Employment increased in both of Arizona’s large counties from June 2015 to June 2016, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. (Large counties are defined as those with employment of 75,000 or more as measured by 2015 annual average employment.) Assistant Commissioner for Regional Operations Richard Holden noted that the over-the-year employment gains were 2.9 percent in Maricopa County and 1.1 percent in Pima County. (See table 1.)

Employment nationwide advanced 1.5 percent during the 12-month period as 291 of the 344 largest U.S. counties registered increases. Williamson, Tenn., recorded the fastest rate of employment gain in the country, up 6.7 percent. Midland, Texas, experienced the largest over-the-year decrease among these counties with a loss of 8.3 percent.

In Arizona’s largest county, Maricopa, the employment level was 1,827,400 in June 2016. The other large county, Pima, had an employment level of 351,900. Together, these two largest Arizona counties accounted for 83.2 percent of total employment within the state. Nationwide, the 344 largest counties made up 72.5 percent of total U.S. employment.

Maricopa County had average weekly wage gains from the second quarter of 2015 to the second quarter of 2016 (2.2 percent), while wages in Pima County were unchanged. (See table 1.) Maricopa County also had the highest average weekly wage at $970. Nationally, the average weekly wage increased 2.2 percent from a year ago to $989 in the second quarter of 2016.

Employment and wage levels (but not over-the-year changes) are also available for the 13 counties in Arizona with employment below 75,000. Twelve of these smaller counties had average weekly wages below the national average in June 2016. (See table 2.)

Large county wage changes

Maricopa County’s 2.2-percent rise in average weekly wages from the second quarter of 2015 to the second quarter of 2016 ranked 181^st among the nation’s 344 largest counties. (See table 1.) 

Nationally, 304 of the 344 largest counties had over-the-year wage increases. McLean, Ill., had the largest wage gain in the nation, up 21.0 percent. Elkhart, Ind., had the second largest increase (8.5 percent), followed by King, Wash. (8.1 percent).

Nationwide, 36 of the largest counties had wage declines from the previous year. Ventura, Calif., had the largest decrease in average weekly wages with a loss of 8.4 percent over the year. Forsyth, N.C., had the second largest wage decline (-6.5 percent), followed by Lafayette, La. (-6.2 percent).

Large county average weekly wages

Weekly wages in the state’s two large counties were below the national average of $989 per week. In the second quarter of 2016, average wages in Maricopa County ($970) ranked 120^th and Pima County ($827) ranked 259^th, both near the middle of the national rankings of the 344 large counties. (See table 1.)

More than two-thirds of the largest U.S. counties (241) reported average weekly wages below the national average in the second quarter of 2016. Horry, S.C. ($598) had the lowest wage, followed by the Texas counties of Cameron ($602), Hidalgo ($626), and Webb ($659).

Nationwide, average weekly wages were higher than the U.S. average in 102 of the 344 largest counties. Santa Clara, Calif., held the top position with an average weekly wage of $2,252. San Mateo, Calif., was second with an average weekly wage of $1,871, followed by New York, N.Y. ($1,866). Average wages in the highest-ranked county, Santa Clara, Calif., were more than three times the average wage in the lowest-ranked county, Horry, S.C.

Average weekly wages in Arizona’s smaller counties

Among the 13 smaller counties in Arizona – those with employment below 75,000 – 12 reported average weekly wages below the national average of $989.The exception was Greenlee County with an average weekly wage of $1,125. Among the remaining counties, Cochise ($824) had the highest weekly wages, while La Paz had the lowest ($668). (See table 2.)

When all 15 counties in Arizona were considered, 2 had average wages under $700 per week, 8 registered wages from $700 to $799, 3 had wages from $800 to $899, and 2 had above $900. (See chart 1.)

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 Online are now available at www.bls.gov/cew/publications/employment-and-wages-annual-averages/2015/home.htm.

The County Employment and Wages release for third quarter 2016 is scheduled to be released on Tuesday, March 7, 2017.

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 142.7 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 2 largest counties in Arizona, second quarter 2016

Area	Employment			Average weekly wage (1)
	June 2016 (thousands)	Percent change, June 2015-16 (2)	National ranking by percent change (3)	Average weekly wage	National ranking by level (3)	Percent change, second quarter 2015-16 (2)	National ranking by percent change (3)
United States (4)	142,717.2	1.5	--	$989	--	2.2	--
Arizona	2,619.6	2.6	--	921	22	1.9	33
Maricopa, Ariz.	1,827.4	2.9	66	970	120	2.2	181
Pima, Ariz.	351.9	1.1	204	827	259	0.0	305
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 2. Covered employment and wages in the United States and all counties in Arizona, second quarter 2016

Area	Employment June 2016	Average Weekly Wage(1)
United States(2)	142,717,157	$989
Arizona	2,619,632	921
Apache	17,481	795
Cochise	33,496	824
Coconino	61,444	791
Gila	14,604	738
Graham	8,553	747
Greenlee	4,470	1,125
La Paz	5,789	668
Maricopa	1,827,438	970
Mohave	46,656	689
Navajo	28,358	716
Pima	351,915	827
Pinal	59,678	759
Santa Cruz	13,374	812
Yavapai	61,346	710
Yuma	58,472	708
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.
NOTE: Includes workers covered by Unemployment Insurance (UI) and Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees (UCFE) programs. Data are preliminary.

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

State	Employment		Average weekly wage (1)
	June 2016 (thousands)	Percent change, June 2015-16	Average weekly wage	National ranking by level	Percent change, second quarter 2015-16	National ranking by percent change
United States (2)	142,717.2	1.5	$989	--	2.2	--
Alabama	1,923.5	1.2	835	37	2.0	29
Alaska	338.7	-2.4	1,011	10	-1.7	49
Arizona	2,619.6	2.6	921	22	1.9	33
Arkansas	1,197.5	1.1	785	47	3.0	7
California	16,754.1	2.5	1,157	5	2.4	19
Colorado	2,574.5	2.3	999	14	1.0	43
Connecticut	1,689.9	-0.1	1,213	3	3.0	7
Delaware	444.0	0.9	990	16	-0.6	48
District of Columbia	756.0	1.7	1,623	1	1.1	42
Florida	8,161.8	3.2	883	25	2.6	14
Georgia	4,269.5	2.7	929	21	2.7	11
Hawaii	643.4	1.0	906	24	3.5	5
Idaho	699.7	3.3	740	50	3.8	3
Illinois	5,945.0	0.2	1,038	9	2.4	19
Indiana	2,995.4	1.0	828	39	2.1	27
Iowa	1,566.0	0.3	825	40	2.9	9
Kansas	1,378.4	-0.2	829	38	1.2	39
Kentucky	1,877.2	1.5	838	36	1.9	33
Louisiana	1,905.2	-1.4	852	32	0.2	46
Maine	622.8	1.0	795	46	3.5	5
Maryland	2,656.0	0.9	1,070	8	2.5	15
Massachusetts	3,538.2	1.2	1,233	2	2.0	29
Michigan	4,300.9	1.9	942	19	2.7	11
Minnesota	2,846.8	0.7	997	15	2.0	29
Mississippi	1,120.1	0.5	727	51	2.5	15
Missouri	2,785.6	1.4	863	30	2.4	19
Montana	468.6	2.2	767	48	1.7	35
Nebraska	978.3	0.9	805	43	2.4	19
Nevada	1,289.4	3.3	874	27	2.2	26
New Hampshire	655.1	1.1	1,003	12	3.7	4
New Jersey	4,051.2	1.7	1,147	6	1.7	35
New Mexico	808.1	-0.3	812	42	0.9	44
New York	9,264.0	1.5	1,210	4	2.5	15
North Carolina	4,285.3	2.5	865	29	2.1	27
North Dakota	423.3	-4.9	908	23	-3.3	51
Ohio	5,353.1	0.8	882	26	2.0	29
Oklahoma	1,570.5	-1.4	823	41	0.6	45
Oregon	1,867.8	2.7	933	20	4.1	2
Pennsylvania	5,786.8	0.4	971	17	1.4	37
Rhode Island	482.9	0.6	949	18	2.5	15
South Carolina	2,013.7	2.4	804	44	2.8	10
South Dakota	432.7	1.0	760	49	2.7	11
Tennessee	2,900.4	2.4	874	27	1.3	38
Texas	11,810.7	1.0	1,000	13	1.2	39
Utah	1,395.9	3.8	840	35	2.3	25
Vermont	310.6	-0.1	850	33	2.4	19
Virginia	3,833.4	1.6	1,011	10	1.2	39
Washington	3,281.6	2.8	1,083	7	5.4	1
West Virginia	693.2	-1.9	800	45	-0.4	47
Wisconsin	2,869.1	0.9	856	31	2.4	19
Wyoming	281.7	-3.7	849	34	-2.2	50
Puerto Rico	879.5	-0.7	512	(3)	0.2	(3)
Virgin Islands	38.4	0.9	743	(3)	-0.4	(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.