206
231
282
129
16
81
117
317
103
274
Whatcom, WA..............................
Yakima, WA.................................
Kanawha, WV...............................
Brown, WI.....................................
Dane, WI......................................
Milwaukee, WI..............................
Outagamie, WI.............................
Waukesha, WI..............................
Winnebago, WI.............................
San Juan, PR...............................
7.1
8.1
5.9
6.4
14.1
25.0
5.0
12.3
3.5
11.4
83.5
119.2
103.9
149.6
314.7
482.4
103.4
232.1
89.7
249.3
1.1
3.1
-0.2
-0.2
1.1
0.4
0.8
0.3
-0.6
-1.8
212
73
318
318
212
282
248
290
330
(⁵)
782
658
828
829
900
902
808
929
865
603
2.2
3.1
3.0
3.1
-2.2
2.5
2.5
2.5
3.2
1.3
206
103
117
103
338
165
165
165
91
(⁵)
¹ Includes areas not officially designated as counties. See Technical Note.
² Average weekly wages were calculated using unrounded data.
³ Percent changes were computed from quarterly employment and pay data adjusted for noneconomic county reclassifications. See Technical
Note.
⁴ Totals for the United States do not include data for Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands.
⁵ This county was not included in the U.S. rankings.
Note: Data are preliminary. Includes workers covered by Unemployment Insurance (UI) and Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees
(UCFE) programs. These 339 U.S. counties comprise 71.8 percent of the total covered workers in the U.S.
Table 2. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 10 largest counties,
third quarter 2014
Average weekly wage ¹
Employment
County by NAICS supersector
Establishments,
third quarter
2014
(thousands)
September
2014
(thousands)
Percent
change,
September
2013-14²
Third
quarter
2014
Percent
change,
third quarter
2013-14²
United States³.................................................................
Private industry.............................................................
Natural resources and mining....................................
Construction...............................................................
Manufacturing............................................................
Trade, transportation, and utilities..............................
Information.................................................................
Financial activities......................................................
Professional and business services...........................
Education and health services...................................
Leisure and hospitality...............................................
Other services............................................................
Government..................................................................
9,419.7
9,125.2
136.7
758.2
339.4
1,918.4
152.3
837.0
1,685.8
1,489.1
798.5
816.1
294.5
137,724.1
116,563.5
2,200.5
6,371.0
12,226.3
26,099.3
2,723.0
7,692.6
19,249.6
20,622.5
14,882.7
4,240.0
21,160.6
2.0
2.3
3.5
4.7
1.3
2.0
0.5
0.9
2.9
1.8
2.5
1.8
0.4
$949
940
1,072
1,040
1,153
802
1,726
1,392
1,202
882
399
644
1,004
2.9
2.8
6.1
3.6
2.7
2.8
6.3
3.4
2.3
2.1
3.1
3.4
3.4
Los Angeles, CA..............................................................
Private industry.............................................................
Natural resources and mining....................................
Construction...............................................................
Manufacturing............................................................
Trade, transportation, and utilities..............................
Information.................................................................
Financial activities......................................................
Professional and business services...........................
Education and health services...................................
Leisure and hospitality...............................................
Other services............................................................
Government..................................................................
442.4
436.6
0.5
13.5
12.6
54.0
9.7
24.6
47.8
203.5
30.8
28.1
5.8
4,184.4
3,647.8
9.5
121.9
361.0
788.2
198.6
207.8
604.0
719.8
468.3
148.2
536.7
2.1
2.2
-1.4
2.5
-2.0
2.3
0.0
-0.4
0.9
2.3
4.5
3.8
1.9
1,036
1,000
1,618
1,062
1,136
857
1,840
1,624
1,242
802
578
688
1,288
3.1
2.7
-8.9
0.0
1.6
3.4
6.6
7.7
0.9
2.8
5.1
2.7
5.5
New York, NY..................................................................
Private industry.............................................................
Natural resources and mining....................................
Construction...............................................................
Manufacturing............................................................
Trade, transportation, and utilities..............................
Information.................................................................
Financial activities......................................................
Professional and business services...........................
Education and health services...................................
Leisure and hospitality...............................................
Other services............................................................
Government..................................................................
127.7
127.3
0.0
2.2
2.2
20.7
4.8
19.3
26.9
9.7
13.7
20.0
0.4
2,494.4
2,060.9
0.2
35.6
25.4
261.4
150.4
360.5
523.6
320.6
277.2
98.5
433.5
2.7
3.3
-3.2
4.4
-0.7
1.4
1.6
2.7
3.6
3.7
4.5
2.9
0.0
1,733
1,845
3,140
1,716
1,196
1,265
2,360
3,285
2,074
1,265
818
1,049
1,195
3.8
3.4
48.3
2.6
6.4
4.7
1.0
5.1
3.2
0.9
5.5
3.8
4.6
Cook, IL...........................................................................
Private industry.............................................................
Natural resources and mining....................................
Construction...............................................................
Manufacturing............................................................
Trade, transportation, and utilities..............................
Information.................................................................
Financial activities......................................................
Professional and business services...........................
Education and health services...................................
Leisure and hospitality...............................................
Other services............................................................
Government..................................................................
158.3
157.0
0.1
13.1
6.7
31.4
2.9
16.2
33.7
16.6
14.3
17.9
1.3
2,481.9
2,187.8
1.0
71.8
185.4
454.8
54.4
184.2
455.4
421.7
258.7
96.8
294.1
1.2
1.5
3.4
5.9
-0.3
2.1
1.2
-0.1
2.0
0.8
2.0
0.8
-0.6
1,071
1,071
1,112
1,387
1,137
869
1,627
1,848
1,345
919
481
838
1,075
2.0
3.3
7.0
3.7
4.8
3.7
3.0
5.1
2.9
1.5
1.3
4.9
-6.0
See footnotes at end of table.
Table 2. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 10 largest counties,
third quarter 2014 - Continued
Average weekly wage ¹
Employment
County by NAICS supersector
Establishments,
third quarter
2014
(thousands)
September
2014
(thousands)
Percent
change,
September
2013-14²
Third
quarter
2014
Percent
change,
third quarter
2013-14²
Harris, TX........................................................................
Private industry.............................................................
Natural resources and mining....................................
Construction...............................................................
Manufacturing............................................................
Trade, transportation, and utilities..............................
Information.................................................................
Financial activities......................................................
Professional and business services...........................
Education and health services...................................
Leisure and hospitality...............................................
Other services............................................................
Government..................................................................
108.7
108.1
1.8
6.8
4.7
24.6
1.2
11.1
21.9
14.9
9.1
11.7
0.6
2,269.5
2,009.9
95.1
158.6
198.0
468.6
27.9
119.1
396.3
270.6
211.1
63.7
259.6
3.6
3.9
6.5
9.9
3.6
3.4
-2.4
1.8
2.7
2.7
5.5
3.7
1.6
$1,238
1,254
3,079
1,262
1,491
1,103
1,373
1,490
1,513
972
419
755
1,112
4.0
4.0
7.5
6.4
4.9
3.7
4.4
0.7
3.6
0.8
3.7
5.4
4.3
Maricopa, AZ....................................................................
Private industry.............................................................
Natural resources and mining....................................
Construction...............................................................
Manufacturing............................................................
Trade, transportation, and utilities..............................
Information.................................................................
Financial activities......................................................
Professional and business services...........................
Education and health services...................................
Leisure and hospitality...............................................
Other services............................................................
Government..................................................................
93.4
92.7
0.5
7.3
3.2
20.0
1.5
11.0
21.8
10.7
7.4
6.3
0.7
1,756.8
1,547.6
7.0
92.3
114.0
347.8
33.2
153.0
295.4
261.8
191.3
48.3
209.2
2.0
2.2
0.2
-1.4
0.7
2.1
5.1
2.8
1.5
2.6
3.0
2.6
0.3
914
907
920
935
1,313
832
1,213
1,145
996
935
433
651
972
1.8
1.7
0.2
-0.5
3.0
0.8
2.4
1.2
3.8
2.2
1.6
-0.9
1.9
Dallas, TX........................................................................
Private industry.............................................................
Natural resources and mining....................................
Construction...............................................................
Manufacturing............................................................
Trade, transportation, and utilities..............................
Information.................................................................
Financial activities......................................................
Professional and business services...........................
Education and health services...................................
Leisure and hospitality...............................................
Other services............................................................
Government..................................................................
71.4
70.9
0.6
4.1
2.7
15.4
1.4
8.6
16.0
8.8
6.1
6.8
0.5
1,558.5
1,390.9
10.0
77.9
107.1
312.5
49.2
152.3
313.4
182.2
145.9
39.9
167.6
3.5
3.8
4.9
5.7
-0.4
4.2
0.4
2.5
5.7
3.5
4.9
0.6
1.1
1,141
1,144
3,840
1,084
1,278
1,030
1,722
1,532
1,290
1,027
480
751
1,112
2.5
2.4
18.3
5.3
-1.4
2.3
0.2
5.1
1.7
0.8
4.8
4.5
2.9
Orange, CA......................................................................
Private industry.............................................................
Natural resources and mining....................................
Construction...............................................................
Manufacturing............................................................
Trade, transportation, and utilities..............................
Information.................................................................
Financial activities......................................................
Professional and business services...........................
Education and health services...................................
Leisure and hospitality...............................................
Other services............................................................
Government..................................................................
108.0
106.7
0.2
6.5
4.9
16.8
1.3
10.7
20.7
27.2
7.9
6.9
1.3
1,475.0
1,341.6
3.3
83.4
158.1
254.2
23.5
113.2
276.1
185.7
194.3
43.5
133.4
2.3
2.4
-0.8
4.8
0.3
2.4
-4.9
1.2
2.2
2.5
2.1
4.0
0.6
1,050
1,037
822
1,174
1,387
939
1,600
1,568
1,205
879
457
647
1,196
2.6
2.9
16.8
4.4
6.3
1.4
5.2
0.3
4.4
1.2
4.1
1.6
0.9
See footnotes at end of table.
Table 2. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 10 largest counties,
third quarter 2014 - Continued
Average weekly wage ¹
Employment
County by NAICS supersector
Establishments,
third quarter
2014
(thousands)
September
2014
(thousands)
Percent
change,
September
2013-14²
Third
quarter
2014
Percent
change,
third quarter
2013-14²
San Diego, CA................................................................
Private industry.............................................................
Natural resources and mining....................................
Construction...............................................................
Manufacturing............................................................
Trade, transportation, and utilities..............................
Information.................................................................
Financial activities......................................................
Professional and business services...........................
Education and health services...................................
Leisure and hospitality...............................................
Other services............................................................
Government..................................................................
100.8
99.4
0.7
6.4
3.1
14.2
1.2
9.4
18.2
28.0
7.7
7.3
1.4
1,344.5
1,124.1
11.2
64.7
96.9
212.0
24.3
69.8
227.7
184.1
178.4
49.6
220.5
2.3
2.6
4.8
4.6
1.4
1.4
-1.2
-1.3
1.7
3.1
3.3
5.8
0.5
$1,030
987
610
1,069
1,414
773
1,751
1,340
1,417
874
457
570
1,262
0.8
0.1
-3.6
1.9
3.9
-0.4
0.7
2.1
-2.1
0.8
3.9
1.4
4.5
King, WA.........................................................................
Private industry.............................................................
Natural resources and mining....................................
Construction...............................................................
Manufacturing............................................................
Trade, transportation, and utilities..............................
Information.................................................................
Financial activities......................................................
Professional and business services...........................
Education and health services...................................
Leisure and hospitality...............................................
Other services............................................................
Government..................................................................
84.3
83.7
0.4
6.0
2.3
14.8
2.0
6.5
15.8
20.8
6.8
8.4
0.5
1,252.8
1,094.8
2.8
60.5
106.6
234.4
87.1
65.9
209.1
160.4
127.1
41.0
158.0
3.4
3.7
2.5
9.5
0.3
4.6
4.4
1.2
4.3
3.3
3.3
3.2
1.3
1,452
1,479
1,221
1,213
1,542
1,125
5,134
1,490
1,528
949
510
794
1,262
5.1
5.3
1.6
4.3
1.7
4.5
9.3
3.3
4.9
4.3
2.2
2.5
3.0
Miami-Dade, FL...............................................................
Private industry.............................................................
Natural resources and mining....................................
Construction...............................................................
Manufacturing............................................................
Trade, transportation, and utilities..............................
Information.................................................................
Financial activities......................................................
Professional and business services...........................
Education and health services...................................
Leisure and hospitality...............................................
Other services............................................................
Government..................................................................
94.3
94.0
0.5
5.4
2.7
27.4
1.6
9.9
19.8
10.1
7.2
8.2
0.3
1,047.0
911.7
7.4
37.1
37.3
269.0
18.4
71.8
141.3
163.4
127.3
37.3
135.3
3.0
3.6
6.0
11.4
1.9
3.1
4.5
4.2
4.2
2.2
2.9
3.2
-1.3
891
873
573
887
850
806
1,402
1,362
1,055
913
521
576
1,017
2.2
2.2
4.8
4.5
4.7
1.6
2.0
4.0
3.5
0.6
-0.4
2.7
2.2
¹ Average weekly wages were calculated using unrounded data.
² Percent changes were computed from quarterly employment and pay data adjusted for noneconomic county reclassifications. See Technical Note.
³ Totals for the United States do not include data for Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands.
Note: Data are preliminary. Counties selected are based on 2013 annual average employment. Includes workers covered by Unemployment Insurance
(UI) and Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees (UCFE) programs.
Table 3. Covered establishments, employment, and wages by state,
third quarter 2014
Average weekly wage ¹
Employment
State
Establishments,
third quarter
2014
(thousands)
September
2014
(thousands)
Percent
change,
September
2013-14
Third
quarter
2014
Percent
change,
third quarter
2013-14
United States²..........................................
9,419.7
137,724.1
2.0
$949
2.9
Alabama....................................................
Alaska........................................................
Arizona......................................................
Arkansas...................................................
California...................................................
Colorado....................................................
Connecticut...............................................
Delaware...................................................
District of Columbia...................................
Florida.......................................................
118.3
22.4
147.4
87.3
1,386.5
180.9
114.4
30.1
36.3
642.5
1,871.2
344.7
2,539.6
1,170.9
16,013.4
2,443.0
1,663.2
426.1
732.9
7,748.4
1.3
-0.1
1.8
1.3
3.1
3.7
0.8
1.9
0.8
3.3
815
1,019
876
737
1,095
982
1,124
961
1,631
826
2.5
3.0
2.0
1.8
3.7
3.0
1.4
2.2
4.5
2.1
Georgia......................................................
Hawaii........................................................
Idaho.........................................................
Illinois........................................................
Indiana.......................................................
Iowa...........................................................
Kansas......................................................
Kentucky....................................................
Louisiana...................................................
Maine.........................................................
283.0
39.0
55.4
416.0
158.6
100.2
86.0
121.0
127.2
49.4
4,059.0
625.1
658.4
5,807.4
2,924.7
1,528.8
1,363.1
1,827.8
1,928.3
604.5
3.4
0.9
2.1
1.2
1.4
1.1
1.2
1.8
1.7
0.3
891
870
721
982
799
800
794
781
852
754
2.8
3.9
2.6
2.5
1.9
3.6
2.3
2.5
3.1
2.6
Maryland....................................................
Massachusetts..........................................
Michigan....................................................
Minnesota..................................................
Mississippi.................................................
Missouri.....................................................
Montana....................................................
Nebraska...................................................
Nevada......................................................
New Hampshire.........................................
164.9
232.1
236.5
165.9
71.5
185.7
44.3
72.1
76.2
50.3
2,574.5
3,386.7
4,141.0
2,757.9
1,105.0
2,686.4
449.5
950.0
1,215.8
633.5
1.1
1.8
1.7
1.1
0.5
1.0
0.7
1.1
4.0
1.4
1,042
1,164
896
965
697
828
732
779
840
927
3.1
3.0
2.4
2.9
1.3
2.7
3.7
1.8
0.5
3.6
New Jersey...............................................
New Mexico...............................................
New York..................................................
North Carolina...........................................
North Dakota.............................................
Ohio...........................................................
Oklahoma..................................................
Oregon......................................................
Pennsylvania.............................................
Rhode Island.............................................
264.4
57.2
627.7
260.3
31.7
290.0
107.4
137.5
349.5
35.9
3,880.4
804.0
8,902.1
4,085.5
455.9
5,219.1
1,592.3
1,752.8
5,676.2
471.8
0.8
1.1
2.0
1.9
4.3
1.4
1.0
2.4
1.0
1.4
1,087
786
1,145
839
977
863
826
887
937
895
1.7
2.6
3.2
2.8
6.1
3.1
3.6
3.6
2.6
1.8
South Carolina..........................................
South Dakota............................................
Tennessee.................................................
Texas.........................................................
Utah...........................................................
Vermont.....................................................
Virginia......................................................
Washington...............................................
West Virginia.............................................
Wisconsin..................................................
118.7
32.1
146.2
623.1
90.8
24.5
242.4
236.9
49.8
166.2
1,902.7
415.8
2,775.5
11,433.6
1,304.7
306.5
3,667.9
3,112.8
709.3
2,783.1
2.4
1.7
2.4
3.1
3.1
1.2
0.6
3.2
-0.2
1.1
768
733
837
988
803
805
989
1,087
778
808
2.4
3.7
2.1
3.8
1.5
2.3
2.0
3.9
3.5
1.9
See footnotes at end of table.
Table 3. Covered establishments, employment, and wages by state,
third quarter 2014 - Continued
Average weekly wage ¹
Employment
State
Establishments,
third quarter
2014
(thousands)
September
2014
(thousands)
Percent
change,
September
2013-14
Third
quarter
2014
Percent
change,
third quarter
2013-14
Wyoming...................................................
25.6
291.3
1.7
$877
4.4
Puerto Rico...............................................
Virgin Islands............................................
49.0
3.4
896.7
37.5
-1.5
-1.0
505
720
0.8
2.0
¹ Average weekly wages were calculated using unrounded data.
² Totals for the United States do not include data for Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands.
Note: Data are preliminary. Includes workers covered by Unemployment Insurance (UI) and Unemployment Compensation for
Federal Employees (UCFE) programs.
Chart 3. Percent change in employment in counties with 75,000 or more employees,
September 2013-14 (U.S. average = 2.0 percent)
Largest Counties
Higher than U.S. average
U.S. average or lower
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
Chart 4. Percent change in average weekly wage in counties with 75,000
or more employees, third quarter 2013-14 (U.S. average = 2.9 percent)
Largest Counties
Higher than U.S. average
U.S. average or lower
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics