For Release: Wednesday, October 07, 2015

15-1846-ATL

SOUTHEAST INFORMATION OFFICE: Atlanta, Ga.
Technical information: (404) 893-4222 BLSInfoAtlanta@bls.gov www.bls.gov/regions/southeast
Media contact: (404) 893-4220

County Employment and Wages in Tennessee — First Quarter 2015

Employment rose in all of the six large counties in Tennessee from March 2014 to March 2015, 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 2014 annual average employment.) Regional Commissioner Janet S. Rankin noted that employment increases ranged from 5.2 percent in Williamson County to 1.3 percent in Shelby County. (See table 1.)

Nationally, employment advanced 2.1 percent from March 2014 to March 2015 as 323 of the 342 largest U.S. counties registered increases. Utah, Utah, recorded the largest percentage increase in the country, up 6.1 percent over the year. 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 largest counties in Tennessee, employment was highest in Shelby (477,200) in March 2015. One other county, Davidson, had an employment level exceeding 400,000. Together, Tennessee’s six large counties accounted for 56.4 percent of total employment within the state. Nationwide, the 342 largest counties made up 72.3 percent of total U.S. employment, which stood at 137.4 million in March 2015.

Average weekly wages increased in five of Tennessee’s six largest counties from the first quarter of 2014 to the first quarter of 2015. Williamson County recorded the largest wage increase at 6.9 percent. (See table 1.) Williamson County also had the highest average weekly wage in the state at $1,262, followed by the counties of Davidson ($1,085) and Shelby ($1,009). Nationally, the average weekly wage increased 2.1 percent over the year to $1,048 in the first quarter of 2015.

Employment and wage levels (but not over-the-year changes) are also available for the 89 counties with employment levels below 75,000 in Tennessee. Average weekly wages in these counties ranged from $1,089 to $467. (See table 2.)

Large county wage changes

As noted, average weekly wages rose in five of Tennessee’s large counties from the first quarter of 2014 to the first quarter of 2015. Williamson’s 6.9-percent wage increase ranked ninth among the nation’s 342 large counties; Rutherford’s 3.0-percent gain ranked 67th. (See table 1.) In contrast, Shelby County recorded a wage decrease of 0.7 percent.

Nationally, 297 of the 342 largest counties had over-the-year increases in average weekly wages. Olmsted, Minn., had the largest percentage wage increase among the largest U.S. counties (11.7 percent). Washington, Pa., was second with a wage increase of 10.7 percent, followed by the counties of Riverside, Calif. (10.1 percent); Lake, Ill. (9.2 percent); and Orange, Calif. (9.1 percent).

Of the 342 largest counties, 39 experienced over-the-year decreases in average weekly wages. Snohomish, Wash., had the largest percentage decrease in average weekly wages, with a loss of 4.8 percent. Chester, Pa., had the second largest percentage decrease in average weekly wages, followed by Williamson, Texas; Saginaw, Mich.; and Palm Beach, Fla.

Large county average weekly wages

Average weekly wages in 3 of Tennessee’s 6 largest counties placed in the top half of the national ranking among the 342 largest counties in the first quarter of 2015. Williamson and Davidson Counties had average weekly wages above the U.S. average of $1,048 and ranked in the top 100 nationwide at 40th and 76th, respectively. Shelby County with an average weekly wage of $1,009 ranked 117th. Average weekly wages in the remaining three large counties placed in the bottom half of the national ranking.

Nationwide, 93 large counties registered average weekly wage above the U.S. average in the first quarter of 2015. New York, N.Y., recorded the highest average weekly wage at $2,847, followed by Santa Clara, Calif., at $2,203. Rounding out the top five were Somerset, N.J. ($2,080), San Francisco, Calif. ($2,070), and San Mateo, Calif. ($2,066).

Seventy-three percent of the largest U.S. counties (248) reported weekly wages below the national average. Horry County, S.C., reported the lowest wage ($583), followed by the Texas counties of Cameron and Hidalgo ($593 and $607); Lake, Fla. ($649); and Yakima, Wash. ($658).

Average weekly wages in Tennessee’s smaller counties

Among the 89 counties in Tennessee with employment below 75,000, only Roane County ($1,089) had an average weekly wage above the national average of $1,048. Grundy County reported the lowest average weekly in the state, averaging $467 in the first quarter of 2015. (See table 2.)

When all 95 counties in Tennessee were considered, 33 reported average weekly wages under $600, 34 reported wages from $600 to $699, 14 had wages from $700 to $799, and 14 had wages at $800 or above. (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 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 2013 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 2014 version of the national news release. Tables and additional content from Employment and Wages Online Annual Averages 2013 are now available 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.

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.

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.

Table 1. Covered employment and wages in the United States and the 6 largest counties in Tennessee, first quarter 2015
Table 1. Covered employment and wages in the United States and the 6 largest counties in Tennessee, first quarter 2015
AreaEmploymentAverage Weekly Wage (1)
March 2015 (thousands)Percent change, March 2014-15 (2)National ranking by percent change (3)Average weekly wageNational ranking by level (3)Percent change, first quarter 2014-15 (2)National ranking by percent change (3)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
- ContinuedNote: See footnotes at end of table.

United States (4)

137,412.42.1--$1,048--2.1--

Tennessee

2,772.72.1--886271.438

Davidson, Tenn.

444.72.9971,085762.696

Hamilton, Tenn.

189.22.31428802052.0142

Knox, Tenn.

228.02.61198582242.5108

Rutherford, Tenn.

113.62.61198612203.067

Shelby, Tenn.

477.21.32231,009117-0.7318

Williamson, Tenn.

111.25.291,262406.99

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.
 

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 Tennessee, first quarter 2015
Table 2. Covered employment and wages in the United States and all counties in Tennessee, first quarter 2015
AreaEmployment March 2015Average Weekly Wage (1)
 
 
 
- Continued

United States (2)

137,412,381$1,048

Tennessee

2,772,654886

Anderson

38,780978

Bedford

18,384672

Benton

3,961567

Bledsoe

2,106559

Blount

45,109822

Bradley

40,383721

Campbell

8,915594

Cannon

2,037550

Carroll

7,425596

Carter

10,554582

Cheatham

7,874764

Chester

3,483570

Claiborne

8,621590

Clay

1,485519

Cocke

7,394592

Coffee

25,545789

Crockett

3,573682

Cumberland

16,898590

Davidson

444,6591,085

Decatur

3,510625

De Kalb

5,097631

Dickson

15,597659

Dyer

15,367677

Fayette

7,640743

Fentress

4,662547

Franklin

11,628633

Gibson

13,377620

Giles

9,892676

Grainger

3,331577

Greene

25,181666

Grundy

2,102467

Hamblen

29,866685

Hamilton

189,180880

Hancock

820490

Hardeman

6,697702

Hardin

7,781714

Hawkins

12,164692

Haywood

4,784674

Henderson

8,266628

Henry

11,078638

Hickman

3,743602

Houston

1,498534

Humphreys

5,743839

Jackson

1,454596

Jefferson

12,798668

Johnson

4,010688

Knox

228,030858

Lake

1,920536

Lauderdale

6,206622

Lawrence

10,094585

Lewis

2,505513

Lincoln

8,955625

Loudon

14,041733

McMinn

17,408729

McNairy

5,638559

Macon

4,511561

Madison

55,811739

Marion

6,991653

Marshall

8,358668

Maury

30,288819

Meigs

1,926607

Monroe

13,396650

Montgomery

48,819652

Moore

1,816785

Morgan

3,029620

Obion

9,582651

Overton

4,285642

Perry

1,940507

Pickett

1,034562

Polk

2,172544

Putnam

33,834665

Rhea

10,724769

Roane

17,3561,089

Robertson

21,298678

Rutherford

113,554861

Scott

5,297559

Sequatchie

2,746535

Sevier

40,902510

Shelby

477,2461,009

Smith

4,957692

Stewart

2,509899

Sullivan

67,285923

Sumner

48,724720

Tipton

10,902623

Trousdale

1,472567

Unicoi

4,788844

Union

2,250547

Van Buren

798566

Warren

13,565646

Washington

59,212730

Wayne

3,830587

Weakley

10,619565

White

6,435607

Williamson

111,2051,262

Wilson

36,806731

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: Data are preliminary. 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
Table 3. Covered employment and wages by state, first quarter 2015
StateEmploymentAverage weekly wage (1)
March 2015 (thousands)Percent change, March 2014-15Average weekly wageNational ranking by levelPercent change, first quarter 2014-15National ranking by percent change
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
- ContinuedNote: See footnotes at end of table.

United States (2)

137,412.42.1$1,048--2.1--

Alabama

1,873.51.3844392.219

Alaska

322.21.01,051152.610

Arizona

2,605.62.5926231.045

Arkansas

1,166.61.3790470.847

California

16,029.53.01,20763.73

Colorado

2,458.03.71,071132.416

Connecticut

1,640.50.81,38231.535

Delaware

422.82.51,1059-0.551

District of Columbia

732.61.41,76413.24

Florida

8,018.03.6885281.827

Georgia

4,107.03.5989181.731

Hawaii

633.71.3881312.89

Idaho

650.33.1736502.219

Illinois

5,724.61.21,13072.416

Indiana

2,894.81.8857351.438

Iowa

1,504.31.3848372.97

Kansas

1,357.11.0851361.438

Kentucky

1,810.31.5823411.535

Louisiana

1,927.11.0885282.021

Maine

571.40.9793450.946

Maryland

2,540.81.21,11382.512

Massachusetts

3,338.61.71,34143.24

Michigan

4,079.51.8969211.924

Minnesota

2,709.21.81,079124.31

Mississippi

1,102.30.6711510.748

Missouri

2,678.01.7882301.827

Montana

441.02.7750492.610

Nebraska

943.11.4818422.512

Nevada

1,227.73.786534-0.250

New Hampshire

623.51.5982201.243

New Jersey

3,834.61.41,28851.924

New Mexico

798.71.4805431.535

New York

8,865.01.91,46320.249

North Carolina

4,099.42.5930221.924

North Dakota

436.01.6984194.22

Ohio

5,144.51.4922241.438

Oklahoma

1,592.71.3869332.021

Oregon

1,748.73.5919252.97

Pennsylvania

5,606.90.91,031162.416

Rhode Island

456.11.41,008171.243

South Carolina

1,919.12.5801441.827

South Dakota

406.51.5763483.06

Tennessee

2,772.72.1886271.438

Texas

11,557.02.91,089102.512

Utah

1,318.83.7845381.731

Vermont

303.90.9824402.021

Virginia

3,649.31.11,068141.731

Washington

3,064.43.21,087111.827

West Virginia

692.4-0.3792461.438

Wisconsin

2,734.31.5877322.512

Wyoming

277.80.8892261.731

Puerto Rico

904.9-1.1524(3)1.0(3)

Virgin Islands

38.50.0738(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.
 

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.
 

 Chart 1. Average weekly wages in Tennessee, first quarter 2015