Hawaii’s only large county, Honolulu, reported an employment increase of 1.3 percent from March 2015 to March 2016 the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. (Large counties are those with 2015 annual average employment levels of 75,000 or more.) Assistant Commissioner for Regional Operations Richard Holden noted that the rate of employment growth in Honolulu County was slower than the national increase of 2.0 percent. (See table 1.)

Nationally, employment increased in 318 of the 344 largest U.S. counties from March 2015 to March 2016. Williamson, Tenn. had the largest percentage increase with a gain of 7.9 percent over-the-year. Midland, Texas, had the largest over-the-year percentage decrease in employment among the largest U.S. counties with a loss of 9.0 percent.

Employment in Honolulu County stood at 470,100 in March 2016, accounting for 72.9 percent of total employment in Hawaii. Nationwide, the 344 largest counties made up 72.6 percent of total U.S. employment.

Employment and wage levels (but not over-the-year changes) are also available for the three counties in Hawaii with employment below 75,000. All three of these smaller counties had average weekly wages at least $245 below the national average. (See table 2 and chart 1.)

Large county wage changes

From the first quarter of 2015 to the first quarter of 2016, the average weekly wage in Honolulu County advanced 1.9 percent, ranking 42^nd among the largest 344 U.S. counties for wage change. Nationally, average weekly wages decreased 0.5 percent. (See table 1.)

Nationally, 164 of the 344 largest counties had over-the-year increases in average weekly wages. Clayton, Ga., had the largest percentage increase in average weekly wages with a gain of 15.5 percent. King, Wash., had the second largest wage increase (5.1 percent), followed by San Mateo, Calif. (4.8 percent).

Of the 344 largest U.S. counties, 167 experienced over-the-year decreases in average weekly wages. McLean, Ill., had the largest percentage wage decrease among the large U.S. counties, down 13.3 percent from the first quarter of 2015. Washington, Pa., had the second largest decrease (-12.0 percent), followed by Lafayette, La. (-10.3 percent).

Large county average weekly wages

Honolulu County had average weekly wages of $935 and ranked in the top half (157^th) among the nation’s 344 largest counties. Nationally, the average weekly wage was $1,043 in the first quarter of 2016.

In the first quarter of 2016, nearly three-fourths of the largest U.S. counties (253) reported wages below the national weekly average of $1,043. Horry County, S.C., had the lowest wage ($587), followed by the Texas counties of Cameron ($592), Hidalgo ($614), and Webb ($650).

Nationally, 91 large counties had average weekly wages above the U.S. average. New York, N.Y., had the highest average weekly wage of $2,783. Santa Clara, Calif., was second at $2,210, followed by San Mateo ($2,195), San Francisco, Calif. ($2,054), and Somerset, N.J. ($2,022).

Additional statistics and other information

QCEW data for states have been included in this release in table 3. For additional information about quarterly employment and wages data, please read the Technical Note or visit www.bls.gov/cew.

Employment and Wages Annual Averages Online features comprehensive information by detailed industry on establishments, employment, and wages for the nation and all states. The 2015 edition of this publication contains selected data produced by Business Employment Dynamics (BED) on job gains and losses, as well as selected data from the first quarter 2016 version of the national news release. Tables and additional content from Employment and Wages Annual Averages 2015 are now available online at www.bls.gov/cew/publications/employment-and-wages-annual-averages/2015/home.htm.

The County Employment and Wages release for second quarter 2016 is scheduled to be released on Wednesday, December 7, 2016.

Technical Note

Average weekly wage data by county are compiled under 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 9.7 million employer reports cover 140.1 million full- and part-time workers. The average weekly wage values are calculated by dividing quarterly total wages by the average of the three monthly employment levels of those covered by UI programs. The result is then divided by 13, the number of weeks in a quarter. It is to be noted, therefore, that over-the-year wage changes for geographic areas may reflect shifts in the composition of employment by industry, occupation, and such other factors as hours of work. Thus, wages may vary among counties, metropolitan areas, or states for reasons other than changes in the average wage level. Data for all states, Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs), counties, and the nation are available on the BLS Web site at www.bls.gov/cew/; however, data in QCEW press releases have been revised (see Technical Note below) and may not match the data contained on the Bureau’s Web site.

QCEW data are not designed as a time series. QCEW data are simply the sums of individual establishment records reflecting 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.

The preliminary QCEW data presented in this release may differ from data released by the individual states as well as from the data presented on the BLS Web site. These potential differences result from the states’ continuing receipt, review and editing of UI data over time. On the other hand, differences between data in this release and the data found on the BLS Web site are the result of adjustments made to improve over-the-year comparisons. Specifically, these adjustments account for administrative (noneconomic) changes such as a correction to a previously reported location or industry classification. Adjusting for these administrative changes allows users to more accurately assess changes of an economic nature (such as a firm moving from one county to another or changing its primary economic activity) over a 12-month period. Currently, adjusted data are available only from BLS press releases.

Information in this release will be made available to sensory impaired individuals upon request. Voice phone: (202) 691-5200; Federal Relay Service: (800) 877-8339.

Table 1. Covered employment and wages in the United States and the largest county in Hawaii, first quarter 2016

Area	Employment			Average weekly wage (1)
	March 2016 (thousands)	Percent change, March 2015-16 (2)	National ranking by percent change (3)	Average weekly wage	National ranking by level (3)	Percent change, first quarter 2015-16 (2)	National ranking by percent change (3)
United States (4)	140,070.8	2.0	--	$1,043	--	-0.5	--
Hawaii	645.1	1.4	--	896	26	1.7	3
Honolulu, Hawaii	470.1	1.3	242	935	157	1.9	42
Footnotes: (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. (3) Ranking does not include data for Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands. (4) Totals for the United States do not include data for Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands.
Note: Data are preliminary. Covered employment and wages includes workers covered by Unemployment Insurance (UI) and Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees (UCFE) programs.

 
 

Table 3. Covered employment and wages by state, first quarter 2016

State	Employment		Average weekly wage (1)
	March 2016 (thousands)	Percent change, March 2015-16	Average weekly wage	National ranking by level	Percent change, first quarter 2015-16	National ranking by percent change
United States (2)	140,070.8	2.0	1043	--	-0.5	--
Alabama	1,902.6	1.6	842	37	-0.2	22
Alaska	317.6	-1.4	1028	15	-2	43
Arizona	2,679.8	2.8	918	23	-0.8	30
Arkansas	1,191.1	2.1	793	45	0.5	13
California	16,455.5	2.6	1206	6	0	20
Colorado	2,514.6	2.4	1057	13	-1.3	36
Connecticut	1,650.6	0.6	1362	3	-1.4	38
Delaware	429.7	1.5	1072	10	-3	48
District of Columbia	749.6	2.0	1766	1	0.4	14
Florida	8,301.8	3.5	887	27	0.2	18
Georgia	4,215.1	3.0	1008	17	1.9	2
Hawaii	645.1	1.4	896	26	1.7	3
Idaho	670.4	3.5	725	50	-1.5	39
Illinois	5,800.6	1.2	1126	7	-0.5	28
Indiana	2,949.5	1.9	853	33	-0.5	28
Iowa	1,518.2	0.9	844	36	-0.4	27
Kansas	1,362.3	0.4	833	38	-2	43
Kentucky	1,843.9	1.9	823	41	0.1	19
Louisiana	1,910.5	-0.8	860	32	-2.6	47
Maine	580.5	1.8	804	44	1.1	8
Maryland	2,591.7	1.9	1103	9	-0.8	30
Massachusetts	3,414.8	2.1	1327	4	-1	33
Michigan	4,163.7	2.1	976	20	0.7	11
Minnesota	2,750.1	1.5	1065	12	-1.2	34
Mississippi	1,121.0	1.7	713	51	0.4	14
Missouri	2,729.5	1.9	879	29	-0.3	25
Montana	447.8	1.8	751	49	0.3	16
Nebraska	956.6	1.4	817	42	0	20
Nevada	1,264.1	3.0	875	30	1.2	5
New Hampshire	635.1	1.9	998	18	1.6	4
New Jersey	3,909.7	2.4	1268	5	-1.7	41
New Mexico	800.4	0.0	792	46	-1.6	40
New York	9,042.2	2.0	1456	2	-0.3	25
North Carolina	4,220.3	3.0	928	22	-0.2	22
North Dakota	409.4	-6.2	908	25	-7.6	51
Ohio	5,236.2	1.8	913	24	-0.8	30
Oklahoma	1,578.6	-0.9	833	38	-4.1	49
Oregon	1,808.2	3.2	929	21	1.2	5
Pennsylvania	5,662.2	1.1	1012	16	-1.9	42
Rhode Island	464.6	1.9	985	19	-2.2	46
South Carolina	1,974.6	2.7	806	43	0.8	10
South Dakota	410.5	0.9	771	48	1.2	5
Tennessee	2,859.2	3.3	887	27	0.3	16
Texas	11,638.7	0.7	1066	11	-2.1	45
Utah	1,369.2	3.8	849	35	0.6	12
Vermont	304.6	0.1	832	40	1	9
Virginia	3,748.1	2.6	1057	13	-1.2	34
Washington	3,147.7	3.1	1121	8	3	1
West Virginia	683.9	-1.2	782	47	-1.3	36
Wisconsin	2,771.4	1.3	875	30	-0.2	22
Wyoming	267.9	-3.7	850	34	-4.7	50
Puerto Rico	895.2	-1.2	520	(3)	-0.4	(3)
Virgin Islands	38.6	0.4	769	(3)	2.9	(3)
Footnotes: (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. (3) Data not included in the national ranking.
Note: Data are preliminary. Covered employment and wages includes workers covered by Unemployment Insurance (UI) and Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees (UCFE) programs.