Employment rose in 22 of the 24 largest counties in Texas from September 2011 to September 2012, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported today. (Large counties are defined as those with employment of 75,000 or more as measured by 2011 annual average employment.) Regional Commissioner Stanley W. Suchman noted that job growth rates in four Texas counties ranked in the top ten nationwide. Montgomery County’s 5.5-percent gain led the state with the 4th fastest growth in the nation. Also sharing top-ten national rankings were the Texas counties of Fort Bend (4.3 percent, 6th), Travis (3.9 percent, 9th), and Harris (3.8 percent, 10th). (See table 1.)

Employment nationwide advanced 1.6 percent from September 2011 as 276 of the 328 largest U.S. counties registered increases. Elkhart, Ind., recorded the fastest rate of employment growth in the country, up 6.9 percent, while Benton, Wash., registered the largest decline, down 5.2 percent.

Among the largest counties in Texas, employment was highest in Harris County (2,128,200) in September 2012, followed by Dallas County (1,478,500). Three other counties, Tarrant, Bexar, and Travis, had employment levels exceeding 600,000. Together, the 24 largest Texas counties accounted for 78.4 percent of total employment within the state. Nationwide, the 328 largest counties made up 71.0 percent of total U.S. employment.

From the third quarter of 2011 to the third quarter of 2012, average weekly wages nationwide fell 1.1 percent to $906. Among large counties in Texas, Galveston County registered the largest decrease in average weekly wages, falling 4.4 percent, while Lubbock recorded the fastest increase, up 1.8 percent. (See table 1.) In the third quarter of 2012, Harris had the highest average weekly wage among the state’s largest counties at $1,154 per week and Cameron had the lowest at $580.

Employment and wage levels (but not over-the-year changes) are also available for the 230 counties in Texas with employment levels below 75,000 in 2011. Among these smaller counties, 90 percent (207) had average weekly wages below the national average in September 2012. (See table 2.)

Large county wage changes

A majority of Texas’s large counties experienced wage declines from the third quarter of 2011 to the third quarter of 2012. During the period, average weekly wages fell in 19 of the 24 largest counties in the state, led by Galveston County’s 4.4-percent decrease. (See table 1.) In contrast, five counties recorded wage increases from the third quarter of 2011. Lubbock County’s leading 1.8-percent increase was followed by Webb County’s gain of 1.4 percent, placing 7th and 14th, respectively, in the national ranking of percent change in average weekly wages.

Among the 328 largest U.S. counties, 274 had over-the-year decreases in average weekly wages. Yolo, Calif., had the largest decline with a loss of 7.0 percent. Within Yolo, wage declines in government had the greatest impact on the county’s over-the-year decrease. Three counties tied for the second largest loss, as wages fell 6.9 percent in Rockingham, N.H.; Lake, Ohio; and Benton, Wash. Increases were recorded in 46 large counties nationwide; San Mateo, Calif., led this group with an over-the-year wage gain of 7.3 percent.

Large county average weekly wages

Average weekly wages in 4 of the 24 large Texas counties were at least 10 percent above the national average of $906 per week in the third quarter of 2012. Harris County led at $1,154 per week and ranked 22nd among the 328 large counties nationwide. Harris was followed by Dallas ($1,085, 33rd), Collin ($1,057, 42nd), and Travis ($1,003, 56th). Four additional Texas counties – Fort Bend, Williamson, Jefferson, and Tarrant – reported average weekly wages ranging from $928 to $909.

Texas had 4 of the 11 lowest-paying large counties in the United States, all located along the border with Mexico. These included Cameron ($580, 327th), Hidalgo ($584, 326th), Webb ($637, 320th) and El Paso ($654, 318th). Other Texas counties with low national rankings included two that are home to large public universities, Lubbock ($716, 297th) and Brazos ($721, 294th).

Nationally, weekly wages were higher than the U.S. average in 102 of the largest counties in the country. Santa Clara, Calif., held the top position among the highest-paid large counties with an average weekly wage of $1,800. New York, N.Y., was second at $1,626, followed by San Mateo, Calif. ($1,537), Washington, D.C. ($1,514), and Arlington, Va. ($1,488).

Of the largest counties in the United States, 225, or more than two-thirds, reported average weekly wages below the national average in the third quarter of 2012. The lowest wage was reported in Horry, S.C., at $554 per week. Joining the Texas counties of Cameron and Hidalgo among the bottom five were Yakima, Wash. ($620) and Marion, Fla. ($621). Wages in these five lowest-ranked counties were about one-third or less of the average weekly wage in the highest-ranked county, Santa Clara, Calif.

Average weekly wages in smaller Texas counties

Twenty-three of the 230 smaller Texas counties – those with employment below 75,000 – reported average weekly wages equal to or above the national average of $906. Three of these smaller counties had wages that not only exceeded $1,000 per week, but were also the highest in the state: Carson ($1,312), Kenedy ($1,196), and Crane ($1,190). Delta County registered the lowest weekly wage, averaging $384 in the third quarter of 2012. (See table 2.)

When all 254 counties in Texas were considered, all but 31 had wages below the national average. Forty-eight reported average weekly wages under $600, 89 registered wages from $600 to $699, 48 had wages from $700 to $799, 36 had wages from $800 to $899, and 33 had wages of $900 or more per week. (See chart 1.) The counties with above average wages were concentrated around the metropolitan areas of Austin, Amarillo, Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, Midland, and Odessa. Lower paying counties were generally located in the agricultural areas of central Texas and the Texas Panhandle, as well as along the Texas-Mexico border.

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 2011 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 2012 version of the news release. Tables and additional content from Employment and Wages Annual Averages 2011 are now available online at www.bls.gov/cew/cewbultn11.htm. The 2012 edition of Employment and Wages Annual Averages Online will be available later in 2013.

Information in this release will be made available to sensory impaired individuals upon request. Voice phone: 202-691-5200; Federal Relay Service: 1-800-877-8339.

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 9.2 million employer reports covered 132.6 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.