Employment declined in both of Mississippi’s large counties from June 2012 to June 2013, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. (Large counties are defined as those with employment of 75,000 or more as measured by 2011 annual average employment.) Regional Commissioner Janet S. Rankin noted that Harrison County experienced the larger decrease, down 0.4 percent, and Hinds County registered a 0.1-percent decline. (See table 1.)

Nationally, employment rose 1.6 percent during the 12-month period, as 288 of the 334 largest U.S. counties added jobs. Fort Bend, Texas, posted the largest over-the-year percentage increase with a gain of 7.0 percent. Atlantic, N.J., had the largest over-the-year decrease in employment with a loss of 4.5 percent.

Among Mississippi’s two largest counties, employment was higher in Hinds (120,300) in June 2013. Together, Hinds and Harrison Counties accounted for 18.6 percent of total employment within the state. Nationwide, the 334 largest counties made up 71.4 percent of total U.S. employment, which stood at 135.1 million in June 2013.

Large county wage changes

Hinds County posted a 1.8-percent wage gain from the second quarter of 2012 to the second quarter of 2013 and Harrison County posted a 1.7-percent increase. Over-the-year wage growth in both counties placed in the middle of the national ranking at 159^th and 170^th, respectively. Average weekly wages increased 2.1 perent nationwide from the second quarter of 2012. (See table 1.)

Nationwide, 304 large counties experienced growth in average weekly wages. Union, N.J., ranked first with an increase of 8.1 percent from the second quarter of 2012. San Mateo, Calif., ranked second with a gain of 8.0 percent, followed by the counties of Williamson, Tenn. (7.8 percent), Rockingham, N.H. (6.9 percent), and Dane, Wis. (6.0 percent).

Among the 334 largest U.S. counties, 18 experienced over-the-year decreases in average weekly wages. Davidson, Tenn., had the largest decrease in the nation (-2.2 percent), followed by the county of Whatcom, Wash. (-1.5 percent). Washington, Ore., and Shelby, Tenn., tied for the third largest percentage decrease (-1.3 percent). Two counties, El Paso, Colo., and Wyandotte, Kan., tied for the fifth largest percentage decrease (-1.1 percent).

Large county average weekly wages

Average weekly wages in both Hinds County ($811) and Harrison County ($677) were below the U.S. average of $921 and placed in the bottom half of the national ranking in the second quarter of 2013. The average weekly wage in Hinds County ranked 203^rd and Harrison County’s average weekly wage ranked 323^rd. (See table 1.)

Nationally, average weekly wages were higher than average in 107 of the 334 largest counties. Santa Clara, Calif., recorded the highest average weekly wage at $1,810. New York, N.Y., was second with an average weekly wage of $1,675, followed by San Mateo, Calif. ($1,632), Washington D.C. ($1,575), and Arlington, Va. ($1,525).

There were 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, followed by the counties of Cameron, Texas ($572), Hidalgo, Texas ($592), Yakima, Wash. ($629), and Lake, Fla. ($633).

Average weekly wages in Mississippi’s smaller counties

Employment and wage levels (but not over-the-year changes) are also available for the 80 counties in Mississippi with employment below 75,000. Among the smaller counties in Mississippi, all but one had an average weekly wage below the national average of $921. The lone exception was Kemper ($924). (See table 2.) Issaquena County reported the lowest weekly wage among all the counties in the state, averaging $423 in the second quarter of 2013.

When all 82 counties in Mississippi were considered, 3 reported average weekly wages under $500, 38 reported wages from $500-$599, 28 had wages from $600-$699, 8 had wages from $700-$799, and 5 had wages above $800. (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/.

An annual bulletin, 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 contains selected data produced by the 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 Online Annual Averages 2012 are now available at www.bls.gov/cew/publications/employment-and-wages-annual-averages/2012/home.htm. The 2013 edition of Employment and Wages Annual Averages Online will be available in September 2014.

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.

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.