News Release Information
Friday, December 15, 2017
County Employment and Wages in the District of Columbia – Second Quarter 2017
Average Weekly Wage in Washington, D.C. Ranked 5th in the Nation
The average weekly wage in Washington, D.C., increased 3.3 percent from the second quarter of 2016 to the second quarter of 2017, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Nationally, the average weekly wage rose 3.2 percent over the year, as 325 of the largest 346 counties had 12-month increases. (Large counties are defined as those with employment of 75,000 or more as measured by 2016 annual average employment.) Sheila Watkins, the Bureau’s regional commissioner, noted that the average weekly wage in Washington, D.C., ranked fifth-highest in the nation in the second quarter of 2017, at $1,675. Nationally, weekly wages averaged $1,020.
Washington, D.C., had a 1.0-percent employment increase from June 2016 to June 2017. Nationally, employment rose 1.7 percent over the 12-month period. Washington, D.C.’s rate of employment growth ranked 235th among the nation’s 346 largest counties. Employment in Washington, D.C., totaled 766,500 in June 2017.
Large county wage changes
Over the year, Washington, D.C.’s 3.3-percent wage growth ranked 140th among the 346 largest U.S. counties. Nationally, New Hanover, N.C., had the largest over-the-year increase in average weekly wages (11.9 percent), followed by the counties of San Mateo, Calif., and Midland, Texas, at 11.4 percent each.
Only 19 large counties nationwide had over-the-year declines in average weekly wages, led by McLean, Ill., with a loss of 20.4 percent. Union, N.J., had the second-largest decline at 3.7 percent, followed by Warren, Ohio (-3.6 percent) and Somerset, N.J. (-3.4 percent).
Large county average weekly wages
Nationally, average weekly wages were higher than the U.S. average in 97 of the largest 346 counties. Santa Clara, Calif., held the top position with an average weekly wage of $2,392. San Mateo, Calif., was second with an average weekly wage of $2,093, followed by San Francisco, Calif. ($1,941); New York, N.Y. ($1,907); Washington, D.C. ($1,675); and Suffolk, Mass. ($1,651).
Three of the 10 counties with the highest wages in the United States were located in the Washington metropolitan area (Arlington, Va.; Fairfax, Va.; and Washington, D.C.), and two were in the New York metropolitan area (New York, N.Y.; and Morris, N.J.). Three other top-paying counties were located in or around the San Francisco metropolitan area (San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara, Calif.). Rounding out the top 10 were Middlesex, Mass., and Suffolk, Mass., both located in the Boston metropolitan area. (See table 1.)
There were 249 large counties with an average weekly wage below the national average in the second quarter of 2017. The lowest average weekly wage was in Cameron, Texas ($615), followed by Horry, S.C. ($622); Hidalgo, Texas ($632); Webb, Texas ($667); Lake, Fla. ($702); and Tulare, Calif. ($711).
Additional statistics and other information
QCEW data for states have been included in this release in table 2. For additional information about quarterly employment and wages data, please read the Technical Note or visit the QCEW Web site at 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 2016 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 second quarter 2017 version of the national news release. Tables and additional content from Employment and Wages Annual Averages 2016 are now available online at www.bls.gov/cew/cewbultn16.htm. The 2017 edition of Employment and Wages Annual Averages Online will be available in September 2018.
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.
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 9.9 million employer reports cover 145.2 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/cewbultn16.htm; however, data in QCEW press releases have been revised 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.
|Area (1)||Employment||Average weekly wage (2)|
|June 2017 (thousands)||Percent change, June 2016-17 (3)||Average weekly wage||National Ranking by level||Percent change, second quarter 2016-17 (3)||National Ranking by percent change|
United States (4)
Santa Clara, Calif.
San Mateo, Calif.
San Francisco, Calif.
New York, N.Y.
NOTE: Covered employment and wages include workers covered by Unemployment Insurance (UI) and Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees (UCFE) programs. Data are preliminary.
|State||Employment||Average weekly wage (1)|
|June 2017 (thousands)||Percent change, June 2016-17||Average weekly wage||National ranking by level||Percent change, second quarter 2016-17||National ranking by percent change|
United States (2)
District of Columbia
Note: Data are preliminary. Covered employment and wages includes workers covered by Unemployment Insurance (UI) and Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees (UCFE) programs.
Last Modified Date: Friday, December 15, 2017