Employment in Hillsborough County rose 1.8 percent from September 2013 to September 2014, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Rockingham, New Hampshire’s other large county, saw an employment gain of 1.2 percent. (Large counties are defined as those with employment of 75,000 or more as measured by 2013 annual average employment.) Regional Commissioner Deborah A. Brown noted that employment growth in both counties was below the 2.0-percent national average.

Nationwide, employment increased in 306 of the 339 largest U.S. counties. The largest over-the-year percentage increase in employment was recorded in Weld, Colo. (8.8 percent); Atlantic, N.J., experienced the largest over-the-year decrease (-4.0 percent).

Among New Hampshire’s two large counties, employment was higher in Hillsborough County (195,005) in September 2014. Together, both large counties accounted for 53.2 percent of total employment within the state. Nationwide, the 339 largest counties made up 71.8 percent of total U.S. employment.

The average weekly wage in Rockingham rose 5.8 percent to $918 from the third quarter of 2013 to the third quarter of 2014. The average weekly wagein Hillsborough, at $1,014, increased 2.7 percent. (See table 1 .) Nationally, the average weekly wage increased 2.9 percent over the year to $949.

Employment and wage levels (but not over-the-year changes) are also available for the eight counties in New Hampshire 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

The 5.8-percent wage gain in Rockingham County ranked 11^th among the 339 largest U.S. counties. Hillsborough’s 2.7-percent wage increase ranked 140^th. Nationwide, Olmstead, Minn., had the largest over-the-year increase in average weekly wages with a gain of 11.1 percent in the third quarter of 2014. Across the country, 328 large counties experienced over-the-year increases in average weekly wages.

Of the 339 largest counties, 10 experienced decreases in average weekly wages. Collier, Fla. had the largest percentage decrease in average weekly wage, with a loss of 3.9 percent. Dane, Wis., had the second largest percentage decrease in average weekly wages, followed by Williamson, Texas; Hamilton, Ind.; and Shawnee, Kan.

Large County Average Weekly Wages

Hillsborough County’s average weekly wage of $1,014 placed 73^rd in the national ranking, putting it in the top quarter of all large counties. Rockingham County’s $918 weekly wage was in the top half of large counties (130^th) but was below the U.S. average of $949.

Among the 237 counties with average weekly wages below the national average, Horry, S.C. ($580), reported the lowest wage, followed by the counties of Cameron, Texas ($603), Hidalgo, Texas ($616), Marion, Fla. ($644), and Pasco, Fla. ($650).

Nationally, average weekly wages were equal to or greater than the national average in 102 of the largest U.S. counties. Santa Clara, Calif., held the top position among the highest-paid large counties with an average weekly wage of $2,012. San Mateo, Calif., was second with an average weekly wage of $1,824, followed by New York, N.Y. ($1,733), and San Francisco, Calif. ($1,685). 

Average Weekly Wages in New Hampshire’s Smaller Counties

All eight of the counties in New Hampshire with employment below 75,000 had average weekly wages lower than the national average of $949. Among these counties, Grafton reported the highest average weekly wage in the third quarter of 2014 at $947, while Carroll reported the lowest at $597.

When all 10 counties in New Hampshire were considered, all but 1 had wages below the national average. Two reported average weekly wages at or below $699, 3 reported wages from $700 to $799, 2 had wages from $800 to $899, and 3 had wages above $900. The lowest-paid counties were generally located in the northeastern part of the state. (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 the QCEW Web site at www.bls.gov/cew.

An annual bulletin, Employment and Wages Annual Wages Online, features comprehensive information by detailed industry on establishments, employment, and wages for the nation and all states. The 2013 edition of this publication, which was published in September 2014, contains selected data produced by Business Employment Dynamics (BED) on job gains and losses, as well as selected data from the first quarter 2014 version of the news release. Tables and additional content from Employment and Wages Annual Averages 2013 are now available online at www.bls.gov/cew/publications/employment-and-wages-annual-averages/2013/home.htm. The 2014 edition of Employment and Wages Annual Averages Online will be available in September 2015. 

Information in this release will be made available to sensory impaired individuals upon request. Voice phone: 202-691-5200; Federal Relay Services: 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 9.4 million employer reports cover 137.7 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 2 largest counties in New Hampshire, third quarter 2014

Area	Employment			Average Weekly Wage (1)
	September 2014 (thousands)	Percent change, September 2013-14 (2)	National ranking by percent change (3)	Average weekly wage	National ranking by level (3)	Percent change, third quarter 2013-14 (2)	National ranking by percent change (3)
United States (4)	137,724.1	2.0	--	$949	--	2.9	--
New Hampshire	633.5	1.4	--	927	18	3.6	10
Hillsborough, N.H.	195.0	1.8	153	1,014	73	2.7	140
Rockingham, N.H.	142.1	1.2	199	918	130	5.8	11
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 2. Covered employment and wages in the United States and all counties in New Hampshire, third quarter 2014

Area	Employment September 2014	Average Weekly Wage(1)
United States(2)	137,724,117	$949
New Hampshire	633,513	927
Belknap	26,094	718
Carroll	20,654	597
Cheshire	32,274	769
Coos	12,515	647
Grafton	52,707	947
Hillsborough	195,005	1,014
Merrimack	75,369	861
Rockingham	142,107	918
Strafford	46,750	876
Sullivan	14,021	742
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. Note: Includes workers covered by Unemployment Insurance (UI) and Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees (UCFE) programs. Data are preliminary.

Table 3. Covered employment and wages by state, third quarter 2014

State	Employment		Average weekly wage (1)
	September 2014 (thousands)	Percent change, September 2013-14	Average weekly wage	National ranking by level	Percent change, third quarter 2013-14	National ranking by percent change
United States (2)	137,724.1	2.0	$949	--	2.9	--
Alabama	1,871.2	1.3	815	34	2.5	30
Alaska	344.7	-0.1	1,019	9	3.0	19
Arizona	2,539.6	1.8	876	24	2.0	40
Arkansas	1,170.9	1.3	737	47	1.8	44
California	16,013.4	3.1	1,095	5	3.7	7
Colorado	2,443.0	3.7	982	12	3.0	19
Connecticut	1,663.2	0.8	1,124	4	1.4	49
Delaware	426.1	1.9	961	16	2.2	37
District of Columbia	732.9	0.8	1,631	1	4.5	2
Florida	7,748.4	3.3	826	32	2.1	38
Georgia	4,059.0	3.4	891	21	2.8	23
Hawaii	625.1	0.9	870	25	3.9	4
Idaho	658.4	2.1	721	50	2.6	26
Illinois	5,807.4	1.2	982	12	2.5	30
Indiana	2,924.7	1.4	799	39	1.9	42
Iowa	1,528.8	1.1	800	38	3.6	10
Kansas	1,363.1	1.2	794	40	2.3	35
Kentucky	1,827.8	1.8	781	42	2.5	30
Louisiana	1,928.3	1.7	852	27	3.1	16
Maine	604.5	0.3	754	46	2.6	26
Maryland	2,574.5	1.1	1,042	8	3.1	16
Massachusetts	3,386.7	1.8	1,164	2	3.0	19
Michigan	4,141.0	1.7	896	19	2.4	33
Minnesota	2,757.9	1.1	965	15	2.9	22
Mississippi	1,105.0	0.5	697	51	1.3	50
Missouri	2,686.4	1.0	828	31	2.7	25
Montana	449.5	0.7	732	49	3.7	7
Nebraska	950.0	1.1	779	43	1.8	44
Nevada	1,215.8	4.0	840	28	0.5	51
New Hampshire	633.5	1.4	927	18	3.6	10
New Jersey	3,880.4	0.8	1,087	6	1.7	47
New Mexico	804.0	1.1	786	41	2.6	26
New York	8,902.1	2.0	1,145	3	3.2	15
North Carolina	4,085.5	1.9	839	29	2.8	23
North Dakota	455.9	4.3	977	14	6.1	1
Ohio	5,219.1	1.4	863	26	3.1	16
Oklahoma	1,592.3	1.0	826	32	3.6	10
Oregon	1,752.8	2.4	887	22	3.6	10
Pennsylvania	5,676.2	1.0	937	17	2.6	26
Rhode Island	471.8	1.4	895	20	1.8	44
South Carolina	1,902.7	2.4	768	45	2.4	33
South Dakota	415.8	1.7	733	48	3.7	7
Tennessee	2,775.5	2.4	837	30	2.1	38
Texas	11,433.6	3.1	988	11	3.8	6
Utah	1,304.7	3.1	803	37	1.5	48
Vermont	306.5	1.2	805	36	2.3	35
Virginia	3,667.9	0.6	989	10	2.0	40
Washington	3,112.8	3.2	1,087	6	3.9	4
West Virginia	709.3	-0.2	778	44	3.5	14
Wisconsin	2,783.1	1.1	808	35	1.9	42
Wyoming	291.3	1.7	877	23	4.4	3
Puerto Rico	896.7	-1.5	505	(3)	0.8	(3)
Virgin Islands	37.5	-1.0	720	(3)	2.0	(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.