Employment increased in 9 of the 10 large counties in Michigan from December 2017 to December 2018, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported today. (Large counties are defined as those with 2017 annual average employment levels of 75,000 or more.) Assistant Commissioner for Regional Operations Charlene Peiffer noted that Kent County had the largest increase, up 1.8 percent, followed by Ottawa County, up 1.2 percent. (See table 1.)

Nationally, employment advanced 1.5 percent from December 2017 to December 2018 with 296 of the 349 largest U.S. counties registering increases. Midland, TX, had the largest percentage increase in the country, up 10.0 percent over the year. Bay, FL, experienced the largest over-the-year percentage decrease in employment, with a loss of 5.6 percent.

Among the 10 largest counties in Michigan, employment was highest in Oakland County (744,600) and Wayne County (734,900) in December 2018. Two other counties, Kent (409,300) and Macomb (332,100), also had employment levels of more than 300,000. Collectively, Michigan’s 10 large counties accounted for 70.1 percent of total employment within the state. Nationwide, the 349 largest counties made up 73.2 percent of total U.S. employment.

The average weekly wage in Washtenaw County increased 3.4 percent from the fourth quarter of 2017 to the fourth quarter of 2018, followed by Kalamazoo’s 3.2 percent wage gain. (See table 1.) Oakland County had the highest average weekly wage in the state at $1,262, followed by Wayne at $1,218. Nationally, the average weekly wage rose 3.2 percent over the year, increasing to $1,144 in the fourth quarter of 2018.

Employment and wage levels (but not over-the-year changes) are also available for the 73 counties in Michigan with employment levels below 75,000. With the exception of Kalkaska County ($1,192), all smaller counties had average weekly wages below the national average. (See table 2.)

Large county wage changes

All of Michigan’s large counties had over-the-year wage gains, with one county’s wage growth greater than the national increase of 3.2 percent. (See table 1.) Washtenaw County’s 3.4-percent increase in average weekly wages was the largest among the state’s large counties and ranked 137^th nationwide. Kalamazoo (3.2 percent, 155^st) and Saginaw (3.1 percent, 164^th) had over-the-year wage increases that ranked in the top-half nationwide.

Nationally, 332 of the 349 largest counties had over-the-year wage growth. Tippecanoe, IN, had the largest fourth-quarter over-the-year wage gain at 15.1 percent. Williamson, TN, was second with a wage increase of 13.1 percent, followed by Olmsted, MN, at 13.0 percent.

Among the largest U.S. counties, 15 experienced over-the-year decreases in average weekly wages. Washington, PA, had the largest percentage decrease in average weekly wages (-6.6 percent), followed by Elkhart, IN (-5.0 percent); Muscogee, GA, (-3.7 percent); and Douglas, CO (-3.6 percent).

Large county average weekly wages

Average weekly wages in 6 of Michigan’s 10 large counties were above $1,000 in the fourth quarter of 2018, with wages in 3 counties above the $1,144 national average. Oakland ($1,262, 53^rd), Wayne ($1,218, 66^th), and Washtenaw ($1,172, 78^th) placed in the top 100 nationwide for average weekly wages. Genesee ($923) reported the lowest average weekly wage among the state’s large counties and ranked 276^th nationwide.

Nationally, weekly wages were higher than the U.S. average of $1,144 in 94 of the 349 largest counties. Santa Clara, CA, held the top position among the highest-paid large counties in the nation with an average weekly wage of $2,670. San Francisco, CA, was second at $2,452, followed by San Mateo, CA, ($2,410); New York, NY, ($2,400); and Suffolk, MA ($2,055).

Among the largest U.S. counties, 255 had weekly wages below the national average in the fourth quarter of 2018. Hidalgo, TX, had the lowest wage at $680, followed by Horry, SC, and Cameron, TX, each at $685.

Average weekly wages in Michigan’s smaller counties

Seventy-two of the 73 smaller counties in Michigan with employment below 75,000 had average weekly wages below the national average of $1,144. Among the state’s smaller counties, Kalkaska had the highest average weekly wage at $1,192, while Keweenaw had the lowest at $542. (See table 2.)

When all 83 counties in Michigan were considered, all but 4 had wages below the national average. Two had average weekly wages of $649 or lower, 14 had wages from $650 to $749, 35 had wages from $750 to $849, 15 had wages from $850 to $949, and 17 had wages of $950 or higher. (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 2017 edition of this publication, which was published in September 2018, contains selected data produced by Business Employment Dynamics (BED) on job gains and losses, as well as selected data from the first quarter 2018 version of the national news release. Tables and additional content from Employment and Wages Annual Averages 2017 are now available online at www.bls.gov/cew/publications/employment-and-wages-annual-averages/2017/home.htm. The 2018 edition of Employment and Wages Annual Averages Online will be available in September 2019.

The County Employment and Wages release for first quarter 2019 is scheduled to be released on Wednesday, August 21, 2019. The County Employment and Wages full data update for first quarter 2019 is scheduled to be released on Wednesday, September 4, 2019.

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 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. 13, the number of weeks in a quarter, then divide the result. 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 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 10 largest counties in Michigan, fourth quarter 2018

Area	Employment			Average weekly wage (1)
	December 2018 (thousands)	Percent change, December 2017-18 (2)	National ranking by percent change (3)	Average weekly wage	National ranking by level (3)	Percent change, fourth quarter 2017-18 (2)	National ranking by percent change (3)
United States (4)	148,061.8	1.5	--	$1,144	--	3.2	--
Michigan	4,366.5	1.0	--	1,077	19	1.3	49
Genesee, Mich.	136.4	0.4	251	923	276	2.4	227
Ingham, Mich.	152.6	0.1	282	1,077	138	3.0	176
Kalamazoo, Mich.	120.5	0.6	227	1,032	169	3.2	155
Kent, Mich.	409.3	1.8	100	988	210	2.8	194
Macomb, Mich.	332.1	0.7	215	1,112	112	2.0	257
Oakland, Mich.	744.6	0.9	185	1,262	53	0.5	322
Ottawa, Mich.	125.9	1.2	161	984	215	0.8	319
Saginaw, Mich.	84.9	-0.2	312	925	274	3.1	164
Washtenaw, Mich.	218.4	0.9	185	1,172	78	3.4	137
Wayne, Mich.	734.9	0.9	185	1,218	66	0.9	316
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, fourth quarter 2018

State	Employment		Average weekly wage (1)
	December 2018 (thousands)	Percent change, December 2017-18	Average weekly wage	National ranking by level	Percent change, fourth quarter 2017-18	National ranking by percent change
United States (2)	148,061.8	1.5	$1,144	--	3.2	--
Alabama	1,986.6	1.6	957	36	3.1	33
Alaska	308.3	0.4	1,103	16	4.9	7
Arizona	2,921.1	3.0	1,017	24	4.1	11
Arkansas	1,227.0	0.8	869	50	2.4	43
California	17,556.7	1.7	1,392	4	3.3	26
Colorado	2,713.7	2.2	1,180	10	4.1	11
Connecticut	1,697.9	0.5	1,334	5	1.3	49
Delaware	451.2	1.1	1,107	15	2.4	43
District of Columbia	775.1	0.6	1,943	1	7.3	2
Florida	8,902.7	2.1	1,006	27	3.1	33
Georgia	4,499.8	1.8	1,053	21	2.4	43
Hawaii	669.3	0.6	1,016	25	3.3	26
Idaho	734.4	3.2	890	47	3.6	20
Illinois	6,026.0	0.3	1,189	9	3.3	26
Indiana	3,086.2	0.9	941	38	2.8	37
Iowa	1,558.4	0.5	966	35	3.0	35
Kansas	1,402.2	0.8	927	41	3.7	18
Kentucky	1,914.0	0.3	924	42	3.2	30
Louisiana	1,934.1	0.7	968	34	3.8	15
Maine	618.4	1.3	906	44	2.5	41
Maryland	2,702.5	0.8	1,228	8	1.7	48
Massachusetts	3,620.3	1.0	1,457	2	3.3	26
Michigan	4,366.5	1.0	1,077	19	1.3	49
Minnesota	2,902.3	0.9	1,140	14	3.6	20
Mississippi	1,144.3	0.2	793	51	2.5	41
Missouri	2,821.3	0.5	980	31	3.6	20
Montana	468.8	1.6	888	48	5.2	5
Nebraska	983.0	0.2	930	40	3.2	30
Nevada	1,397.4	3.3	1,006	27	5.3	4
New Hampshire	666.0	0.7	1,158	12	2.3	46
New Jersey	4,125.6	0.8	1,298	6	2.7	38
New Mexico	830.2	1.5	905	45	4.6	9
New York	9,613.2	1.5	1,445	3	1.0	51
North Carolina	4,458.9	1.6	1,013	26	5.1	6
North Dakota	422.3	1.5	1,057	20	4.7	8
Ohio	5,442.9	0.5	1,006	27	3.4	24
Oklahoma	1,632.3	1.5	932	39	4.1	11
Oregon	1,935.8	1.7	1,052	22	3.7	18
Pennsylvania	5,932.5	1.0	1,103	16	2.6	39
Rhode Island	487.2	0.8	1,085	18	2.6	39
South Carolina	2,119.6	2.8	893	46	1.9	47
South Dakota	428.4	1.2	885	49	3.4	24
Tennessee	3,039.8	1.8	1,030	23	3.0	35
Texas	12,531.7	2.5	1,148	13	3.5	23
Utah	1,511.5	3.2	972	33	3.8	15
Vermont	314.2	-0.4	954	37	3.2	30
Virginia	3,927.2	1.1	1,164	11	3.8	15
Washington	3,384.2	2.4	1,292	7	6.3	3
West Virginia	704.2	1.5	917	43	8.3	1
Wisconsin	2,892.3	0.6	989	30	4.0	14
Wyoming	272.1	1.8	978	32	4.4	10
Puerto Rico	896.4	0.8	576	(3)	0.9	(3)
Virgin Islands	34.5	0.5	925	(3)	2.3	(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.