Employment increased in each of Mississippi’s two large counties from June 2015 to June 2016, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. (Large counties are those with 2015 annual average employment levels of 75,000 or more.) Regional Commissioner Janet S. Rankin noted that Hinds County employment rose 1.0 percent during the 12-month period. Harrison County employment increased 0.1 percent over the year. (See table 1.)

Nationally, employment advanced 1.5 percent from June 2015 to June 2016 as 291 of the 344 largest U.S. counties registered increases. Williamson, Tenn., had the largest percentage increase with a gain of 6.7 percent over the year. Midland, Texas, had the largest over-the-year percentage decrease in employment among the large U.S. counties with a loss of 8.3 percent.

Among Mississippi’s two largest counties, employment was higher in Hinds (121,100) in June 2016, followed by Harrison (85,200). Together, Hinds and Harrison Counties accounted for 18.4 percent of total employment within the state. Nationwide, the 344 largest counties made up 72.5 percent of total U.S. employment, which stood at 142.7 million in June 2016.

From the second quarter of 2015 to the second quarter of 2016, Harrison County and Hinds County each recorded a 1.9-percent increase in average weekly wages. (See table 1.) Hinds County had the higher average weekly wage at $843. Nationally, the average weekly wage was $989, a 2.2-percent increase from a year ago.

Employment and wages levels (but not over-the-year changes) are also available for the 80 counties in Mississippi with employment below 75,000. Wage levels were below the national average in all but one of these smaller counties. (See table 2.)

Large county wage changes

Harrison and Hinds Counties’ average weekly wages each advanced 1.9 percent from the second quarter of 2015 to the second quarter of 2016, ranking 216^th in the national ranking. (See table 1.)

Nationally, 304 of the 344 largest counties had over-the-year increases in average weekly wages. McLean, Ill., had the largest wage increase among the largest U.S. counties (21.0 percent). Elkhart, Ind., was second with a wage increase of 8.5 percent, followed by the counties of King, Wash. (8.1 percent); Washington, Ore. (7.4 percent); and Albany, N.Y. (7.0 percent).

Of the 344 largest U.S. counties, 36 experienced over-the-year decreases in average weekly wages. Ventura, Calif., had the largest percentage decrease in average weekly wages (-8.4 percent), followed by Forsyth, N.C. (-6.5 percent); Lafayette, La. (-6.2 percent); Gregg, Texas (-3.7 percent); and Midland, Texas (-3.2 percent).

Large county average weekly wages

Average weekly wages in both Hinds County ($843) and Harrison County ($698) were below the U.S. average of $989 and placed in the bottom third of the national ranking in the second quarter of 2016. The average weekly wage in Hinds County ranked 241^st and Harrison County’s average weekly wage ranked 335^th. (See table 1.)

Nationwide, average weekly wages were higher than the U.S. average in 102 of the 344 largest counties. Santa Clara, Calif., held the top position among the highest-paid large counties with an average weekly wage of $2,252. San Mateo, Calif., was second with an average weekly wage of $1,871, followed by New York, N.Y. ($1,866).

Seventy percent of the largest U.S. counties (241) reported average weekly wages below the national average in the second quarter of 2016. The lowest wage was reported in Horry, S.C. ($598), followed by the Texas counties of Cameron ($602) and Hidalgo ($626).

Average weekly wages in Mississippi’s smaller counties

Among the 80 smaller counties in Mississippi—those with employment below 75,000—only Kemper ($990) had an average weekly wage above the $989 national average. Issaquena County reported the lowest weekly wage among all the counties in the state, averaging $449 in the second quarter of 2016. (See table 2.)

When all 82 counties in Mississippi were considered, 23 reported average weekly wages below $600, 39 had wages from $600 to $699, 11 had wages from $700 to $799, and 9 had wages above $800. (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 2015 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 2016 version of the national news release. Tables and additional content from Employment and Wages Annual Averages 2015 are now available online at https://www.bls.gov/cew/publications/employment-and-wages-annual-averages/2015/home.htm.

The County Employment and Wages release for third quarter 2016 is scheduled to be released on Tuesday, March 7, 2017.

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 9.7 million employer reports cover 142.7 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.

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 2 largest counties in Mississippi, second quarter 2016

Area	Employment			Average weekly wage (1)
	June 2016 (thousands)	Percent change, June 2015-16 (2)	National ranking by percent change (3)	Average weekly wage	National ranking by level (3)	Percent change, second quarter 2015-16 (2)	National ranking by percent change (3)
United States (4)	142,717.2	1.5	--	$989	--	2.2	--
Mississippi	1,120.1	0.5	--	727	51	2.5	15
Harrison, Miss.	85.2	1.0	218	698	335	1.9	216
Hinds, Miss.	121.1	0.1	287	843	241	1.9	216
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, second quarter 2016

State	Employment		Average weekly wage (1)
	June 2016 (thousands)	Percent change, June 2015-16	Average weekly wage	National ranking by level	Percent change, second quarter 2015-16	National ranking by percent change
United States (2)	142,717.2	1.5	$989	--	2.2	--
Alabama	1,923.5	1.2	835	37	2.0	29
Alaska	338.7	-2.4	1,011	10	-1.7	49
Arizona	2,619.6	2.6	921	22	1.9	33
Arkansas	1,197.5	1.1	785	47	3.0	7
California	16,754.1	2.5	1,157	5	2.4	19
Colorado	2,574.5	2.3	999	14	1.0	43
Connecticut	1,689.9	-0.1	1,213	3	3.0	7
Delaware	444.0	0.9	990	16	-0.6	48
District of Columbia	756.0	1.7	1,623	1	1.1	42
Florida	8,161.8	3.2	883	25	2.6	14
Georgia	4,269.5	2.7	929	21	2.7	11
Hawaii	643.4	1.0	906	24	3.5	5
Idaho	699.7	3.3	740	50	3.8	3
Illinois	5,945.0	0.2	1,038	9	2.4	19
Indiana	2,995.4	1.0	828	39	2.1	27
Iowa	1,566.0	0.3	825	40	2.9	9
Kansas	1,378.4	-0.2	829	38	1.2	39
Kentucky	1,877.2	1.5	838	36	1.9	33
Louisiana	1,905.2	-1.4	852	32	0.2	46
Maine	622.8	1.0	795	46	3.5	5
Maryland	2,656.0	0.9	1,070	8	2.5	15
Massachusetts	3,538.2	1.2	1,233	2	2.0	29
Michigan	4,300.9	1.9	942	19	2.7	11
Minnesota	2,846.8	0.7	997	15	2.0	29
Mississippi	1,120.1	0.5	727	51	2.5	15
Missouri	2,785.6	1.4	863	30	2.4	19
Montana	468.6	2.2	767	48	1.7	35
Nebraska	978.3	0.9	805	43	2.4	19
Nevada	1,289.4	3.3	874	27	2.2	26
New Hampshire	655.1	1.1	1,003	12	3.7	4
New Jersey	4,051.2	1.7	1,147	6	1.7	35
New Mexico	808.1	-0.3	812	42	0.9	44
New York	9,264.0	1.5	1,210	4	2.5	15
North Carolina	4,285.3	2.5	865	29	2.1	27
North Dakota	423.3	-4.9	908	23	-3.3	51
Ohio	5,353.1	0.8	882	26	2.0	29
Oklahoma	1,570.5	-1.4	823	41	0.6	45
Oregon	1,867.8	2.7	933	20	4.1	2
Pennsylvania	5,786.8	0.4	971	17	1.4	37
Rhode Island	482.9	0.6	949	18	2.5	15
South Carolina	2,013.7	2.4	804	44	2.8	10
South Dakota	432.7	1.0	760	49	2.7	11
Tennessee	2,900.4	2.4	874	27	1.3	38
Texas	11,810.7	1.0	1,000	13	1.2	39
Utah	1,395.9	3.8	840	35	2.3	25
Vermont	310.6	-0.1	850	33	2.4	19
Virginia	3,833.4	1.6	1,011	10	1.2	39
Washington	3,281.6	2.8	1,083	7	5.4	1
West Virginia	693.2	-1.9	800	45	-0.4	47
Wisconsin	2,869.1	0.9	856	31	2.4	19
Wyoming	281.7	-3.7	849	34	-2.2	50
Puerto Rico	879.5	-0.7	512	(3)	0.2	(3)
Virgin Islands	38.4	0.9	743	(3)	-0.4	(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.