Employment rose in the four largest counties in Kansas from June 2012 to June 2013, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported today. (Large counties are defined as those with employment of 75,000 or more as measured by 2012 annual average employment.) Regional Commissioner Stanley W. Suchman noted that Johnson County experienced the fastest growth, up 2.6 percent over the year, and exceeded the national average of 1.6 percent.

Nationally, employment increased in 288 of the 334 largest U.S. counties from June 2012 to June 2013. Fort Bend, Texas, posted the largest increase with a gain of 7.0 percent over the year. Atlantic, N.J., had the largest over-the-year decrease in employment with a loss of 4.5 percent.

Among the four largest counties in Kansas, employment was highest in Johnson County (323,600) and lowest in Wyandotte (83,900). Together, the four largest counties accounted for 55.2 percent of total employment within the state. Nationwide, the 334 large counties made up 71.4 percent of total U.S. employment.

Two of Kansas’s four large counties experienced wage growth that exceeded the 2.1-percent increase for the nation. Sedgwick and Johnson Counties recorded wage growth of 3.1 and 2.7 percent, respectively. Johnson County had the highest average weekly wage among the largest counties in the state at $950 and was above the national average of $921. (See table 1.)

Employment and wage levels (but not over-the-year changes) are also available for the 101 counties in Kansas with employment below 75,000. Of these smaller counties, only Coffey ($1,161) had an average weekly wage above the national average. (See table 2.)

Large county wage changes

As mentioned, Sedgwick County had the largest wage gain at 3.1 percent, placing it 53^rd in the national ranking, followed by Johnson at 2.7 percent and ranking 76^th. (See table 1.) Average wages in Shawnee County rose 1.7 percent and placed 170^th. Wyandotte had a decline in average weekly wages with a loss of 1.1 percent, ranking 326^th.

Among the 334 largest counties in the U.S., 304 had over-the-year increases in average weekly wages in the second quarter of 2013. Union, N.J., ranked first in average weekly wage growth with an increase of 8.1 percent. Davidson, Tenn., had the largest average weekly wage decrease with a loss of 2.2 percent.

Large county average weekly wages

Only one of Kansas’s four large counties had average weekly wages above the national average of $921 and placed in the top 100 nationwide in the second quarter of 2013. Johnson County had an average weekly wage of $950 and ranked 87^th among the 334 largest counties. The state’s remaining large counties had average weekly wages that placed them in the bottom half of the national ranking—Sedgwick ($843,171^st), Wyandotte ($832, 184^th), and Shawnee ($784, 244^th).

Nationally, weekly wages were higher than the average of $921 in 107 of the 334 largest U.S. counties. Santa Clara, Calif., held the top position among the highest-paid large counties with an average weekly wage of $1,810, followed by New York, N.Y., ($1,675) and San Mateo, Calif. ($1,632). Among the 227 large counties with an average weekly wage below the U.S. average in the second quarter of 2013, Horry, S.C. ($537) reported the lowest wage.

Average weekly wages in Kansas’s smaller counties

Of the 101 counties in Kansas with employment below 75,000, only one county—Coffey ($1,161)—had an average weekly wage above the national average of $921. Decatur County reported the lowest weekly wage in the state with an average of $452 in the second quarter of 2013. (See table 2.)

When all 105 counties in Kansas were considered, all but 2 had wages below the national average. Forty-nine reported average weekly wages under $600, 33 reported wages from $600 to $649, 11 had wages from $650 to $699, 4 had wages from $700 to $749, and 8 had wages above $750. (See chart 1.)

Additional statistics and other information

Quarterly 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 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 2012 edition of this publication, which was published in September 2013, contains selected data produced by Business Employment Dynamics (BED) on job gains and losses, as well as selected data from the first quarter 2013 version of the national news release. Tables and additional content from Employment and Wages Annual Averages 2012 are now available online at www.bls.gov/cew/publications/employment-and-wages-annual-averages/2012/home.htm.

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

Technical Note

Average weekly wage data by county are compiled under the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) program, also known as the ES-202 program. The data are derived from summaries of employment and total pay of workers covered by state and federal unemployment insurance (UI) legislation and provided by State Workforce Agencies (SWAs). The 9.2 million employer reports cover 135.1 million full- and part-time workers. The average weekly wage values are calculated by dividing quarterly total wages by the average of the three monthly employment levels of those covered by UI programs. The result is then divided by 13, the number of weeks in a quarter. It is to be noted, therefore, that over-the-year wage changes for geographic areas may reflect shifts in the composition of employment by industry, occupation, and such other factors as hours of work. Thus, wages may vary among counties, metropolitan areas, or states for reasons other than changes in the average wage level. Data for all states, Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs), counties, and the nation are available on the BLS Web site at www.bls.gov/cew/; however, data in QCEW press releases have been revised 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.