An official website of the United States government
21-925-CHI
Friday, July 09, 2021
Employment fell in the 10 largest counties in Michigan from December 2019 to December 2020, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. (Large counties are those with annual average employment levels of 75,000 or more in 2019.) Regional Commissioner Jason Palmer noted that Saginaw County and Kent County had the largest over-the-year decreases in employment at 10.8 percent and 10.7 percent, respectively. (See chart 1 and table 1.)
National employment decreased 6.1 percent over the year, with 352 of the 357 largest U.S. counties reporting declines. Maui + Kalawao, HI, had the largest over-the-year decrease in employment with a loss of 22.8 percent. Utah, UT, experienced the largest over-the-year percentage increase in employment with a gain of 3.8 percent.
Among the 10 largest counties in Michigan, employment was highest in Oakland County (682,000) in December 2020. Within Oakland County’s private industry, professional and technical services accounted for the largest employment. Together, the 10 largest Michigan counties accounted for 70.3 percent of total employment within the state. Nationwide, the 357 largest counties made up 73.1 percent of total U.S. employment.
Employment and wage levels (but not over-the-year changes) are also available for the 73 counties in Michigan with employment below 75,000. Wage levels in all of the smaller counties were below the national average in the fourth quarter of 2020. (See table 2.)
Large county wage changesAll 10 large Michigan counties reported average weekly wage gains from the fourth quarter of 2019 to the fourth quarter of 2020. (See chart 2.) Six counties had rates of wage gains that were at or above the national rate of 13.0 percent, with the largest gain Kent County had (+16.4 percent). Over-the-year wage gains among Michigan’s four other large counties ranged from 12.6 percent to 9.4 percent.
Among the 357 largest counties in the United States, 356 had over-the-year wage increases. Nationally, across most industries, increases in average weekly wages reflect substantial employment declines combined with wage increases. The lowest paying industry, leisure and hospitality, had the largest employment loss, which results in higher average weekly wages for the industry and the nation. San Francisco, CA, had the largest percentage wage increase (+44.3 percent). Ector, TX, had the only over-the-year percentage decrease (-7.5 percent).
Large county average weekly wagesWeekly wages in the 3 of the 10 largest counties in Michigan were above the national average of $1,339 in the fourth quarter of 2020. Average weekly wages in these three counties ranked among the top 100 nationwide: Oakland ($1,473, 54th), Wayne ($1,391, 69th), and Washtenaw ($1,365, 79th).
Among the largest U.S. counties, 89 reported average weekly wages above the U.S. average in the fourth quarter of 2020. Santa Clara, CA, had the highest average weekly wage at $3,690. Average weekly wages were below the national average in the remaining 268 counties. At $760 a week, Cameron, TX, had the lowest average weekly wage.
Average weekly wages in Michigan’s smaller countiesAmong the 73 smaller counties in Michigan—those with employment below 75,000—Midland ($1,333) reported the highest average weekly wage in the state, below the national average of $1,339. Keweenaw ($680) reported the lowest average weekly wage in the state.
When all 83 counties in Michigan were considered, 10 reported average weekly wages of less than $850, 26 registered wages from $850 to $949, 21 had wages from $950 to $1,049, and 26 had average weekly wages of $1,050 or higher. (See chart 3.)
Additional statistics and other informationQCEW 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 2019 edition of this publication was published in September 2020. Tables and additional content from the 2019 edition of Employment and Wages Annual Averages Online are available at www.bls.gov/cew/publications/employment-and-wages-annual-averages/2019/home.htm. The 2020 edition of Employment and Wages Annual Averages Online will be available in September 2021.
The County Employment and Wages release for first quarter 2021 is scheduled to be released on Wednesday, August 18, 2021. The County Employment and Wages full data update for first quarter 2021 is scheduled to be released on Wednesday, September 1, 2021.
In the spring of 2020, BLS modified its imputation process for QCEW to be more responsive to current economic conditions. While continuing work to improve this process, BLS made an unintended data processing error. This error affected data for the second, third, and fourth quarters of 2020. BLS has analyzed this issue and has determined that the impact on QCEW employment was negligible at the statewide level. In smaller areas and industries, revisions may be larger than usual. Wage data were not affected. Following the usual QCEW practice, these data will be revised and corrected with the full data update on September 1, 2021.
For more information on QCEW imputation methodology, see www.bls.gov/cew/additional-resources/imputation-methodology.htm.
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. 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 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 individuals with sensory impairments upon request. Voice phone: (202) 691-5200; Federal Relay Service: (800) 877-8339.
Area | Establishments, fourth quarter 2020 (thousands) | Employment | Average weekly wage (1) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
December 2020 (thousands) | Percent change, December 2019–20 (2) | National ranking by percent change (3) | Fourth quarter 2020 | National ranking by level (3) | Percent change, fourth quarter 2019–20 (2) | National ranking by percent change (3) | ||
United States (4) | 10,675.8 | 140,881.3 | -6.1 | -- | $1,339 | -- | 13.0 | -- |
Michigan | 265.3 | 3,998.2 | -8.9 | -- | 1,257 | 19 | 12.8 | 21 |
Genesee | 7.2 | 124.1 | -9.4 | 317 | 1,073 | 271 | 9.4 | 309 |
Ingham | 6.5 | 139.7 | -9.8 | 326 | 1,252 | 138 | 10.6 | 264 |
Kalamazoo | 5.8 | 112.7 | -8.6 | 288 | 1,190 | 179 | 13.8 | 100 |
Kent | 16.2 | 371.1 | -10.7 | 339 | 1,194 | 175 | 16.4 | 30 |
Macomb | 18.9 | 306.0 | -9.0 | 301 | 1,308 | 107 | 14.1 | 84 |
Oakland | 42.5 | 682.0 | -9.6 | 320 | 1,473 | 54 | 12.6 | 170 |
Ottawa | 6.3 | 120.0 | -6.8 | 218 | 1,133 | 220 | 13.0 | 140 |
Saginaw | 4.0 | 76.0 | -10.8 | 340 | 1,076 | 268 | 13.9 | 94 |
Washtenaw | 9.2 | 203.3 | -9.5 | 318 | 1,365 | 79 | 13.7 | 105 |
Wayne | 34.9 | 676.4 | -9.2 | 310 | 1,391 | 69 | 9.9 | 295 |
Footnotes: | ||||||||
Note: Data are preliminary. Covered employment and wages includes workers covered by Unemployment Insurance (UI) and Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees (UCFE) programs. |
Area | Employment December 2020 | Average weekly wage(1) |
---|---|---|
United States(2) | 140,881,253 | $1,339 |
Michigan | 3,998,223 | 1,257 |
Alcona | 1,641 | 864 |
Alger | 2,076 | 991 |
Allegan | 36,478 | 1,123 |
Alpena | 10,660 | 994 |
Antrim | 4,475 | 784 |
Arenac | 3,657 | 882 |
Baraga | 2,669 | 965 |
Barry | 11,422 | 1,030 |
Bay | 31,400 | 1,064 |
Benzie | 3,791 | 805 |
Berrien | 54,485 | 1,085 |
Branch | 13,542 | 977 |
Calhoun | 50,129 | 1,186 |
Cass | 8,249 | 993 |
Charlevoix | 8,823 | 1,045 |
Cheboygan | 4,917 | 848 |
Chippewa | 11,382 | 910 |
Clare | 5,980 | 920 |
Clinton | 15,972 | 1,027 |
Crawford | 3,769 | 959 |
Delta | 12,706 | 909 |
Dickinson | 12,720 | 1,090 |
Eaton | 39,973 | 1,080 |
Emmet | 16,562 | 979 |
Genesee | 124,106 | 1,073 |
Gladwin | 3,834 | 844 |
Gogebic | 4,737 | 885 |
Grand Traverse | 45,332 | 1,103 |
Gratiot | 12,287 | 1,077 |
Hillsdale | 11,576 | 987 |
Houghton | 10,686 | 995 |
Huron | 10,219 | 938 |
Ingham | 139,701 | 1,252 |
Ionia | 18,898 | 867 |
Iosco | 6,900 | 1,105 |
Iron | 3,246 | 852 |
Isabella | 25,500 | 932 |
Jackson | 53,367 | 1,134 |
Kalamazoo | 112,689 | 1,190 |
Kalkaska | 3,921 | 1,141 |
Kent | 371,093 | 1,194 |
Keweenaw | 332 | 680 |
Lake | 1,668 | 876 |
Lapeer | 19,768 | 920 |
Leelanau | 5,208 | 903 |
Lenawee | 23,203 | 985 |
Livingston | 58,901 | 1,068 |
Luce | 1,535 | 893 |
Mackinac | 3,060 | 864 |
Macomb | 305,974 | 1,308 |
Manistee | 6,087 | 943 |
Marquette | 24,006 | 995 |
Mason | 9,178 | 963 |
Mecosta | 12,023 | 947 |
Menominee | 6,517 | 853 |
Midland | 34,098 | 1,333 |
Missaukee | 3,437 | 855 |
Monroe | 36,054 | 1,144 |
Montcalm | 14,977 | 907 |
Montmorency | 2,008 | 822 |
Muskegon | 56,367 | 982 |
Newaygo | 11,210 | 896 |
Oakland | 681,972 | 1,473 |
Oceana | 5,651 | 859 |
Ogemaw | 5,424 | 792 |
Ontonagon | 1,218 | 691 |
Osceola | 7,235 | 1,002 |
Oscoda | 1,144 | 733 |
Otsego | 9,531 | 980 |
Ottawa | 120,042 | 1,133 |
Presque Isle | 2,377 | 940 |
Roscommon | 4,709 | 826 |
Saginaw | 76,004 | 1,076 |
St. Clair | 41,497 | 1,100 |
St. Joseph | 19,790 | 926 |
Sanilac | 9,695 | 879 |
Schoolcraft | 2,332 | 995 |
Shiawassee | 14,159 | 954 |
Tuscola | 10,809 | 967 |
Van Buren | 18,901 | 1,140 |
Washtenaw | 203,266 | 1,365 |
Wayne | 676,435 | 1,391 |
Wexford | 12,837 | 949 |
Footnotes | ||
NOTE: Includes workers covered by Unemployment Insurance (UI) and Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees (UCFE) programs. Data are preliminary. |
State | Establishments, fourth quarter 2020 (thousands) | Employment | Average weekly wage (1) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
December 2020 (thousands) | Percent change, December 2019–20 | Fourth quarter 2020 | National ranking by level | Percent change, fourth quarter 2019–20 | National ranking by percent change | ||
United States (2) | 10,675.8 | 140,881.3 | -6.1 | $1,339 | -- | 13.0 | -- |
Alabama | 134.6 | 1,951.2 | -2.9 | 1,096 | 35 | 11.4 | 36 |
Alaska | 23.1 | 290.1 | -6.4 | 1,260 | 17 | 10.6 | 44 |
Arizona | 173.9 | 2,908.7 | -3.3 | 1,214 | 22 | 14.6 | 9 |
Arkansas | 94.6 | 1,194.8 | -3.2 | 999 | 49 | 11.4 | 36 |
California | 1,660.2 | 16,380.1 | -8.3 | 1,724 | 3 | 18.5 | 1 |
Colorado | 219.6 | 2,613.7 | -5.7 | 1,378 | 10 | 12.3 | 25 |
Connecticut | 126.8 | 1,578.4 | -6.5 | 1,551 | 6 | 12.2 | 27 |
Delaware | 35.1 | 432.9 | -5.2 | 1,262 | 16 | 11.3 | 38 |
District of Columbia | 43.8 | 713.0 | -8.9 | 2,293 | 1 | 15.2 | 6 |
Florida | 765.4 | 8,642.8 | -5.0 | 1,180 | 24 | 13.1 | 17 |
Georgia | 319.7 | 4,405.9 | -4.0 | 1,208 | 23 | 10.9 | 42 |
Hawaii | 47.3 | 561.1 | -16.1 | 1,219 | 21 | 16.0 | 4 |
Idaho | 71.8 | 763.5 | 0.8 | 1,034 | 47 | 12.8 | 21 |
Illinois | 386.3 | 5,573.8 | -7.8 | 1,378 | 10 | 13.0 | 18 |
Indiana | 173.1 | 2,985.1 | -4.0 | 1,076 | 39 | 11.2 | 39 |
Iowa | 105.6 | 1,494.3 | -4.3 | 1,099 | 34 | 11.6 | 32 |
Kansas | 89.9 | 1,346.9 | -4.5 | 1,070 | 40 | 11.5 | 34 |
Kentucky | 130.4 | 1,839.6 | -4.8 | 1,057 | 42 | 10.8 | 43 |
Louisiana | 140.8 | 1,796.9 | -7.0 | 1,078 | 38 | 8.6 | 48 |
Maine | 55.4 | 594.3 | -4.3 | 1,092 | 36 | 14.5 | 10 |
Maryland | 174.5 | 2,546.1 | -6.7 | 1,445 | 8 | 13.6 | 16 |
Massachusetts | 266.7 | 3,365.8 | -8.3 | 1,766 | 2 | 17.0 | 3 |
Michigan | 265.3 | 3,998.2 | -8.9 | 1,257 | 19 | 12.8 | 21 |
Minnesota | 186.4 | 2,684.1 | -7.9 | 1,322 | 13 | 12.3 | 25 |
Mississippi | 76.1 | 1,119.1 | -2.4 | 901 | 51 | 10.4 | 45 |
Missouri | 221.5 | 2,724.4 | -4.3 | 1,127 | 33 | 11.6 | 32 |
Montana | 54.6 | 467.4 | -1.4 | 1,035 | 45 | 12.7 | 23 |
Nebraska | 72.5 | 962.7 | -2.9 | 1,079 | 37 | 11.5 | 34 |
Nevada | 90.2 | 1,283.1 | -10.7 | 1,178 | 25 | 14.4 | 11 |
New Hampshire | 57.1 | 637.3 | -5.2 | 1,406 | 9 | 17.9 | 2 |
New Jersey | 291.0 | 3,860.5 | -7.2 | 1,517 | 7 | 13.9 | 15 |
New Mexico | 64.8 | 767.1 | -9.5 | 1,052 | 43 | 11.8 | 29 |
New York | 662.4 | 8,693.4 | -10.3 | 1,712 | 4 | 14.2 | 13 |
North Carolina | 301.7 | 4,431.0 | -2.7 | 1,152 | 29 | 11.2 | 39 |
North Dakota | 32.6 | 394.4 | -7.1 | 1,136 | 31 | 4.7 | 50 |
Ohio | 307.3 | 5,199.9 | -5.1 | 1,161 | 27 | 12.0 | 28 |
Oklahoma | 113.6 | 1,569.1 | -4.4 | 1,013 | 48 | 7.3 | 49 |
Oregon | 167.3 | 1,824.3 | -7.5 | 1,256 | 20 | 14.2 | 13 |
Pennsylvania | 370.5 | 5,549.4 | -7.4 | 1,287 | 15 | 12.6 | 24 |
Rhode Island | 40.7 | 449.6 | -8.3 | 1,259 | 18 | 14.7 | 7 |
South Carolina | 149.2 | 2,074.4 | -3.5 | 1,035 | 45 | 11.1 | 41 |
South Dakota | 35.5 | 422.8 | -1.9 | 1,048 | 44 | 14.4 | 11 |
Tennessee | 176.2 | 3,002.5 | -2.7 | 1,172 | 26 | 11.7 | 30 |
Texas | 743.1 | 12,251.1 | -4.3 | 1,294 | 14 | 9.0 | 47 |
Utah | 117.9 | 1,557.8 | 0.6 | 1,154 | 28 | 12.9 | 20 |
Vermont | 26.6 | 286.1 | -8.9 | 1,133 | 32 | 14.7 | 7 |
Virginia | 289.8 | 3,796.1 | -4.7 | 1,360 | 12 | 13.0 | 18 |
Washington | 259.7 | 3,219.7 | -6.8 | 1,589 | 5 | 16.0 | 4 |
West Virginia | 51.9 | 654.1 | -5.3 | 997 | 50 | 10.3 | 46 |
Wisconsin | 184.2 | 2,762.5 | -4.8 | 1,140 | 30 | 11.7 | 30 |
Wyoming | 27.7 | 260.2 | -5.3 | 1,061 | 41 | 4.6 | 51 |
Puerto Rico | 46.0 | 873.8 | -4.0 | 621 | (3) | 8.0 | (3) |
Virgin Islands | 3.5 | 35.3 | -11.5 | 1,057 | (3) | -1.3 | (3) |
Footnotes: | |||||||
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, July 09, 2021