Technical information: (202) 691-6567 USDL 04-2211 http://www.bls.gov/cew/ For release: 10:00 A.M. EDT Media contact: 691-5902 Tuesday, October 26, 2004 COUNTY EMPLOYMENT AND WAGES: FIRST QUARTER 2004 In March 2004, Prince William County, Va., had the largest over-the- year percentage increase in employment among the largest counties in the U.S., according to preliminary data released today by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor. Prince William County ex- perienced an over-the-year employment gain of 8.0 percent, compared with national job growth of 0.8 percent. New York County, N.Y., had the largest over-the-year gain in average weekly wages in the first quarter of 2004, with an increase of 13.6 percent. The U.S. average weekly wage increased by 3.8 percent over the same time span. Of the 317 largest counties in the United States, 161 had over-the-year percentage growth in employment above the national average in March 2004, and 144 experienced changes below the national average. Average weekly wages grew faster than the national average in 103 of the largest U.S. counties, while the percent change in average weekly wages was below the national average in 203 counties. The employment and 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 reports submitted by every employer subject to unemployment insurance (UI) laws. The 8.4 million employer reports cover 127.8 million full- and part-time workers. The attached tables and charts contain data for the nation and for the 317 U.S. counties with employment levels of 75,000 or more in 2003. In addi- tion, data for San Juan, Puerto Rico, are provided, but not used in cal- culating U.S. averages, or in the analysis in the text. (See Technical Note.) March 2004 employment and 2004 first-quarter average weekly wages for all states are provided in table 4 of this release. Data for all states, MSAs, counties, and the nation through the fourth quarter of 2003 are available on the BLS Web site at http://www.bls.gov/cew/. Preliminary data for the first quarter of 2004 and revised data for 2003 will be available in October on the BLS Web site. Large County Employment The national employment total in March 2004 was 127.8 million, which was 0.8 percent higher than in March 2003. The 317 U.S. counties with 75,000 or more employees accounted for 70.6 percent of total U.S. covered employment and 77.4 percent of total wages. These 317 counties had a net job gain of 680,700 over the year, comprising 64 percent of the U.S. net over-the-year employment increase from March 2003. The largest gains in employment from March 2003 to March 2004 were recorded in the counties of Orange, Calif. (49,900), Clark, Nev. (40,000), Maricopa, Ariz. (39,500), Los Angeles, Calif. (29,500), and Riverside, Calif. (29,000). (See table A.) - 2 - Table A. Top 10 counties ranked by March 2004 employment, March 2003-04 employment change, and March 2003-04 percent change in employment --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Employment in large counties --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | March 2004 employment | Net change in employment, | Percent change (thousands) | March 2003-04 | in employment, | (thousands) | March 2003-04 ---------------------------|----------------------------|------------------------ U.S. 127,778.5|U.S. 1,064.1|U.S. 0.8 ---------------------------|----------------------------|------------------------ Los Angeles, Calif. 4,054.6|Orange, Calif. 49.9|Prince William, Va. 8.0 Cook, Ill. 2,474.0|Clark, Nev. 40.0|Rutherford, Tenn. 7.3 New York, N.Y. 2,203.0|Maricopa, Ariz. 39.5|Marion, Fla. 6.4 Harris, Texas 1,823.3|Los Angeles, Calif. 29.5|Placer, Calif. 6.3 Maricopa, Ariz. 1,611.2|Riverside, Calif. 29.0|Lee, Fla. 5.8 Orange, Calif. 1,454.3|San Bernardino, Calif. 27.8|Collin, Texas 5.5 Dallas, Texas 1,418.2|Fairfax, Va. 21.7|Loudoun, Va. 5.5 San Diego, Calif. 1,264.0|Hillsborough, Fla. 21.4|Clark, Nev. 5.4 King, Wash. 1,075.7|Orange, Fla. 18.4|Riverside, Calif. 5.4 Miami-Dade, Fla. 982.9|San Diego, Calif. 16.4|Pasco, Fla. 5.2 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Employment increased in 222 counties from March 2003 to March 2004. Prince William County, Va., had the largest over-the-year percentage increase in employment (8.0 percent). Rutherford County, Tenn., had the next largest increase, 7.3 percent, followed by the counties of Marion, Fla. (6.4 percent), Placer, Calif. (6.3 percent), and Lee, Fla. (5.8 per- cent). (See table 1.) Employment declined in 80 counties from March 2003 to March 2004. The largest percentage decline in employment was in Trumbull County, Ohio (-3.2 percent), followed by the counties of St. Louis City, Mo. (-2.9 per- cent), Oakland, Mich. (-2.5 percent), Wayne, Mich. (-2.4 percent), and San Mateo, Calif. (-1.9 percent). The largest absolute declines in employment occurred in Wayne County, Mich. (-19,600), followed by the counties of Oakland, Mich. (-18,200), Cook, Ill. (-12,600), Middlesex, Mass. (-9,600), and Alameda, Calif. (-9,100). Large County Average Weekly Wages The national average weekly wage in the first quarter of 2004 was $758, which was 3.8 percent higher than in the first quarter of 2003. Average weekly wages were higher than the national average in 107 of the largest 317 U.S. counties. New York County, N.Y., held the top position among the highest-paid large counties with an average weekly wage of $1,913. Fairfield County, Conn., was second with an average weekly wage of $1,492, followed by Suffolk, Mass. ($1,405), Santa Clara, Calif. ($1,338), and Somerset, N.J. ($1,322). (See table B.) New York County, N.Y., also led the nation in growth in average weekly wages, with an increase of 13.6 percent from the first quarter of 2003. Suffolk County, Mass., was second with 12.6 percent growth, followed by the counties of San Mateo, Calif. (10.8 percent), Olmsted, Minn. (10.4 percent), and Loudoun, Va. (10.1 percent). - 3 - Table B. Top 10 counties ranked by first quarter 2004 average weekly wages, first quarter 2003-04 change in average weekly wages, and first quarter 2003-04 percent change in average weekly wages ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Average weekly wage in large counties ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | | Average weekly wage, | Change in average weekly| Percent change in first quarter 2004 | wage, first quarter | average weekly wage, | 2003-04 | first quarter 2003-04 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ U.S. $758|U.S. $28|U.S. 3.8 ---------------------------|-------------------------|------------------------ New York, N.Y. $1,913|New York, N.Y. $229|New York, N.Y. 13.6 Fairfield, Conn. 1,492|Suffolk, Mass. 157|Suffolk, Mass. 12.6 Suffolk, Mass. 1,405|San Mateo, Calif. 117|San Mateo, Calif. 10.8 Santa Clara, Calif. 1,338|Fairfield, Conn. 114|Olmsted, Minn. 10.4 Somerset, N.J. 1,322|Santa Clara, Calif. 100|Loudoun, Va. 10.1 San Francisco, Calif. 1,312|Arlington, Va. 99|Washington, Ore. 9.7 Arlington, Va. 1,240|Loudoun, Va. 90|Arlington, Va. 8.7 Washington, D.C. 1,221|Hudson, N.J. 89|Hudson, N.J. 8.6 San Mateo, Calif. 1,203|Washington, D.C. 82|Fairfield, Conn. 8.3 Fairfax, Va. 1,156|Olmsted, Minn. 79|Santa Clara, Calif. 8.1 |Washington, Ore. 79| ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ There were 210 counties with an average weekly wage below the national average in the first quarter of 2004. The lowest average weekly wages were reported in Cameron County, Texas ($445), followed by the counties of Hidalgo, Texas ($451), Webb, Texas ($473), Horry, S.C. ($484), and Yakima, Wash. ($505). (See table 1.) Eleven counties experienced over-the-year declines in average weekly wages. Trumbull County, Ohio, had the largest decrease, -3.0 percent, followed by the counties of Williamson, Texas (-1.6 percent), Chester, Penn. (-1.4 percent), Snohomish, Wash. (-1.3 percent), and Broome, N.Y. (-0.8 percent). Ten Largest U.S. Counties Of the 10 largest U.S. counties (based on 2003 employment levels), 6 reported increases in employment, while declines occurred in 4 from March 2003 to March 2004. Orange County, Calif., experienced the fastest growth in employment among the largest counties, with a 3.5 percent increase. The largest employment increases were in financial activities (10.3 percent) and professional and business services (9.2 percent). Orange County showed employment gains in every industry group except natural resources and mining, manufacturing, information, and government. (See table 2.) Maricopa County, Ariz., had the next largest increase in employment, 2.5 percent, fol- lowed by San Diego, Calif. (1.3 percent). The largest decrease in employment for the 10 largest counties was in Dallas County, Texas, with a 0.6 percent decline. The next largest declines in employment were recorded in Cook County, Ill. (-0.5 percent), and Harris County, Texas (-0.2 percent). All of the 10 largest U.S. counties saw over-the-year increases in average weekly wages. New York County, N.Y., had the fastest growth in wages among the top 10 counties, growing at a 13.6 percent rate. New York County's fastest growing supersectors were financial activities, where the average weekly wage rose by 27.4 percent, and manufacturing, with a 9.5 per- cent increase. Dallas County, Texas, was second in wage growth, increasing by 6.3 percent, followed by Cook County, Ill., and Miami-Dade County, Fla., where average wages increased by 5.2 percent each. King County, Wash., experienced the smallest increase in average weekly wages among the largest 10 counties, rising by only 2.2 percent, primarily due to wage decreases in the information supersector. This was followed by Orange County, Calif., with an increase in average weekly wages of 3.8 percent and by two other California counties, Los Angeles and San Diego (3.9 percent each). - 4 - Largest County by State Table 3 shows March 2004 employment and the 2004 first-quarter average weekly wage in the largest county in each state. This table includes two counties that have employment levels below 75,000 (Yellowstone, Mont., and Laramie, Wyo.). The employment levels in these counties in March 2004 ranged from approximately 4.1 million in Los Angeles County, Calif., to 39,100 in Laramie County, Wyo. The highest average weekly wage of these counties was in New York, N.Y. ($1,913), while the lowest average weekly wage was in Yellowstone County, Mont. ($568). - 5 - 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 to- tal 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. Data for 2004 are preliminary and sub- ject to revision. For purposes of this release, large counties are defined as having employment levels of 75,000 or greater. Each year, these large counties are selected on the basis of the preliminary annual average of employment for the previous year. The 318 counties discussed in this release were derived using 2003 preliminary annual averages of employment. These counties will be included in all 2004 quarterly releases. The counties in table 2 are selected and sorted each year based on the annual average employment from the preceding year. 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 pro- cedure, and publication product. Differences in coverage and estimation methods can result in somewhat different measures of over-the-quarter employment change. It is important to understand program differences and the intended uses of the program products. (See table below.) Additional information on each program can be obtained from the program Web sites shown in the table below. - 6 - Summary of Major Differences between QCEW, BED, and CES Employment Measures -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | QCEW | BED | CES -----------|---------------------|----------------------|----------------------- Source |--Count of UI admini-|--Count of longitudi- |--Sample survey: | strative records | nally-linked UI ad- | 400,000 employers | submitted by 8.4 | ministrative records| | million employers | submitted by 6.4 | | | million private-sec-| | | tor employers | -----------|---------------------|----------------------|----------------------- Coverage |--UI and UCFE cover- |--UI coverage, exclud-|Nonfarm wage and sal- | age, including all | ing government, pri-| ary jobs: | employers subject | vate households, and|--UI coverage, exclud- | to state and feder-| establishments with | ing agriculture, pri- | al UI laws | zero employment | vate households, and | | | self-employed workers | | |--Other employment, in- | | | cluding railroads, | | | religious organiza- | | | tions, and other non- | | | UI-covered jobs -----------|---------------------|----------------------|----------------------- Publication|--Quarterly |--Quarterly |--Monthly frequency | -7 months after the| -8 months after the | -Usually first Friday | end of each quar- | end of each quarter| of following month | ter | | -----------|---------------------|----------------------|----------------------- Use of UI |--Directly summarizes|--Links each new UI |--Uses UI file as a sam- file | and publishes each | quarter to longitu- | pling frame and annu- | new quarter of UI | dinal database and | ally realigns (bench- | data | directly summarizes | marks) sample esti- | | gross job gains and | mates to first quar- | | losses | ter UI levels -----------|---------------------|----------------------|------------------------ Principal |--Provides a quarter-|--Provides quarterly |--Provides current month- products | ly and annual uni- | employer dynamics | ly estimates of employ- | verse count of es- | data on establish- | ment, hours, and earn- | tablishments, em- | ment openings, clos-| ings at the MSA, state, | ployment, and wages| ings, expansions, | and national level by | at the county, MSA,| and contractions at | industry | state, and national| the national level | | levels by detailed |--Future expansions | | industry | will include data at| | | the county, MSA, and| | | state level by in- | | | dustry and size of | | | establishment | -----------|---------------------|----------------------|-------------------------- Principal |--Major uses include:|--Major uses include: |--Major uses include: uses | -Detailed locality | -Business cycle | -Principal national | data | analysis | economic indicator | -Periodic universe | -Analysis of employ-| -Official time series | counts for bench- | er dynamics under- | for employment change | marking sample | lying economic ex- | measures | survey estimates | pansions and con- | -Input into other ma- | -Sample frame for | tractions | jor economic indi- | BLS establishment | -Future: Employment| cators | surveys | expansion and con- | | | traction by size of| | | establishment | -----------|---------------------|----------------------|-------------------------- Program |--www.bls.gov/cew/ |--www.bls.gov/bdm/ |--www.bls.gov/ces/ Web sites | | | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - 7 - Coverage Employment and wage data for workers covered by state UI laws and for federal civilian workers covered by the Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees (UCFE) program are compiled from quarterly contribution reports submitted to the SWAs by employers. 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. The employment and wage data included in this release are derived from microdata summaries of more than 8 million employer reports of employment and wages submitted by states to the BLS. These re- ports are based on place of employment rather than place of residence. UI and UCFE coverage is broad and basically comparable from state to state. In 2003, UI and UCFE programs covered workers in 127.8 million jobs. The estimated 122.9 million workers in these jobs (after adjust- ment for multiple jobholders) represented 96.6 percent of civilian wage and salary employment. Covered workers received $4.826 trillion in pay, representing 94.6 percent of the wage and salary component of personal income and 43.9 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 domes- tic 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 over-the-year comparisons presented in this news release. Effective January 1, 2004, the Washington Employment Security Department no longer includes as covered wages an em- ployee's income attributable to the transfer of shares of stock to the em- ployee. This change in wage coverage pertains to all establishments in Washington State and contributes significantly to over-the-year changes in wages in the state in 2004. 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 pro- duction 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. Average weekly wages are affected by the ratio of full-time to part- time workers as well as the number of individuals in high-paying and low- paying occupations. When comparing average weekly wage levels between industries and/or states, these factors should be taken into consideration. Percent changes are calculated using an adjusted version of the final 2003 quarterly data as the base data. Final data for 2003 may differ from pre- liminary data published earlier. - 8 - In order to insure the highest possible quality of data, states verify with employers and update, if necessary, the industry, location, and own- ership classification of all establishments on a 3-year cycle. Changes in establishment classification codes resulting from this process are in- troduced with the data reported for the first quarter of the year. Changes resulting from improved employer reporting also are introduced in the first quarter. These changes in classifications are partially adjusted for in order to im- prove the measure of economic change over time, as presented in this release. Some changes in classification reflect economic events, while other changes are simply the result of corrections and other noneconomic events. Changes of an economic nature (such as a firm moving from one county to another or changing its primary economic activity) are not adjusted for in the over-the- year change, because these changes are due to an actual event. But to the ex- tent possible, changes that are not economic in nature (such as a correction to a previously reported location or industry classification) are adjusted for in the measures of change presented in this release. The adjustment is made by reassigning year-ago data for establishments with noneconomic changes into the classification shown in the current data. The year-ago totals are then recreated reflecting this reassignment process. The adjusted year-ago data are then used to calculate the over- the-year change. The adjusted year-ago data differ to some extent from the data available on the BLS Web site. This process results in a more accurate presentation of change in local economic activity than what would result from the simple comparison of current and year-ago data points. 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 re- ferred to in this release are defined as census regions. Additional statistics and other information An annual bulletin, Employment and Wages, features comprehensive infor- mation by detailed industry on establishments, employment, and wages for the nation and all states. Employment and Wages Annual Averages, 2002 is available for sale from the BLS Publications Sales Center, P.O. Box 2145, Chicago, Illinois 60690, telephone 312-353-1880. The 2002 bulletin is now available in a portable document format (PDF) on the BLS Web site at http://www.bls.gov/cew/cewbultn02.htm. The 2003 annual bulletin will be published in late 2004. BLS also will make this bulletin available in a PDF format on the BLS Web site. 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: BDMInfo@bls.gov). 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(1) establishments, employment, and wages in the 318 largest counties, first quarter 2004(2) Employment Average weekly wage(5) Establishments, first quarter Percent County(3) 2004 March Percent Ranking Average change, Ranking (thousands) 2004 change, by weekly first by (thousands) March percent wage quarter percent 2003-04(4) change 2003-04 change (4) United States(6)......... 8,367.2 127,778.5 0.8 - $758 3.8 - Jefferson, AL............ 18.4 368.7 0.2 212 766 3.2 140 Madison, AL.............. 7.8 161.4 2.1 77 760 0.1 302 Mobile, AL............... 9.6 160.0 -1.6 307 592 1.9 240 Montgomery, AL........... 6.5 130.7 1.5 103 618 2.8 170 Tuscaloosa, AL........... 4.1 77.2 -0.4 252 587 0.7 290 Anchorage Borough, AK.... 7.8 138.1 1.0 145 780 4.8 66 Maricopa, AZ............. 80.9 1,611.2 2.5 67 733 5.0 53 Pima, AZ................. 17.6 335.2 1.8 90 626 1.8 248 Benton, AR............... 4.3 83.2 3.4 36 775 3.2 140 Pulaski, AR.............. 13.2 239.2 1.0 145 669 5.0 53 Washington, AR........... 5.0 85.1 3.1 46 566 4.2 86 Alameda, CA.............. 48.9 678.0 -1.3 293 979 5.0 53 Contra Costa, CA......... 28.3 337.9 -0.3 248 972 6.0 34 Fresno, CA............... 29.6 316.5 2.0 80 591 1.5 267 Kern, CA................. 16.2 241.4 3.2 40 649 2.5 192 Los Angeles, CA.......... 364.7 4,054.6 0.7 172 846 3.9 97 Marin, CA................ 12.0 107.8 0.0 224 985 5.0 53 Monterey, CA............. 12.2 156.6 -0.4 252 679 2.1 225 Orange, CA............... 90.8 1,454.3 3.5 31 872 3.8 105 Placer, CA............... 9.5 130.3 6.3 4 721 3.6 116 Riverside, CA............ 38.4 563.4 5.4 8 645 4.4 78 Sacramento, CA........... 47.1 602.0 1.0 145 833 1.7 253 San Bernardino, CA....... 42.3 600.1 4.9 12 645 2.5 192 San Diego, CA............ 87.0 1,264.0 1.3 119 806 3.9 97 San Francisco, CA........ 44.0 518.4 -1.4 302 1,312 6.1 32 San Joaquin, CA.......... 16.1 212.1 0.7 172 643 3.4 127 San Luis Obispo, CA...... 8.8 99.6 0.3 201 607 1.5 267 San Mateo, CA............ 23.3 328.2 -1.9 311 1,203 10.8 3 Santa Barbara, CA........ 13.4 179.1 1.4 110 706 3.1 147 Santa Clara, CA.......... 52.8 846.5 -1.1 287 1,338 8.1 10 Santa Cruz, CA........... 8.5 91.9 0.7 172 735 3.8 105 Solano, CA............... 9.6 125.1 0.2 212 716 6.7 21 Sonoma, CA............... 17.4 189.8 1.2 124 706 0.6 291 Stanislaus, CA........... 13.4 164.2 1.4 110 $624 1.6 259 Tulare, CA............... 8.9 130.3 1.1 133 524 3.6 116 Ventura, CA.............. 20.9 308.6 1.7 93 824 6.6 24 Yolo, CA................. 5.1 94.5 0.4 197 674 3.7 114 Adams, CO................ 8.5 138.5 -0.8 272 710 4.9 61 Arapahoe, CO............. 18.6 264.6 -0.7 268 928 1.2 282 Boulder, CO.............. 11.6 149.0 0.3 201 923 6.0 34 Denver, CO............... 24.0 418.0 -1.1 287 948 7.7 12 El Paso, CO.............. 15.7 231.3 0.8 163 687 1.9 240 Jefferson, CO............ 17.7 199.7 0.1 221 770 2.3 206 Larimer, CO.............. 9.1 118.9 2.0 80 661 2.8 170 Fairfield, CT............ 31.8 407.1 0.1 221 1,492 8.3 9 Hartford, CT............. 24.2 474.1 -0.1 236 1,006 7.5 13 New Haven, CT............ 21.9 357.2 0.3 201 807 3.5 121 New London, CT........... 6.6 125.6 -0.5 256 792 5.2 49 New Castle, DE........... 18.6 277.3 1.9 87 957 2.2 215 Washington, DC........... 30.2 654.7 0.8 163 1,221 7.2 15 Alachua, FL.............. 5.9 123.6 2.3 75 550 3.8 105 Brevard, FL.............. 12.6 194.6 4.8 13 705 6.5 25 Broward, FL.............. 57.9 693.7 0.8 163 707 5.8 39 Collier, FL.............. 10.5 126.3 3.3 38 636 5.0 53 Duval, FL................ 22.8 433.8 1.4 110 745 3.9 97 Escambia, FL............. 7.4 126.0 3.6 29 571 2.1 225 Hillsborough, FL......... 31.7 612.8 3.6 29 721 4.9 61 Lee, FL.................. 15.2 198.9 5.8 5 613 4.8 66 Leon, FL................. 7.4 144.8 1.8 90 616 4.1 89 Manatee, FL.............. 7.1 118.6 5.1 11 559 1.8 248 Marion, FL............... 6.5 91.0 6.4 3 530 2.9 161 Miami-Dade, FL........... 81.6 982.9 0.9 154 729 5.2 49 Okaloosa, FL............. 5.3 78.2 -1.7 310 575 6.1 32 Orange, FL............... 30.1 621.1 3.1 46 688 5.0 53 Palm Beach, FL........... 43.6 524.3 2.0 80 728 2.2 215 Pasco, FL................ 7.5 84.5 5.2 10 510 3.9 97 Pinellas, FL............. 28.7 437.3 3.5 31 641 2.7 176 Polk, FL................. 10.6 193.7 2.8 58 567 2.2 215 Sarasota, FL............. 13.2 155.8 4.8 13 $606 4.8 66 Seminole, FL............. 12.2 150.3 3.2 40 656 3.1 147 Volusia, FL.............. 12.0 156.7 4.1 20 530 2.3 206 Bibb, GA................. 4.8 87.1 3.0 54 614 2.3 206 Chatham, GA.............. 7.1 126.9 2.5 67 622 2.5 192 Clayton, GA.............. 4.4 106.7 (7) - 784 1.6 259 Cobb, GA................. 20.0 299.9 1.4 110 821 1.7 253 De Kalb, GA.............. 17.1 288.8 -0.8 272 828 1.3 276 Fulton, GA............... 37.4 722.0 0.6 180 1,043 2.5 192 Gwinnett, GA............. 21.4 303.4 3.3 38 791 0.4 294 Muscogee, GA............. 4.8 97.1 0.8 163 598 1.5 267 Richmond, GA............. 4.8 104.5 1.5 103 609 1.5 267 Honolulu, HI............. 24.6 422.7 1.2 124 681 3.2 140 Ada, ID.................. 12.9 183.5 2.4 72 656 1.1 285 Champaign, IL............ 3.9 89.2 0.1 221 618 2.3 206 Cook, IL................. 126.5 2,474.0 -0.5 256 953 5.2 49 Du Page, IL.............. 32.4 561.0 -0.5 256 888 3.6 116 Kane, IL................. 10.9 193.2 0.3 201 678 2.6 184 Lake, IL................. 18.9 311.3 0.0 224 932 3.2 140 McHenry, IL.............. 7.4 92.0 3.1 46 652 2.7 176 McLean, IL............... 3.3 83.3 -1.3 293 733 3.5 121 Madison, IL.............. 5.6 93.7 0.2 212 618 4.9 61 Peoria, IL............... 4.5 96.1 1.3 119 714 6.7 21 Rock Island, IL.......... 3.4 76.1 -1.3 293 676 2.6 184 St. Clair, IL............ 5.0 91.7 0.2 212 581 3.6 116 Sangamon, IL............. 5.1 128.6 (7) - 727 (7) - Will, IL................. 10.7 154.1 3.4 36 683 1.5 267 Winnebago, IL............ 6.6 133.9 0.3 201 643 0.6 291 Allen, IN................ 8.8 176.2 -0.1 236 660 0.3 297 Elkhart, IN.............. 4.9 119.1 4.6 16 625 1.3 276 Hamilton, IN............. 6.2 84.6 3.0 54 812 4.0 94 Lake, IN................. 9.9 188.3 -1.1 287 659 3.8 105 Marion, IN............... 23.8 567.9 0.2 212 810 5.6 43 St. Joseph, IN........... 6.0 121.7 0.2 212 633 1.6 259 Vanderburgh, IN.......... 4.8 107.0 -0.9 277 $632 2.8 170 Linn, IA................. 6.0 114.3 0.4 197 709 4.3 82 Polk, IA................. 14.0 255.4 2.0 80 781 4.7 70 Scott, IA................ 5.1 83.1 0.3 201 596 3.3 137 Johnson, KS.............. 18.4 289.0 1.3 119 816 3.0 153 Sedgwick, KS............. 11.6 237.3 -1.0 280 677 2.0 231 Shawnee, KS.............. 4.7 95.3 -1.3 293 625 3.0 153 Fayette, KY.............. 8.7 164.2 0.9 154 699 4.2 86 Jefferson, KY............ 21.4 411.0 -0.5 256 750 5.6 43 Caddo, LA................ 6.9 118.6 1.0 145 607 3.8 105 Calcasieu, LA............ 4.6 81.8 -1.0 280 618 6.9 16 East Baton Rouge, LA..... 12.9 246.4 3.2 40 636 2.6 184 Jefferson, LA............ 13.8 212.6 0.0 224 604 3.4 127 Lafayette, LA............ 7.5 118.3 -0.5 256 625 1.5 267 Orleans, LA.............. 12.4 250.0 0.5 187 724 6.3 29 Cumberland, ME........... 11.4 165.0 1.7 93 696 5.0 53 Anne Arundel, MD......... 13.3 211.7 3.5 31 775 5.3 47 Baltimore, MD............ 20.4 360.5 1.2 124 787 6.9 16 Frederick, MD............ 5.4 88.9 4.2 18 743 6.8 19 Howard, MD............... 7.8 137.1 0.9 154 850 3.3 137 Montgomery, MD........... 31.0 446.5 0.5 187 1,014 7.8 11 Prince Georges, MD....... 14.7 310.5 2.0 80 787 2.7 176 Baltimore City, MD....... 13.9 353.4 -1.4 302 885 6.9 16 Barnstable, MA........... 9.1 83.5 1.5 103 652 3.0 153 Bristol, MA.............. 15.0 215.6 0.7 172 648 1.3 276 Essex, MA................ 20.5 289.1 -1.4 302 790 1.8 248 Hampden, MA.............. 13.8 196.2 0.0 224 708 2.2 215 Middlesex, MA............ 47.6 772.2 -1.2 292 1,072 6.8 19 Norfolk, MA.............. 21.7 312.7 -0.8 272 916 3.2 140 Plymouth, MA............. 13.4 166.7 0.9 154 704 2.0 231 Suffolk, MA.............. 22.2 552.4 -1.4 302 1,405 12.6 2 Worcester, MA............ 20.1 311.9 0.0 224 748 2.3 206 Genesee, MI.............. 8.6 152.7 -0.4 252 716 -0.3 309 Ingham, MI............... 7.0 166.0 -1.3 293 718 -0.7 311 Kalamazoo, MI............ 5.5 114.3 -0.2 241 742 4.1 89 Kent, MI................. 14.5 328.3 0.7 172 $682 0.0 304 Macomb, MI............... 18.1 317.6 0.5 187 828 -0.6 310 Oakland, MI.............. 41.5 702.8 -2.5 313 923 0.2 300 Ottawa, MI............... 5.7 108.3 0.5 187 654 2.3 206 Saginaw, MI.............. 4.6 88.1 -1.1 287 677 (7) - Washtenaw, MI............ 8.2 193.0 -0.2 241 868 4.7 70 Wayne, MI................ 35.2 785.5 -2.4 312 893 2.9 161 Anoka, MN................ 7.4 108.7 1.2 124 710 2.9 161 Dakota, MN............... 9.6 163.1 1.1 133 752 2.2 215 Hennepin, MN............. 40.6 806.7 -0.7 268 983 6.5 25 Olmsted, MN.............. 3.3 85.9 1.4 110 837 10.4 4 Ramsey, MN............... 14.9 319.5 -0.9 277 881 5.9 36 St. Louis, MN............ 5.7 90.9 -1.3 293 637 3.7 114 Stearns, MN.............. 4.2 75.8 1.1 133 579 2.8 170 Harrison, MS............. 4.5 88.7 0.6 180 538 0.2 300 Hinds, MS................ 6.5 129.9 0.3 201 646 2.9 161 Boone, MO................ 4.2 76.4 0.8 163 566 3.9 97 Clay, MO................. 4.9 84.9 -1.0 280 682 2.7 176 Greene, MO............... 8.0 144.1 0.3 201 560 2.8 170 Jackson, MO.............. 18.7 360.0 -1.0 280 764 2.3 206 St. Charles, MO.......... 7.2 109.5 3.8 26 642 1.7 253 St. Louis, MO............ 33.8 609.2 -1.3 293 813 3.8 105 St. Louis City, MO....... 8.3 223.0 -2.9 314 905 4.9 61 Douglas, NE.............. 14.6 303.1 -0.3 248 712 2.6 184 Lancaster, NE............ 7.4 148.6 1.3 119 609 3.0 153 Clark, NV................ 37.9 784.0 5.4 8 693 5.8 39 Washoe, NV............... 12.5 198.2 3.1 46 693 2.8 170 Hillsborough, NH......... 12.2 191.6 2.1 77 806 2.9 161 Rockingham, NH........... 10.6 130.2 2.7 64 762 4.7 70 Atlantic, NJ............. 6.5 139.6 0.8 163 667 2.1 225 Bergen, NJ............... 34.1 444.9 0.8 163 966 3.0 153 Burlington, NJ........... 11.1 195.9 1.5 103 798 2.7 176 Camden, NJ............... 13.3 204.8 2.8 58 764 1.5 267 Essex, NJ................ 21.3 358.1 0.2 212 1,036 5.4 46 Gloucester, NJ........... 6.0 97.1 3.7 28 $674 3.9 97 Hudson, NJ............... 13.8 231.5 -1.3 293 1,121 8.6 8 Mercer, NJ............... 10.6 212.1 1.1 133 987 1.9 240 Middlesex, NJ............ 20.5 390.5 1.4 110 1,019 3.5 121 Monmouth, NJ............. 19.8 247.9 3.2 40 824 1.7 253 Morris, NJ............... 17.6 277.3 0.9 154 1,145 3.4 127 Ocean, NJ................ 11.4 139.3 3.2 40 638 1.3 276 Passaic, NJ.............. 12.4 176.6 2.3 75 794 1.9 240 Somerset, NJ............. 9.9 166.4 -1.6 307 1,322 1.9 240 Union, NJ................ 15.0 236.8 0.0 224 964 3.2 140 Bernalillo, NM........... 16.8 310.6 1.4 110 644 2.4 201 Albany, NY............... 9.5 226.6 0.6 180 778 2.2 215 Bronx, NY................ 15.3 211.8 -1.6 307 686 1.9 240 Broome, NY............... 4.4 93.9 -1.0 280 589 -0.8 312 Dutchess, NY............. 7.7 115.8 1.2 124 769 1.9 240 Erie, NY................. 23.2 453.1 1.1 133 671 2.1 225 Kings, NY................ 41.7 441.6 0.5 187 665 5.6 43 Monroe, NY............... 17.6 375.8 -0.5 256 755 3.6 116 Nassau, NY............... 50.3 593.3 1.1 133 831 4.4 78 New York, NY............. 112.3 2,203.0 -0.1 236 1,913 13.6 1 Oneida, NY............... 5.3 106.5 -0.2 241 581 2.7 176 Onondaga, NY............. 12.6 243.7 0.4 197 693 1.2 282 Orange, NY............... 9.1 124.5 1.4 110 623 3.0 153 Queens, NY............... 39.8 468.4 -0.5 256 749 3.0 153 Richmond, NY............. 8.0 87.2 0.5 187 659 4.9 61 Rockland, NY............. 9.2 109.8 1.0 145 800 4.0 94 Suffolk, NY.............. 47.2 587.9 1.0 145 783 2.5 192 Westchester, NY.......... 35.0 403.6 0.6 180 1,065 7.4 14 Buncombe, NC............. 6.8 104.3 1.2 124 562 1.4 274 Catawba, NC.............. 4.3 86.8 -0.7 268 560 1.6 259 Cumberland, NC........... 5.6 109.8 1.1 133 547 1.1 285 Durham, NC............... 6.1 166.9 1.5 103 1,052 6.4 28 Forsyth, NC.............. 8.3 173.5 0.2 212 732 2.4 201 Guilford, NC............. 13.6 264.3 0.0 224 676 1.3 276 Mecklenburg, NC.......... 27.1 498.6 -0.2 241 991 5.7 42 New Hanover, NC.......... 6.3 88.4 2.4 72 $587 3.5 121 Wake, NC................. 23.0 383.4 2.7 64 760 2.7 176 Cass, ND................. 5.3 85.5 3.0 54 605 3.8 105 Butler, OH............... 6.9 132.4 3.9 24 653 0.5 293 Cuyahoga, OH............. 38.5 746.2 -0.6 264 790 3.1 147 Franklin, OH............. 29.6 672.9 -0.2 241 762 2.7 176 Hamilton, OH............. 24.8 534.0 -0.8 272 830 3.5 121 Lake, OH................. 6.7 97.0 1.1 133 630 -0.2 307 Lorain, OH............... 6.3 100.2 1.2 124 639 3.4 127 Lucas, OH................ 11.0 223.1 -0.4 252 680 -0.1 306 Mahoning, OH............. 6.5 103.3 0.4 197 564 2.4 201 Montgomery, OH........... 13.3 281.3 -1.1 287 705 1.6 259 Stark, OH................ 9.1 163.6 -0.7 268 593 1.0 288 Summit, OH............... 14.8 260.2 0.5 187 713 1.4 274 Trumbull, OH............. 4.9 83.1 -3.2 315 654 -3.0 316 Oklahoma, OK............. 21.7 398.9 0.5 187 645 4.2 86 Tulsa, OK................ 18.3 317.2 -1.0 280 676 4.3 82 Clackamas, OR............ 11.6 134.9 2.8 58 684 4.1 89 Jackson, OR.............. 6.2 77.2 3.2 40 555 2.2 215 Lane, OR................. 10.5 137.6 1.1 133 573 2.3 206 Marion, OR............... 8.5 125.1 1.6 99 588 2.4 201 Multnomah, OR............ 25.7 414.8 0.0 224 764 2.1 225 Washington, OR........... 14.5 218.7 -0.1 236 890 9.7 6 Allegheny, PA............ 37.0 684.7 -0.1 236 804 4.6 75 Berks, PA................ 9.0 159.9 1.9 87 651 -0.2 307 Bucks, PA................ 19.9 250.0 1.7 93 715 3.2 140 Chester, PA.............. 14.8 220.3 1.6 99 938 -1.4 314 Cumberland, PA........... 5.7 125.0 1.2 124 704 2.2 215 Dauphin, PA.............. 7.0 171.9 0.7 172 759 4.1 89 Delaware, PA............. 13.9 209.1 0.9 154 808 4.8 66 Erie, PA................. 7.2 123.7 1.0 145 578 2.5 192 Lackawanna, PA........... 5.8 97.3 1.5 103 567 0.4 294 Lancaster, PA............ 11.7 221.4 2.0 80 633 0.3 297 Lehigh, PA............... 8.4 170.2 1.7 93 741 2.9 161 Luzerne, PA.............. 8.1 139.2 0.5 187 $595 3.1 147 Montgomery, PA........... 27.7 473.8 0.0 224 1,004 6.7 21 Northampton, PA.......... 6.2 91.4 1.5 103 646 2.9 161 Philadelphia, PA......... 28.3 629.6 (7) - 891 5.9 36 Westmoreland, PA......... 9.5 132.4 2.6 66 580 1.6 259 York, PA................. 8.7 166.2 3.1 46 668 1.8 248 Kent, RI................. 5.5 79.5 2.5 67 678 5.9 36 Providence, RI........... 17.5 281.2 -0.6 264 755 1.2 282 Charleston, SC........... 11.3 189.4 2.5 67 608 2.0 231 Greenville, SC........... 11.8 224.3 -0.9 277 670 0.1 302 Horry, SC................ 7.5 100.4 3.1 46 484 0.8 289 Lexington, SC............ 5.3 85.0 0.8 163 550 3.4 127 Richland, SC............. 9.1 203.9 0.0 224 632 2.1 225 Spartanburg, SC.......... 6.0 109.7 -0.3 248 629 1.3 276 Minnehaha, SD............ 5.9 106.3 1.1 133 612 2.9 161 Davidson, TN............. 17.9 425.1 0.7 172 746 3.5 121 Hamilton, TN............. 8.3 188.9 0.9 154 626 2.5 192 Knox, TN................. 10.3 213.4 2.5 67 632 3.4 127 Rutherford, TN........... 3.6 87.7 7.3 2 651 2.0 231 Shelby, TN............... 19.9 491.9 -0.2 241 757 3.4 127 Bell, TX................. 4.2 90.1 1.8 90 542 0.4 294 Bexar, TX................ 29.5 656.7 0.6 180 670 5.0 53 Brazoria, TX............. 4.1 75.7 -0.5 256 749 6.5 25 Brazos, TX............... 3.5 78.0 1.0 145 520 3.4 127 Cameron, TX.............. 6.1 116.1 0.6 180 445 1.6 259 Collin, TX............... 12.5 202.8 5.5 6 844 4.3 82 Dallas, TX............... 67.7 1,418.2 -0.6 264 947 6.3 29 Denton, TX............... 8.4 131.8 3.1 46 621 2.0 231 El Paso, TX.............. 12.5 251.7 0.2 212 514 2.4 201 Fort Bend, TX............ 6.3 99.3 2.0 80 773 4.3 82 Galveston, TX............ 4.8 87.5 -1.0 280 652 2.0 231 Harris, TX............... 89.4 1,823.3 -0.2 241 898 4.4 78 Hidalgo, TX.............. 9.3 187.6 3.9 24 451 1.6 259 Jefferson, TX............ 5.9 117.4 1.0 145 672 4.7 70 Lubbock, TX.............. 6.4 114.8 -0.8 272 $549 2.0 231 McLennan, TX............. 4.7 98.3 1.7 93 571 1.8 248 Montgomery, TX........... 6.3 89.8 4.7 15 641 3.1 147 Nueces, TX............... 8.0 143.6 0.9 154 601 2.6 184 Potter, TX............... 3.9 77.4 2.9 57 562 3.1 147 Smith, TX................ 4.9 85.5 1.3 119 622 5.2 49 Tarrant, TX.............. 33.7 689.6 0.3 201 770 3.9 97 Travis, TX............... 24.8 509.6 1.2 124 836 2.6 184 Webb, TX................. 4.3 78.0 3.1 46 473 1.7 253 Williamson, TX........... 5.0 84.4 3.5 31 795 -1.6 315 Davis, UT................ 6.1 90.0 3.5 31 603 1.9 240 Salt Lake, UT............ 33.3 512.5 1.1 133 671 3.4 127 Utah, UT................. 10.6 145.4 4.1 20 544 0.0 304 Weber, UT................ 5.2 86.8 1.6 99 537 2.5 192 Chittenden, VT........... 5.7 92.7 1.1 133 730 1.7 253 Arlington, VA............ 6.9 151.6 2.8 58 1,240 8.7 7 Chesterfield, VA......... 6.6 111.5 2.8 58 667 4.1 89 Fairfax, VA.............. 29.7 533.9 4.2 18 1,156 5.3 47 Henrico, VA.............. 8.2 164.3 0.0 224 824 4.7 70 Loudoun, VA.............. 6.2 109.8 5.5 6 979 10.1 5 Prince William, VA....... 5.8 92.9 8.0 1 637 2.2 215 Alexandria City, VA...... 5.7 91.6 0.5 187 924 3.0 153 Chesapeake City, VA...... 4.8 91.6 4.1 20 571 4.0 94 Newport News City, VA.... 3.7 96.5 2.1 77 652 2.0 231 Norfolk City, VA......... 5.6 144.6 0.6 180 720 3.4 127 Richmond City, VA........ 6.9 157.5 -0.3 248 905 3.9 97 Virginia Beach City, VA.. 10.6 167.2 3.8 26 566 2.5 192 Clark, WA................ 10.0 117.6 4.0 23 663 2.6 184 King, WA................. 75.2 1,075.7 0.3 201 940 2.2 215 Kitsap, WA............... 6.0 79.1 4.3 17 686 3.8 105 Pierce, WA............... 19.0 244.7 1.9 87 667 4.4 78 Snohomish, WA............ 15.6 207.5 0.8 163 736 -1.3 313 Spokane, WA.............. 14.1 189.1 0.9 154 598 2.6 184 Thurston, WA............. 6.1 90.7 1.6 99 661 2.3 206 Yakima, WA............... 8.0 88.0 0.3 201 505 3.3 137 Kanawha, WV.............. 6.2 107.3 -0.6 264 $646 1.1 285 Brown, WI................ 6.8 143.2 2.4 72 661 2.0 231 Dane, WI................. 13.8 283.9 1.4 110 728 4.6 75 Milwaukee, WI............ 22.3 491.1 -1.3 293 770 4.6 75 Outagamie, WI............ 5.0 97.3 2.8 58 660 3.8 105 Racine, WI............... 4.3 74.3 0.0 224 672 2.9 161 Waukesha, WI............. 13.4 220.6 0.7 172 739 0.3 297 Winnebago, WI............ 4.0 84.7 -1.4 302 744 5.8 39 San Juan, PR............. 12.9 322.8 1.7 93 487 6.3 29 1 Includes workers covered by Unemployment Insurance (UI) and Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees (UCFE) programs. These 317 U.S. counties comprise 70.6 percent of the total covered workers in the U.S. 2 Data are preliminary. 3 Includes areas not officially designated as counties. See Technical Note. 4 Percent changes were computed from quarterly employment and pay data adjusted for noneconomic county reclassifications. See Technical Note. 5 Average weekly wages were calculated using unrounded data. 6 Totals for the United States do not include data for Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands. 7 Data do not meet BLS or State agency disclosure standards. Table 2. Covered(1) establishments, employment, and wages in the ten largest counties, first quarter 2004(2) Employment Average weekly wage(4) Establishments, first quarter County by NAICS supersector 2004 Percent Percent (thousands) March change, Average change, 2004 March weekly first (thousands) 2003-04(3) wage quarter 2003-04(3) United States(5)............................. 8,367.2 127,778.5 0.8 $758 3.8 Private industry........................... 8,095.7 106,575.5 1.0 758 4.1 Natural resources and mining............. 123.0 1,557.3 2.0 720 6.7 Construction............................. 811.5 6,506.1 3.5 732 1.4 Manufacturing............................ 373.7 14,177.7 -2.9 916 3.7 Trade, transportation, and utilities..... 1,858.2 24,814.5 0.6 647 2.2 Information.............................. 145.0 3,120.6 -2.8 1,231 6.9 Financial activities..................... 778.9 7,818.2 0.9 1,413 11.7 Professional and business services....... 1,335.2 15,994.0 2.4 907 4.9 Education and health services............ 740.9 16,005.0 2.1 656 3.0 Leisure and hospitality.................. 675.1 12,031.7 2.6 311 2.6 Other services........................... 1,081.5 4,261.8 0.4 468 2.2 Government................................. 271.5 21,203.0 0.0 758 2.6 Los Angeles, CA.............................. 364.7 4,054.6 0.7 846 3.9 Private industry........................... 360.9 3,466.8 1.2 825 4.0 Natural resources and mining............. 0.6 11.4 -0.9 1,388 47.3 Construction............................. 13.0 133.7 2.5 796 1.4 Manufacturing............................ 17.7 485.6 -5.1 854 4.3 Trade, transportation, and utilities..... 54.5 760.6 0.3 689 1.3 Information.............................. 9.3 213.9 0.4 1,456 4.6 Financial activities..................... 23.3 236.6 1.3 1,479 15.3 Professional and business services....... 41.2 573.1 4.0 944 1.5 Education and health services............ 27.1 460.3 2.9 718 3.9 Leisure and hospitality.................. 26.2 367.2 4.2 475 5.1 Other services........................... 147.6 223.8 4.7 391 -3.9 Government................................. 3.8 587.8 -2.1 968 4.2 Cook, IL..................................... 126.5 2,474.0 -0.5 953 5.2 Private industry........................... 125.2 2,152.9 -0.3 961 5.4 Natural resources and mining............. 0.1 1.2 -9.8 949 7.6 Construction............................. 10.4 88.2 0.2 1,082 3.3 Manufacturing............................ 7.6 256.8 -4.0 915 2.8 Trade, transportation, and utilities..... 26.5 470.7 -0.3 725 1.1 Information.............................. 2.5 63.1 -4.6 1,418 9.4 Financial activities..................... 13.9 215.0 -0.1 2,099 15.6 Professional and business services....... 25.9 396.0 -0.6 1,196 5.8 Education and health services............ 12.3 351.2 2.0 699 1.6 Leisure and hospitality.................. 10.5 211.0 2.9 $355 1.1 Other services........................... 12.7 94.4 -1.1 620 0.8 Government................................. 1.2 321.1 -2.2 895 3.1 New York, NY................................. 112.3 2,203.0 -0.1 1,913 13.6 Private industry........................... 112.1 1,756.7 0.0 2,154 15.6 Natural resources and mining............. 0.0 0.1 1.0 1,639 -6.1 Construction............................. 2.1 28.1 -3.2 1,293 -1.4 Manufacturing............................ 3.4 46.3 -3.3 1,155 9.5 Trade, transportation, and utilities..... 21.9 228.5 -0.3 1,045 3.3 Information.............................. 4.3 126.3 -5.2 2,130 8.1 Financial activities..................... 16.8 346.4 -0.8 5,680 27.4 Professional and business services....... 22.4 432.0 1.6 1,799 7.3 Education and health services............ 7.9 273.3 0.9 855 2.5 Leisure and hospitality.................. 10.1 184.6 1.6 676 7.0 Other services........................... 16.1 81.3 -1.3 809 6.3 Government................................. 0.2 446.3 -0.5 970 -1.6 Harris, TX................................... 89.4 1,823.3 -0.2 898 4.4 Private industry........................... 89.0 1,576.9 -0.5 920 4.9 Natural resources and mining............. 1.2 62.4 2.8 2,516 12.7 Construction............................. 6.4 134.8 -5.8 832 3.7 Manufacturing............................ 4.6 162.4 -2.5 1,133 4.2 Trade, transportation, and utilities..... 21.1 385.5 -0.7 847 3.7 Information.............................. 1.4 33.5 -4.1 1,123 2.6 Financial activities..................... 9.7 113.0 2.3 1,269 6.3 Professional and business services....... 17.2 280.0 -0.5 961 4.2 Education and health services............ 8.9 187.9 1.9 730 3.3 Leisure and hospitality.................. 6.6 157.6 1.6 326 4.2 Other services........................... 10.4 56.2 -1.7 521 3.2 Government................................. 0.4 246.4 1.2 754 0.5 Maricopa, AZ................................. 80.9 1,611.2 2.5 733 5.0 Private industry........................... 80.4 1,393.1 2.8 737 5.6 Natural resources and mining............. 0.5 9.4 4.3 540 0.7 Construction............................. 8.4 131.7 7.2 712 1.6 Manufacturing............................ 3.2 127.6 -1.5 1,074 7.1 Trade, transportation, and utilities..... 18.5 324.4 2.8 721 5.4 Information.............................. 1.6 35.7 -5.5 $909 8.1 Financial activities..................... 9.6 132.5 0.0 988 5.7 Professional and business services....... 17.8 259.2 2.9 740 8.3 Education and health services............ 7.7 163.3 6.1 739 6.6 Leisure and hospitality.................. 5.6 160.2 2.8 353 4.7 Other services........................... 5.7 45.3 1.5 480 2.8 Government................................. 0.5 218.0 0.6 705 1.6 Dallas, TX................................... 67.7 1,418.2 -0.6 947 6.3 Private industry........................... 67.2 1,261.5 -0.6 967 6.9 Natural resources and mining............. 0.5 6.2 1.1 2,308 4.7 Construction............................. 4.4 73.3 -0.2 795 4.9 Manufacturing............................ 3.4 143.6 -1.7 1,096 8.3 Trade, transportation, and utilities..... 15.6 305.7 -1.6 905 4.7 Information.............................. 1.8 61.7 -6.1 1,466 11.7 Financial activities..................... 8.6 138.4 0.7 1,409 10.9 Professional and business services....... 13.9 236.1 0.9 1,016 6.2 Education and health services............ 6.1 128.8 0.9 815 4.0 Leisure and hospitality.................. 5.1 123.8 -0.3 457 6.0 Other services........................... 6.7 41.6 -3.5 557 1.8 Government................................. 0.4 156.7 -0.4 790 1.5 Orange, CA................................... 90.8 1,454.3 3.5 872 3.8 Private industry........................... 89.4 1,303.6 4.2 860 4.6 Natural resources and mining............. 0.2 7.8 -12.9 535 15.1 Construction............................. 6.5 87.5 5.7 882 2.2 Manufacturing............................ 6.0 183.1 -1.8 1,015 8.0 Trade, transportation, and utilities..... 17.4 261.7 1.3 820 3.9 Information.............................. 1.5 34.2 -3.4 1,286 7.0 Financial activities..................... 10.0 133.6 10.3 1,448 7.9 Professional and business services....... 18.0 258.1 9.2 872 -0.2 Education and health services............ 9.3 129.1 4.9 744 6.1 Leisure and hospitality.................. 6.8 162.1 5.5 346 0.9 Other services........................... 13.4 46.1 4.4 501 3.1 Government................................. 1.4 150.6 -2.1 983 -0.1 San Diego, CA................................ 87.0 1,264.0 1.3 806 3.9 Private industry........................... 85.6 1,044.7 2.2 791 4.9 Natural resources and mining............. 0.9 11.6 3.3 $472 6.1 Construction............................. 6.5 82.6 8.8 800 2.8 Manufacturing............................ 3.6 104.1 -2.9 1,082 8.9 Trade, transportation, and utilities..... 14.3 208.5 3.0 649 0.8 Information.............................. 1.4 36.1 -4.1 1,738 32.1 Financial activities..................... 9.0 81.3 4.8 1,167 4.9 Professional and business services....... 15.4 208.9 3.8 936 1.3 Education and health services............ 7.6 120.4 1.2 695 5.1 Leisure and hospitality.................. 6.6 139.7 0.2 346 3.3 Other services........................... 20.1 51.3 2.3 425 -0.7 Government................................. 1.4 219.3 -2.8 875 0.2 King, WA..................................... 75.2 1,075.7 0.3 940 2.2 Private industry........................... 74.6 922.2 0.3 953 1.9 Natural resources and mining............. 0.4 3.2 -3.9 1,221 5.2 Construction............................. 6.1 54.0 4.3 871 0.3 Manufacturing............................ 2.6 101.5 -4.1 1,131 -3.2 Trade, transportation, and utilities..... 14.6 212.1 -0.2 817 4.2 Information.............................. 1.5 64.9 -3.8 1,977 -6.3 Financial activities..................... 6.1 76.1 0.7 1,309 10.6 Professional and business services....... 11.8 155.2 2.7 1,127 8.1 Education and health services............ 5.9 109.6 2.4 689 3.0 Leisure and hospitality.................. 5.4 99.4 3.8 395 1.8 Other services........................... 20.1 46.2 -5.8 466 6.2 Government................................. 0.6 153.4 0.1 863 3.7 Miami-Dade, FL............................... 81.6 982.9 0.9 729 5.2 Private industry........................... 81.3 829.7 0.9 713 5.3 Natural resources and mining............. 0.5 11.3 -1.4 362 4.6 Construction............................. 5.0 40.9 3.2 717 1.7 Manufacturing............................ 2.8 50.9 -4.2 666 6.1 Trade, transportation, and utilities..... 23.7 238.8 -0.7 671 1.5 Information.............................. 1.7 27.1 -2.2 1,048 2.3 Financial activities..................... 8.6 66.2 2.4 1,173 9.8 Professional and business services....... 16.2 134.4 2.5 832 6.8 Education and health services............ 8.0 123.9 1.8 724 7.7 Leisure and hospitality.................. 5.4 97.7 2.7 402 9.2 Other services........................... 7.7 35.2 0.1 430 2.1 Government................................. 0.3 153.1 0.4 $816 4.9 1 Includes workers covered by Unemployment Insurance (UI) and Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees (UCFE) programs. 2 Data are preliminary. 3 Percent changes were computed from quarterly employment and pay data adjusted for noneconomic county reclassifications. See Technical Note. 4 Average weekly wages were calculated using unrounded data. 5 Totals for the United States do not include data for Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands. Table 3. Covered(1) establishments, employment, and wages in the largest county by state, first quarter 2004(2) Employment Average weekly wage(5) Establishments, first quarter County(3) 2004 Percent Percent (thousands) March change, Average change, 2004 March weekly first (thousands) 2003-04(4) wage quarter 2003-04(4) United States(6)......... 8,367.2 127,778.5 0.8 $758 3.8 Jefferson, AL............ 18.4 368.7 0.2 766 3.2 Anchorage Borough, AK.... 7.8 138.1 1.0 780 4.8 Maricopa, AZ............. 80.9 1,611.2 2.5 733 5.0 Pulaski, AR.............. 13.2 239.2 1.0 669 5.0 Los Angeles, CA.......... 364.7 4,054.6 0.7 846 3.9 Denver, CO............... 24.0 418.0 -1.1 948 7.7 Hartford, CT............. 24.2 474.1 -0.1 1,006 7.5 New Castle, DE........... 18.6 277.3 1.9 957 2.2 Washington, DC........... 30.2 654.7 0.8 1,221 7.2 Miami-Dade, FL........... 81.6 982.9 0.9 729 5.2 Fulton, GA............... 37.4 722.0 0.6 1,043 2.5 Honolulu, HI............. 24.6 422.7 1.2 681 3.2 Ada, ID.................. 12.9 183.5 2.4 656 1.1 Cook, IL................. 126.5 2,474.0 -0.5 953 5.2 Marion, IN............... 23.8 567.9 0.2 810 5.6 Polk, IA................. 14.0 255.4 2.0 781 4.7 Johnson, KS.............. 18.4 289.0 1.3 816 3.0 Jefferson, KY............ 21.4 411.0 -0.5 750 5.6 Orleans, LA.............. 12.4 250.0 0.5 724 6.3 Cumberland, ME........... 11.4 165.0 1.7 696 5.0 Montgomery, MD........... 31.0 446.5 0.5 1,014 7.8 Middlesex, MA............ 47.6 772.2 -1.2 1,072 6.8 Wayne, MI................ 35.2 785.5 -2.4 893 2.9 Hennepin, MN............. 40.6 806.7 -0.7 983 6.5 Hinds, MS................ 6.5 129.9 0.3 646 2.9 St. Louis, MO............ 33.8 609.2 -1.3 813 3.8 Yellowstone, MT.......... 5.7 68.6 2.8 568 6.6 Douglas, NE.............. 14.6 303.1 -0.3 712 2.6 Clark, NV................ 37.9 784.0 5.4 693 5.8 Hillsborough, NH......... 12.2 191.6 2.1 806 2.9 Bergen, NJ............... 34.1 444.9 0.8 966 3.0 Bernalillo, NM........... 16.8 310.6 1.4 644 2.4 New York, NY............. 112.3 2,203.0 -0.1 1,913 13.6 Mecklenburg, NC.......... 27.1 498.6 -0.2 $991 5.7 Cass, ND................. 5.3 85.5 3.0 605 3.8 Cuyahoga, OH............. 38.5 746.2 -0.6 790 3.1 Oklahoma, OK............. 21.7 398.9 0.5 645 4.2 Multnomah, OR............ 25.7 414.8 0.0 764 2.1 Allegheny, PA............ 37.0 684.7 -0.1 804 4.6 Providence, RI........... 17.5 281.2 -0.6 755 1.2 Greenville, SC........... 11.8 224.3 -0.9 670 0.1 Minnehaha, SD............ 5.9 106.3 1.1 612 2.9 Shelby, TN............... 19.9 491.9 -0.2 757 3.4 Harris, TX............... 89.4 1,823.3 -0.2 898 4.4 Salt Lake, UT............ 33.3 512.5 1.1 671 3.4 Chittenden, VT........... 5.7 92.7 1.1 730 1.7 Fairfax, VA.............. 29.7 533.9 4.2 1,156 5.3 King, WA................. 75.2 1,075.7 0.3 940 2.2 Kanawha, WV.............. 6.2 107.3 -0.6 646 1.1 Milwaukee, WI............ 22.3 491.1 -1.3 770 4.6 Laramie, WY.............. 2.8 39.1 2.8 586 4.5 San Juan, PR............. 12.9 322.8 1.7 487 6.3 St. Thomas, VI........... 1.7 23.2 -0.7 559 -1.1 1 Includes workers covered by Unemployment Insurance (UI) and Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees (UCFE) programs. 2 Data are preliminary. 3 Includes areas not officially designated as counties. See Technical Note. 4 Percent changes were computed from quarterly employment and pay data adjusted for noneconomic county reclassifications. See Technical Note. 5 Average weekly wages were calculated using unrounded data. 6 Totals for the United States do not include data for Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands. Table 4. Covered(1) establishments, employment, and wages by state, first quarter 2004(2) Employment Average weekly wage(3) Establishments, first quarter State 2004 Percent Percent (thousands) March change, Average change, 2004 March weekly first (thousands) 2003-04 wage quarter 2003-04 United States(4)......... 8,367.2 127,778.5 0.8 $758 3.8 Alabama.................. 113.0 1,835.1 0.9 626 2.3 Alaska................... 20.0 285.1 1.0 732 3.5 Arizona.................. 127.4 2,340.1 2.5 682 4.3 Arkansas................. 75.7 1,128.5 1.4 563 3.3 California............... 1,214.0 14,873.5 1.1 854 4.4 Colorado................. 160.4 2,109.0 0.5 772 3.9 Connecticut.............. 109.3 1,614.6 0.1 1,042 6.4 Delaware................. 28.1 401.2 2.2 844 2.4 District of Columbia..... 30.2 654.7 0.8 1,221 7.2 Florida.................. 518.9 7,478.3 2.4 657 4.3 Georgia.................. 249.2 3,831.5 1.8 728 1.8 Hawaii................... 37.8 578.7 1.7 656 3.1 Idaho.................... 48.3 570.2 1.8 552 2.2 Illinois................. 326.3 5,614.6 -0.4 823 4.0 Indiana.................. 153.4 2,806.2 0.6 661 3.0 Iowa..................... 91.3 1,391.8 0.9 606 3.9 Kansas................... 81.4 1,280.5 0.2 621 2.3 Kentucky................. 105.8 1,711.9 0.8 623 3.1 Louisiana................ 115.0 1,862.1 0.9 602 3.6 Maine.................... 47.8 575.9 1.0 605 2.9 Maryland................. 151.7 2,431.7 1.3 816 5.3 Massachusetts............ 207.6 3,084.8 -0.6 954 6.0 Michigan................. 254.5 4,235.3 -0.8 771 1.2 Minnesota................ 157.3 2,526.8 -0.2 777 5.0 Mississippi.............. 65.9 1,100.0 0.9 533 2.1 Missouri................. 167.4 2,601.4 0.0 665 2.6 Montana.................. 42.1 392.2 2.0 515 4.7 Nebraska................. 54.8 866.9 0.6 595 2.8 Nevada................... 62.1 1,112.9 4.7 695 5.0 New Hampshire............ 46.6 602.2 1.7 725 3.7 New Jersey............... 265.1 3,843.8 1.1 945 3.3 New Mexico............... 50.8 749.6 1.8 584 3.4 New York................. 552.9 8,186.5 0.2 1,056 8.0 North Carolina........... 228.1 3,721.9 0.7 $670 2.9 North Dakota............. 24.0 312.2 1.6 541 4.2 Ohio..................... 291.4 5,211.6 0.1 691 1.6 Oklahoma................. 92.6 1,413.1 0.2 582 3.4 Oregon................... 120.9 1,560.1 1.1 675 3.5 Pennsylvania............. 333.3 5,439.2 0.4 736 3.2 Rhode Island............. 34.9 463.7 0.6 728 2.1 South Carolina........... 108.0 1,768.3 0.3 596 1.9 South Dakota............. 28.1 358.0 1.0 531 3.3 Tennessee................ 129.3 2,622.3 1.6 651 3.0 Texas.................... 506.8 9,244.0 0.6 737 3.9 Utah..................... 73.8 1,051.7 2.4 599 2.4 Vermont.................. 24.1 294.7 1.0 615 2.7 Virginia................. 204.9 3,443.9 2.3 772 4.6 Washington............... 206.5 2,633.1 1.3 757 2.0 West Virginia............ 47.6 675.9 1.2 569 1.4 Wisconsin................ 158.8 2,647.8 0.5 657 3.0 Wyoming.................. 22.1 239.3 3.4 583 4.1 Puerto Rico.............. 50.5 1,036.8 1.5 422 5.0 Virgin Islands........... 3.1 42.8 1.3 576 -1.9 1 Includes workers covered by Unemployment Insurance (UI) and Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees (UCFE) programs. 2 Data are preliminary. 3 Average weekly wages were calculated using unrounded data. 4 Totals for the United States do not include data for Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands.