Employment rose in the four largest counties in Utah from March 2014 to March 2015, 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 2014 annual average employment.) Regional Commissioner Stanley W. Suchman noted that Utah County experienced the fastest employment growth among the 342 largest U.S. counties, up 6.7 percent over the year. The three remaining large counties in the state also had employment gains exceeding the national average of 2.1 percent.

Nationally, employment increased in 323 of the 342 largest U.S. counties from March 2014 to March 2015. As noted, Utah County, Utah, posted the largest percentage increase with a gain of 6.7 percent over the year. Within Utah County, the largest employment increase occurred in trade, transportation, and utilities, which added 2,962 jobs over the year (8.9 percent). Atlantic, N.J., had the largest over-the-year percentage decrease in employment among the largest counties in the U.S. with a loss of 4.3 percent.

Among the four largest counties in Utah, employment was highest in Salt Lake County (635,800) and lowest in Weber (97,900). Together, the four largest counties accounted for 79.7 percent of total employment within the state. Nationwide, the 342 large counties made up 72.3 percent of total U.S. employment.

Average weekly wages increased in three of the four large counties in Utah from the first quarter of 2014 to the first quarter of 2015. Wages in Salt Lake County had the largest growth (2.0 percent), followed by Utah (1.9 percent) and Davis (0.8 percent). Salt Lake County had the highest average weekly wage ($966) among Utah’s large counties. (See table 1.) Nationally, average weekly wages increased 2.1 percent over the year to $1,048.

Employment and wage levels (but not over-the-year changes) are also available for the 25 counties in Utah with employment below 75,000. All of these smaller counties had average weekly wages below the national average. (See table 2.)

Large county wage changes

As mentioned, Salt Lake County had the largest wage gain at 2.0 percent, placing it 142^nd in the national ranking, followed by Utah (1.9 percent, 150^th) and Davis (0.8 percent, 266^th). (See table 1.) Weber registered a 0.1-percent decline in average weekly wages and ranked 304^th among the largest counties in the nation.

Among the 342 largest U.S. counties, 297 had over-the-year increases in average weekly wages in the first quarter of 2015. Olmsted, Minn., ranked first in average weekly wage growth with a gain of 11.7 percent. Of the 342 largest counties, 39 experienced over-the-year decreases in average weekly wages. Snohomish, Wash., had the largest percentage decline in average weekly wages with a loss of 4.8 percent.

Large county average weekly wages

At $966, Salt Lake County’s average weekly wage ranked 146^th among the 342 largest U.S. counties in the first quarter of 2015. The three remaining large counties in Utah had average weekly wages that placed them in the bottom quartile of the national ranking—Utah ($786, 294^th); Davis ($785, 295^th); and Weber ($721, 328^th).

Nationally, weekly wages were higher than the U.S. average of $1,048 in 93 of the 342 largest counties. New York, N.Y., held the top position with an average weekly wage of $2,847. Santa Clara, Calif., was second at $2,203, followed by Somerset, N.J. ($2,080); San Francisco, Calif. ($2,070); and San Mateo, Calif. ($2,066). Among the 248 large counties with an average weekly wage below the U.S. average in the first quarter of 2015, Horry, S.C. ($583) reported the lowest wage.

Average weekly wages in Utah’s smaller counties

Each of the 25 counties in Utah with employment below 75,000 had average weekly wages lower than the national average. Duchesne County’s wage of $957 was the highest among the small counties followed by Uintah at $947. Piute reported the lowest weekly wage in the state with an average of $472 in the first quarter of 2015. (See table 2.)

When all 29 counties in Utah were considered, 11 reported average weekly wages under $600, 2 reported wages from $600 to $649, 5 posted wages from $650 to $699, 3 had wages from $700 to $749, and 8 had wages greater than $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 2014 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 first quarter 2015 version of the national news release. Tables and additional content from Employment and Wages Annual Averages 2014 are now available online at www.bls.gov/cew/publications/employment-and-wages-annual-averages/2014/home.htm. The 2015 edition of Employment and Wages Annual Averages Online will be available in September 2016.

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.

The County Employment and Wages release for second quarter 2015 is scheduled to be released on Thursday, December 17, 2015.

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 9.5 million employer reports cover 137.4 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.

Table 1. Covered employment and wages in the United States and the 4 largest counties in Utah, first quarter 2015

Area	Employment			Average Weekly Wage (1)
	March 2015 (thousands)	Percent change, March 2014-15 (2)	National ranking by percent change (3)	Average weekly wage	National ranking by level (3)	Percent change, first quarter 2014-15 (2)	National ranking by percent change (3)
United States (4)	137,412.4	2.1	--	$1,048	--	2.1	--
Utah	1,318.8	3.7	--	845	38	1.7	31
Davis, Utah	115.1	3.9	37	785	295	0.8	266
Salt Lake, Utah	635.8	3.4	64	966	146	2.0	142
Utah, Utah	202.0	6.7	1	786	294	1.9	150
Weber, Utah	97.9	3.8	40	721	328	-0.1	304
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, first quarter 2015

State	Employment		Average weekly wage (1)
	March 2015 (thousands)	Percent change, March 2014-15	Average weekly wage	National ranking by level	Percent change, first quarter 2014-15	National ranking by percent change
United States (2)	137,412.4	2.1	$1,048	--	2.1	--
Alabama	1,873.5	1.3	844	39	2.2	19
Alaska	322.2	1.0	1,051	15	2.6	10
Arizona	2,605.6	2.5	926	23	1.0	45
Arkansas	1,166.6	1.3	790	47	0.8	47
California	16,029.5	3.0	1,207	6	3.7	3
Colorado	2,458.0	3.7	1,071	13	2.4	16
Connecticut	1,640.5	0.8	1,382	3	1.5	35
Delaware	422.8	2.5	1,105	9	-0.5	51
District of Columbia	732.6	1.4	1,764	1	3.2	4
Florida	8,018.0	3.6	885	28	1.8	27
Georgia	4,107.0	3.5	989	18	1.7	31
Hawaii	633.7	1.3	881	31	2.8	9
Idaho	650.3	3.1	736	50	2.2	19
Illinois	5,724.6	1.2	1,130	7	2.4	16
Indiana	2,894.8	1.8	857	35	1.4	38
Iowa	1,504.3	1.3	848	37	2.9	7
Kansas	1,357.1	1.0	851	36	1.4	38
Kentucky	1,810.3	1.5	823	41	1.5	35
Louisiana	1,927.1	1.0	885	28	2.0	21
Maine	571.4	0.9	793	45	0.9	46
Maryland	2,540.8	1.2	1,113	8	2.5	12
Massachusetts	3,338.6	1.7	1,341	4	3.2	4
Michigan	4,079.5	1.8	969	21	1.9	24
Minnesota	2,709.2	1.8	1,079	12	4.3	1
Mississippi	1,102.3	0.6	711	51	0.7	48
Missouri	2,678.0	1.7	882	30	1.8	27
Montana	441.0	2.7	750	49	2.6	10
Nebraska	943.1	1.4	818	42	2.5	12
Nevada	1,227.7	3.7	865	34	-0.2	50
New Hampshire	623.5	1.5	982	20	1.2	43
New Jersey	3,834.6	1.4	1,288	5	1.9	24
New Mexico	798.7	1.4	805	43	1.5	35
New York	8,865.0	1.9	1,463	2	0.2	49
North Carolina	4,099.4	2.5	930	22	1.9	24
North Dakota	436.0	1.6	984	19	4.2	2
Ohio	5,144.5	1.4	922	24	1.4	38
Oklahoma	1,592.7	1.3	869	33	2.0	21
Oregon	1,748.7	3.5	919	25	2.9	7
Pennsylvania	5,606.9	0.9	1,031	16	2.4	16
Rhode Island	456.1	1.4	1,008	17	1.2	43
South Carolina	1,919.1	2.5	801	44	1.8	27
South Dakota	406.5	1.5	763	48	3.0	6
Tennessee	2,772.7	2.1	886	27	1.4	38
Texas	11,557.0	2.9	1,089	10	2.5	12
Utah	1,318.8	3.7	845	38	1.7	31
Vermont	303.9	0.9	824	40	2.0	21
Virginia	3,649.3	1.1	1,068	14	1.7	31
Washington	3,064.4	3.2	1,087	11	1.8	27
West Virginia	692.4	-0.3	792	46	1.4	38
Wisconsin	2,734.3	1.5	877	32	2.5	12
Wyoming	277.8	0.8	892	26	1.7	31
Puerto Rico	904.9	-1.1	524	(3)	1.0	(3)
Virgin Islands	38.5	0.0	738	(3)	-0.7	(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.