Technical information: (202) 691-6567

http://www.bls.gov/cew/

Media contact: 691-5902

USDL 06-1275

For release: 10:00 A.M. EDT

Wednesday, July 26, 2006

COUNTY EMPLOYMENT AND WAGES: FOURTH QUARTER 2005

In December 2005, Lee County, Fla., had the largest over-the-year percentage increase in employment

among the largest counties in the U.S., according to preliminary data released today by the Bureau of Labor

Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor. Lee County, which includes Fort Myers, experienced an overthe-year employment gain of 9.2 percent, compared with national job growth of 1.7 percent. Orleans County

(New Orleans), La., had the largest over-the-year gain in average weekly wages in the fourth quarter of

2005, with an increase of 28.7 percent. The increase in Orleans County was related to the effects of Hurricane Katrina, discussed in some detail below. The U.S. average weekly wage increased by 1.5 percent

over the same time span.

Of the 322 largest counties in the United States, as measured by 2004 annual average employment, 133

had over-the-year percentage growth in employment above the national average in December 2005, and 176

experienced changes below the national average. (See chart 1.) Average weekly wages grew faster than the

national average in 127 of the largest U.S. counties, while the percent change in average weekly wages was

below the national average in 183 counties. (See chart 2.)

The employment and 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

reports submitted by every employer subject to unemployment insurance (UI) laws. The 8.7 million employer

 Hurricanes Katrina and Rita

The measures of employment and wages reported in this news release reflect the impact

of both Hurricanes Katrina and Rita and ongoing labor market trends. The effects of

Hurricane Katrina, which hit the Gulf Coast on August 29, 2005, were first reflected in the

September QCEW employment counts and the wage totals for the third quarter of 2005.

The impact of this catastrophic storm in parts of Louisiana and Mississippi continue to be

reflected in monthly employment and quarterly wage totals in the fourth quarter of 2005. Modifications to QCEW nonresponse adjustment methods were made for both the third and fourth

quarters of 2005 to better reflect the impact of the hurricane in parts of Louisiana and

Mississippi. Hurricane Rita made landfall on September 24, after the September reference

period. Nonresponse adjustment methods were modified for the fourth quarter of 2005 to

reflect the impact of this hurricane in parts of Louisiana. For more information, see the

QCEW section of the Katrina coverage on the BLS Web site at http://www.bls.gov/katrina/

qcewquestions.htm.
2

Los Angeles, Calif. 4,196.5 Maricopa, Ariz. 97.4 Lee, Fla. 9.2

Cook, Ill. 2,547.4 Los Angeles, Calif. 73.4 Kern, Calif. 8.6

New York, N.Y. 2,310.7 Harris, Texas 69.7 Pasco, Fla. 7.9

Harris, Texas 1,919.8 Clark, Nev. 56.2 Seminole, Fla. 7.8

Maricopa, Ariz. 1,784.8 New York, N.Y. 44.2 Clark, Nev. 6.7

Orange, Calif. 1,507.7 Dallas, Texas 39.3 Montgomery, Texas 6.6

Dallas, Texas 1,457.5 King, Wash. 37.5 Lake, Fla. 6.5

San Diego, Calif. 1,315.8 Broward, Fla. 30.7 Maricopa, Ariz. 5.8

King, Wash. 1,145.1 Orange, Fla. 28.9 Webb, Texas 5.7

Miami-Dade, Fla. 1,022.1 Orange, Calif. 28.4 Collier, Fla. 5.6

East Baton Rouge, La. 5.6

Employment in large counties

December 2005 employment

 (thousands)

 Growth in employment,

 December 2004-05

 (thousands)

Percent growth in employment,

 December 2004-05

U.S. 133,834.6 U.S. 2,275.4 U.S. 1.7

Table A. Top 10 large counties ranked by December 2005 employment, December 2004-05

employment growth, and December 2004-05 percent growth in employment

reports cover 133.8 million full- and part-time workers. The attached tables and charts contain data for the

nation and for the 322 U.S. counties with annual average employment levels of 75,000 or more in 2004.

December 2005 employment and 2005 fourth-quarter average weekly wages for all states are provided in

table 4 of this release. Final data for all states, metropolitan statistical areas, counties, and the nation through

the fourth quarter of 2004 are available on the BLS Web site at http://www.bls.gov/cew/. Preliminary data

for the fourth quarter of 2005 and revised data for the first, second, and third quarters of 2005 will be

available in July on the BLS Web site.

Large County Employment

In December 2005, national employment, as measured by the QCEW program, was 133.8 million, up

by 1.7 percent from December 2004. The 322 U.S. counties with 75,000 or more employees accounted

for 70.8 percent of total U.S. covered employment and 76.9 percent of total covered wages. These 322

counties had a net job gain of 1,500,400 over the year, accounting for 65.9 percent of the U.S. employment increase. Employment increased in 250 of the large counties from December 2004 to December 2005.

Lee, Fla., had the largest over-the-year percentage increase in employment (9.2 percent). Kern, Calif., had

the next largest increase, 8.6 percent, followed by the counties of Pasco, Fla. (7.9 percent), Seminole, Fla.

(7.8 percent), and Clark, Nev. (6.7 percent). (See table 1.)

Employment declined in 56 counties from December 2004 to December 2005. The largest percentage

decline in employment was in Orleans County, La. (-39.3 percent), followed by the counties of Harrison,

Miss. (-20.2 percent), and Jefferson, La. (-17.0 percent). Employment losses in these three Gulf Coast

counties reflected the devastation caused by Hurricane Katrina. Stark, Ohio, had the next largest employment decline (-1.8 percent), followed by Saginaw, Mich. (-1.5 percent).

The largest gains in employment from December 2004 to December 2005 were recorded in the counties

of Maricopa, Ariz. (97,400), Los Angeles, Calif. (73,400), Harris, Texas (69,700), Clark, Nev. (56,200),

and New York, N.Y. (44,200). (See table A.)
3

New York, N.Y. $1,684 Orleans, La. $216 Orleans, La. 28.7

Fairfield, Conn. 1,496 Jefferson, La. 113 Harrison, Miss. 18.9

Santa Clara, Calif. 1,490 Harrison, Miss. 108 Jefferson, La. 16.2

Suffolk, Mass. 1,412 San Francisco, Calif. 96 York, Pa. 10.8

San Francisco, Calif. 1,378 New Castle, Del. 88 New Castle, Del. 9.0

San Mateo, Calif. 1,365 Fulton, Ga. 80 Fulton, Ga. 7.6

Washington, D.C. 1,354 York, Pa. 76 San Francisco, Calif. 7.5

Arlington, Va. 1,345 Marin, Calif. 71 Collier, Fla. 7.4

Somerset, N.J. 1,296 New York, N.Y. 69 Baltimore City, Md. 7.1

Fairfax, Va. 1,247 Baltimore City, Md. 66 Marin, Calif. 6.7

Lake, Fla. 6.7

U.S. $825 U.S. $12 U.S. 1.5

Average weekly wage in large counties

 Average weekly wage,

 fourth quarter 2005

 Percent growth in average

 weekly wage, fourth

 quarter 2004-05

 Growth in average weekly

 wage, fourth quarter 2004-05

Table B. Top 10 large counties ranked by fourth quarter 2005 average weekly wages, fourth

quarter 2004-05 growth in average weekly wages, and fourth quarter 2004-05 percent growth

in average weekly wages

The largest declines in employment occurred in the Katrina-affected counties of Orleans, La. (-96,800),

Jefferson, La. (-36,900), and Harrison, Miss. (-18,200), followed by the counties of Wayne, Mich. (-11,400),

and Oakland, Mich. (-5,700).

Hurricane Rita affected the Texas-Louisiana border counties. However, the damage was not as extensive as with Hurricane Katrina. Despite the effects of Hurricane Rita, Calcasieu County, La., posted a small

over-the-year gain in employment (1,125) in December 2005—1.3 percent. Prior to Hurricane Rita, Calcasieu had posted strong over-the-year employment growth in both June and September, 5.2 and 4.7 percent, respectively.

The evacuation, due to Hurricane Katrina, of a large part of the New Orleans area population to other

parts of the state likely led to changes in the employment situation in those counties in the third and fourth

quarters of 2005. For example, East Baton Rouge County, La., saw a significant employment gain of 5.6 percent over the year ending in December, which followed a year-over-year gain of 4.8 percent in September,

as contrasted with over-the-year growth of 2.0 percent in June 2005, 3 months before the hurricane. The

pattern of job growth was similar in Lafayette, La., which posted an over-the-year gain of 5.5 percent in

December and 6.2 percent in September, after a gain of only 2.6 percent in June 2005.

Large County Average Weekly Wages

The national average weekly wage in the fourth quarter of 2005 was $825. Average weekly wages

were higher than the national average in 105 of the largest 322 U.S. counties. New York County, N.Y.,

held the top position among the highest-paid large counties with an average weekly wage of $1,684.

Fairfield, Conn., was second with an average weekly wage of $1,496, followed by Santa Clara, Calif.

($1,490), Suffolk, Mass. ($1,412), and San Francisco, Calif. ($1,378). (See table B.)
4

There were 217 counties with an average weekly wage below the national average in the fourth quarter

of 2005. The lowest average weekly wages were reported in Cameron County, Texas ($506), followed by

the counties of Hidalgo, Texas ($512), Webb, Texas ($548), Yakima, Wash. ($552), and Horry, S.C.

($556). (See table 1.)

Over the year, the national average weekly wage rose by 1.5 percent. Among the largest counties,

Orleans, La., led the nation in growth in average weekly wages, with an increase of 28.7 percent from the

fourth quarter of 2004. Harrison, Miss., was second with 18.9 percent growth, followed by the counties

of Jefferson, La. (16.2 percent), York, Pa. (10.8 percent), and New Castle, Del. (9.0 percent). The high

average weekly wage growth rates for Orleans, Harrison, and Jefferson Counties were related to the disproportionate job and pay losses in lower-paid industries due to the impact of Hurricane Katrina.

Seventy-two counties experienced over-the-year declines in average weekly wages. Clayton, Ga., and

Williamson, Texas, had the largest decrease, -8.6 percent each, followed by the counties of Trumbull, Ohio

(-5.8 percent), Brown, Wis. (-5.1 percent), and Anoka, Minn. (-4.7 percent).

Ten Largest U.S. Counties

Of the 10 largest U.S. counties (based on 2004 annual average employment levels), all reported increases in employment from December 2004 to December 2005. Maricopa County, Ariz., experienced

the fastest growth in employment among the largest counties, with a 5.8 percent increase. Within Maricopa

County, employment rose in every industry group except natural resources and mining. The largest gains

were in construction (13.6 percent) and financial activities (7.3 percent). Harris, Texas, had the next largest

increase in employment, 3.8 percent, followed by King, Wash. (3.4 percent). The smallest employment gains

occurred in Cook County, Ill., and San Diego, Calif. (0.9 percent each), followed by Los Angeles, Calif.

(1.8 percent). (See table 2.)

All of the 10 largest U.S. counties saw over-the-year increases in average weekly wages. New York,

N.Y., had the fastest growth in wages among the 10 largest counties, increasing by 4.3 percent. Within

New York County, average weekly wages increased the most in natural resources and mining (175.4 percent), a very small sector. Increases in professional and business services (4.8 percent), however, had a

larger impact on the county’s wage growth. Harris, Texas, was second in wage growth, increasing by 3.8

percent, followed by Dallas County, Texas (3.4 percent). The smallest wage gains among the 10 largest

counties occurred in Los Angeles, Calif. (0.3 percent), followed by King, Wash. (1.1 percent), and Cook

County, Ill. (1.4 percent).

Largest County by State

Table 3 shows December 2005 employment and the 2005 fourth quarter average weekly wage in the

largest county in each state, which is based on 2004 annual average employment levels. (This table includes

two counties—Yellowstone, Mont., and Laramie, Wyo.—that have employment levels below 75,000.) The

employment levels in these counties in December 2005 ranged from approximately 4.2 million in Los Angeles

County, Calif., to 41,300 in Laramie County, Wyo. The highest average weekly wage of these counties was

in New York, N.Y. ($1,684), while the lowest average weekly wage was in Laramie, Wyo. ($647).
5

Regional Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages News Releases

Several BLS regional offices are issuing QCEW news releases targeted to local

data users. For links to these releases, see http://www.bls.gov/cew/cewregional.htm.

For More Information

For additional information about the quarterly employment and wages data, please read the Technical

Note or visit the QCEW Web site at http://www.bls.gov/cew/. Additional information about the QCEW

data also may be obtained by e-mailing QCEWinfo@bls.gov or by calling (202) 691-6567.
Technical Note

These data are the product of a federal-state cooperative

program, 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 summaries are a result of the administration of

state unemployment insurance programs that require most

employers to pay quarterly taxes based on the employment and

wages of workers covered by UI. Data for 2005 are preliminary

and subject to revision.

For purposes of this release, large counties are defined as

having employment levels of 75,000 or greater. In addition,

data for San Juan, Puerto Rico, are provided, but not used in

calculating U.S. averages, rankings, or in the analysis in the

text. Each year, these large counties are selected on the basis

of the preliminary annual average of employment for the

previous year. The 323 counties presented in this release were

derived using 2004 preliminary annual averages of

employment. All of the 318 counties that were published in the

2004 releases are included in the 2005 releases. The following

counties grew enough in 2004 to be included in the 2005

releases: Lake, Fla., Wyandotte, Kan., Harford, Md.,

Washington, Pa., and Whatcom, Wash. These counties will be

included in all 2005 quarterly releases. The counties in table

2 are selected and sorted each year based on the annual

average employment from the preceding year.

The preliminary QCEW data presented in this release may

differ from data released by the individual states. These

potential differences result from the states’ continuing receipt

Source Count of UI administrative records Count of longitudinally-linked UI Sample survey: 400,000 establishsubmitted by 8.6 million establish- administrative records submitted by ments

ments 6.7 million private-sector employers

Coverage UI and UCFE coverage, including UI coverage, excluding govern- Nonfarm wage and salary jobs:

all employers subject to state and ment, private households, and estab- UI coverage, excluding agriculture,

federal UI laws lishments with zero employment private households, and self-employed workers

Other employment, including railroads, religious organizations, and

other non-UI-covered jobs

Publication Quarterly Quarterly Monthly

frequency - 7 months after the end of each - 8 months after the end of each - Usually first Friday of following

quarter quarter month

Use of UI file Directly summarizes and pub- Links each new UI quarter to Uses UI file as a sampling frame

 lishes each new quarter of UI longitudinal database and directly and annually realigns (benchmarks)

 data summarizes gross job gains sample estimates to first quarter

 and losses

Principal Provides a quarterly and annual Provides quarterly employer dy- Provides current monthly estimates

products universe count of estab- namics data on establishment open- of employment, hours, and earnings

lishments, employment, and ings, closings, expansions, and con- at the MSA, state, and national levwages at the county, MSA, tractions at the national level by el by industry

state, and national levels by NAICS supersectors and by size

detailed industry of firm

Future expansions will include data

at the county, MSA, and state level

Principal uses Major uses include: Major uses include: Major uses include:

- Detailed locality data - Business cycle analysis - Principal national economic

- Periodic universe counts for - Analysis of employer dynamics indicator

benchmarking sample survey underlying economic expansions - Official time series for

estimates and contractions employment change measures

- Sample frame for BLS - Analysis of employment expan- - Input into other major economic

establishment surveys sion and contraction by size of indicators

firm

Program www.bls.gov/cew/ www.bls.gov/bdm/ www.bls.gov/ces/

Web sites

•

•

•

•

 •

•

•

• •

•

•

• •

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Summary of Major Differences between QCEW, BED, and CES Employment Measures

 QCEW BED CES

•

UI levels
of UI data over time and ongoing review and editing. The

individual states determine their data release timetables.

Differences between QCEW, BED, and CES employment measures

The Bureau publishes three different establishment-based

employment measures for any given quarter. Each of these

measures—QCEW, Business Employment Dynamics (BED),

and Current Employment Statistics (CES)—makes use of the

quarterly UI employment reports in producing data; however,

each measure has a somewhat different universe coverage,

estimation procedure, and publication product.

Differences in coverage and estimation methods can result

in somewhat different measures of employment change over

time. It is important to understand program differences and the

intended uses of the program products. (See table on the

previous page.) Additional information on each program can

be obtained from the program Web sites shown in the table on

the previous page.

Coverage

Employment and wage data for workers covered by state UI

laws are compiled from quarterly contribution reports submitted

to the SWAs by employers. For federal civilian workers

covered by the Unemployment Compensation for Federal

Employees (UCFE) program, employment and wage data are

compiled from quarterly reports that are sent to the appropriate

SWA by the specific federal agency. In addition to the

quarterly contribution reports, employers who operate multiple

establishments within a state complete a questionnaire, called

the “Multiple Worksite Report,” which provides detailed

information on the location and industry of each of their

establishments. The employment and wage data included in

this release are derived from microdata summaries of more than

8 million employer reports of employment and wages submitted

by states to the BLS. These reports are based on place of

employment rather than place of residence.

UI and UCFE coverage is broad and basically comparable

from state to state. In 2004, UI and UCFE programs covered

workers in 129.3 million jobs. The estimated 124.4 million

workers in these jobs (after adjustment for multiple jobholders)

represented 96.6 percent of civilian wage and salary employment. Covered workers received $5.088 trillion in pay,

representing 94.4 percent of the wage and salary component of

personal income and 43.4 percent of the gross domestic

product.

Major exclusions from UI coverage include self-employed

workers, most agricultural workers on small farms, all members

of the Armed Forces, elected officials in most states, most

employees of railroads, some domestic workers, most student

workers at schools, and employees of certain small nonprofit

organizations.

State and federal UI laws change periodically. These

changes may have an impact on the employment and wages

reported by employers covered under the UI program.

Coverage changes may affect the over-the-year comparisons

presented in this news release. Beginning with the first quarter

of 2005, Oregon implemented a change in their state UI laws.

This change extended UI coverage to providers of home care

for the elderly. These providers are now considered state

workers for purposes of UI benefits.

Concepts and methodology

Monthly employment is based on the number of workers

who worked during or received pay for the pay period including

the 12th of the month. With few exceptions, all employees of

covered firms are reported, including production and sales

workers, corporation officials, executives, supervisory

personnel, and clerical workers. Workers on paid vacations

and part-time workers also are included.

Average weekly wage values are calculated by dividing

quarterly total wages by the average of the three monthly

employment levels (all employees, as described above) and

dividing the result by 13, for the 13 weeks in the quarter. These

calculations are made using unrounded employment and wage

values. The average wage values that can be calculated using

rounded data from the BLS database may differ from the

averages reported. Included in the quarterly wage data are

non-wage cash payments such as bonuses, the cash value of

meals and lodging when supplied, tips and other gratuities,

and, in some states, employer contributions to certain deferred

compensation plans such as 401(k) plans and stock options.

Over-the-year comparisons of average weekly wages may

reflect fluctuations in average monthly employment and/or total

quarterly wages between the current quarter and prior year

levels.

Average weekly wages are affected by the ratio of full-time to

part-time workers as well as the number of individuals in highpaying and low-paying occupations and the incidence of pay

periods within a quarter. For instance, the average weekly wage

of the work force could increase significantly when there is a

large decline in the number of employees that had been receiving

below-average wages. Wages may include payments to workers

not present in the employment counts because they did not work

during the pay period including the 12th of the month. When

comparing average weekly wage levels between industries,

states, or quarters, these factors should be taken into

consideration.

Federal government pay levels are subject to periodic,

sometimes large, fluctuations due to a calendar effect that

consists of some quarters having more pay periods than others.

Most federal employees are paid on a biweekly pay schedule. As

a result of this schedule, in some quarters, federal wages contain

payments for six pay periods, while in other quarters their wages

include payments for seven pay periods. Over-the-year

comparisons of average weekly wages may reflect this calendar

effect. Higher growth in average weekly wages may be attributed,

in part, to a comparison of quarterly wages for the current year,

which include seven pay periods, with year-ago wages that

reflect only six pay periods. An opposite effect will occur when
wages in the current period, which contain six pay periods, are

compared with year-ago wages that include seven pay periods.

The effect on over-the-year pay comparisons can be pronounced

in federal government due to the uniform nature of federal payroll

processing. This pattern may exist in private sector pay, however,

because there are more pay period types (weekly, biweekly,

semimonthly, monthly) it is less pronounced. The effect is most

visible in counties with large concentrations of federal employment.

In order to ensure the highest possible quality of

data, states verify with employers and update, if necessary, the

industry, location, and ownership classification of all

establishments on a 3-year cycle. Changes in establishment

classification codes resulting from this process are introduced

with the data reported for the first quarter of the year. Changes

resulting from improved employer reporting also are introduced

in the first quarter.

QCEW data are not designed as a time series. QCEW data are

simply the sums of individual establishment records and reflect

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. For example,

economic change would come from a firm relocating into the

county; administrative change would come from a company

correcting its county designation.

The over-the-year changes of employment and wages

presented in this release have been adjusted to account for most

of the administrative corrections made to the underlying

establishment reports. This is done by modifying the prior-year

levels used to calculate the over-the-year changes. Percent

changes are calculated using an adjusted version of the final

2004 quarterly data as the base data. The adjusted prior-year

levels used to calculate the over-the-year percent change in

employment and wages are not published. These adjusted prioryear levels do not match the unadjusted data maintained on the

BLS Web site. Over-the-year change calculations based on data

from the Web site, or from data published in prior BLS news

releases, may differ substantially from the over-the-year changes

presented in this news release.

The adjusted data used to calculate the over-the-year change

measures presented in this release account for most of the

administrative changes—those occurring when employers

update the industry, location, and ownership information of their

establishments. The most common adjustments for administrative

change are the result of updated information about the county

location of individual establishments. Included in these

adjustments are administrative changes involving the

classification of establishments that were previously reported in

the unknown or statewide county or unknown industry

categories. The adjusted data do not account for administrative

changes caused by multi-unit employers who start reporting for

each individual establishment rather than as a single entity.

The adjusted data used to calculate the over-the-year change

measures presented in any County Employment and Wages

news release are valid for comparisons between the starting and

ending points (a 12-month period) used in that particular release.

Comparisons may not be valid for any time period other than the

one featured in a release even if the changes were calculated

using adjusted data.

County definitions are assigned according to Federal

Information Processing Standards Publications (FIPS PUBS)

as issued by the National Institute of Standards and

Technology, after approval by the Secretary of Commerce

pursuant to Section 5131 of the Information Technology

Management Reform Act of 1996 and the Computer Security

Act of 1987, Public Law 104-106. Areas shown as counties

include those designated as independent cities in some

jurisdictions and, in Alaska, those designated as census

areas where counties have not been created. County data also

are presented for the New England states for comparative

purposes even though townships are the more common

designation used in New England (and New Jersey). The

regions referred to in this release are defined as census

regions.

Additional statistics and other information

An annual bulletin, Employment and Wages, features

comprehensive information by detailed industry on establishments, employment, and wages for the nation and all

states. The 2004 edition of this bulletin contains selected data

produced by Business Employment Dynamics (BED) on job

gains and losses, as well as selected data from the fourth

quarter 2004 version of this news release. Employment and

Wages Annual Averages, 2004 is now available for sale from

the United States Government Printing Office, Superintendent

of Documents, P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250,

telephone 866-512-1800, outside of Washington, D.C. Within

Washington, D.C., the telephone number is 202-512-1800. The

fax number is 202-512-2104. Also, the 2004 bulletin is available

in a portable document format (PDF) on the BLS Web site at

http://www.bls.gov/cew/cewbultn04.htm.

News releases on quarterly measures of gross job flows also

are available upon request from the Division of Administrative

Statistics and Labor Turnover (Business Employment Dynamics), telephone 202-691-6467; (http://www.bls.gov/bdm/);

(e-mail: BDMInfo@bls.gov).

Information in this release will be made available to

sensory impaired individuals upon request. Voice phone:

202-691-5200; TDD message referral phone number:

1-800-877-8339.
Table 1. Covered1 establishments, employment, and wages in the 323 largest counties,

fourth quarter 20052

County3

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2005

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage5

December

2005

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2004-054

Ranking by

percent

change

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2004-054

Ranking by

percent

change

United States6 .................... 8,690.4 133,834.6 1.7 - $825 1.5 - 

Jefferson, AL ...................... 18.9 375.8 0.8 202 836 0.5 221

Madison, AL ....................... 8.3 172.2 2.8 81 844 -0.4 260

Mobile, AL .......................... 9.9 171.1 3.4 61 712 6.6 12

Montgomery, AL ................ 6.7 138.5 4.0 49 725 0.6 209

Tuscaloosa, AL .................. 4.3 82.9 4.2 43 740 3.9 32

Anchorage Borough, AK .... 7.9 144.0 1.1 170 837 0.8 189

Maricopa, AZ ..................... 86.1 1,784.8 5.8 8 818 2.1 94

Pima, AZ ............................ 18.7 364.2 3.1 70 717 2.4 80

Benton, AR ........................ 4.9 91.5 4.7 26 743 2.3 87

Pulaski, AR ........................ 13.7 248.7 1.2 164 749 -1.1 284

Washington, AR ................. 5.4 91.9 4.4 29 685 2.4 80

Alameda, CA ...................... 48.0 683.1 0.5 222 1,052 -0.5 264

Contra Costa, CA ............... 27.5 344.5 -0.4 282 1,010 0.0 248

Fresno, CA ......................... 29.1 345.3 4.0 49 662 1.5 128

Kern, CA ............................ 16.7 275.1 8.6 2 683 -0.1 249

Los Angeles, CA ................ 378.7 4,196.5 1.8 128 966 0.3 234

Marin, CA ........................... 11.6 111.4 -0.1 260 1,133 6.7 10

Monterey, CA ..................... 11.9 150.9 0.2 235 720 2.9 59

Orange, CA ........................ 91.7 1,507.7 1.9 123 964 2.6 68

Placer, CA .......................... 9.9 134.7 2.4 99 810 1.8 107

Riverside, CA ..................... 40.7 625.2 4.3 35 683 0.9 179

Sacramento, CA ................ 48.6 629.0 2.4 99 894 3.5 42

San Bernardino, CA ........... 44.0 654.3 4.4 29 718 0.8 189

San Diego, CA ................... 88.9 1,315.8 0.9 192 890 1.8 107

San Francisco, CA ............. 43.5 538.1 1.9 123 1,378 7.5 7

San Joaquin, CA ................ 16.4 218.5 1.0 180 718 1.6 119

San Luis Obispo, CA ......... 8.7 100.4 1.9 123 690 1.5 128

San Mateo, CA .................. 22.7 333.1 -0.4 282 1,365 3.5 42

Santa Barbara, CA ............. 13.2 179.0 3.3 65 798 1.4 138

Santa Clara, CA ................. 53.7 877.2 1.7 134 1,490 1.8 107

Santa Cruz, CA .................. 8.5 91.9 0.1 241 738 -4.4 314

Solano, CA ......................... 9.6 131.2 2.7 86 765 1.5 128

Sonoma, CA ...................... 17.4 191.4 0.4 225 821 2.8 61

Stanislaus, CA ................... 13.5 172.6 2.5 95 691 3.1 53

Tulare, CA .......................... 8.6 140.6 4.7 26 583 1.6 119

Ventura, CA ....................... 20.9 318.3 2.7 86 892 -1.5 288

Yolo, CA ............................. 5.3 98.4 1.8 128 729 -4.3 313

Adams, CO ........................ 9.0 150.5 4.0 49 776 -0.4 260

Arapahoe, CO .................... 19.3 274.7 1.4 152 974 -0.9 280

Boulder, CO ....................... 12.3 156.5 1.3 156 971 1.8 107

Denver, CO ........................ 24.9 431.6 1.8 128 1,003 0.9 179

El Paso, CO ....................... 16.7 244.3 2.3 104 750 1.4 138

Jefferson, CO ..................... 18.5 209.0 1.1 170 817 -0.8 275

Larimer, CO ....................... 9.8 125.1 1.6 140 755 3.0 55

Fairfield, CT ....................... 32.3 420.6 0.9 192 1,496 4.3 25

Hartford, CT ....................... 24.6 493.5 1.3 156 1,033 1.5 128

New Haven, CT ................. 22.1 366.4 -0.4 282 895 1.0 170

New London, CT ................ 6.7 130.1 0.1 241 842 -0.7 271

New Castle, DE ................. 19.5 286.6 0.0 251 1,068 9.0 5

Washington, DC ................. 30.9 673.5 1.0 180 1,354 4.9 17

See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered1 establishments, employment, and wages in the 323 largest counties,

fourth quarter 20052 — Continued

County3

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2005

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage5

December

2005

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2004-054

Ranking by

percent

change

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2004-054

Ranking by

percent

change

Alachua, FL ........................ 6.3 125.1 (7) - $656 (7) - 

Brevard, FL ........................ 14.0 207.3 5.0 18 777 0.5 221

Broward, FL ....................... 62.3 752.1 4.3 35 813 1.0 170

Collier, FL .......................... 12.0 136.8 5.6 10 801 7.4 8

Duval, FL ........................... 24.9 462.3 4.2 43 816 1.2 154

Escambia, FL ..................... 7.7 128.8 2.4 99 675 3.7 36

Hillsborough, FL ................. 35.1 643.8 2.7 86 781 0.6 209

Lake, FL ............................. 6.5 83.4 6.5 7 669 6.7 10

Lee, FL ............................... 17.9 223.6 9.2 1 733 2.8 61

Leon, FL ............................. 7.8 147.6 -0.7 297 708 0.9 179

Manatee, FL ....................... 8.3 130.8 1.1 170 642 2.4 80

Marion, FL .......................... 7.6 101.5 (7) - 613 1.7 114

Miami-Dade, FL ................. 84.4 1,022.1 2.1 113 833 1.5 128

Okaloosa, FL ..................... 6.1 83.6 (7) - 666 (7) - 

Orange, FL ......................... 33.4 675.4 4.5 28 766 0.9 179

Palm Beach, FL ................. 47.9 565.1 3.1 70 826 0.9 179

Pasco, FL ........................... 8.8 96.5 7.9 3 600 -0.2 251

Pinellas, FL ........................ 30.9 446.6 0.6 216 730 1.1 162

Polk, FL .............................. 12.0 211.8 5.0 18 660 2.6 68

Sarasota, FL ...................... 14.9 164.3 2.6 91 740 4.2 27

Seminole, FL ...................... 13.8 174.3 7.8 4 777 3.7 36

Volusia, FL ......................... 13.5 166.0 4.8 22 611 -1.6 291

Bibb, GA ............................ 4.8 86.6 -1.3 308 682 1.8 107

Chatham, GA ..................... 7.3 132.6 0.6 216 718 4.7 19

Clayton, GA ....................... 4.4 111.0 3.0 77 758 -8.6 319

Cobb, GA ........................... 20.3 318.9 4.2 43 885 0.6 209

De Kalb, GA ....................... 17.0 295.2 0.5 222 864 -0.3 253

Fulton, GA .......................... 38.3 757.1 1.7 134 1,139 7.6 6

Gwinnett, GA ..................... 22.5 323.5 3.4 61 862 0.9 179

Muscogee, GA ................... 4.8 98.7 0.7 210 647 3.7 36

Richmond, GA ................... 4.9 107.0 1.2 164 677 0.4 228

Honolulu, HI ....................... 23.9 452.5 2.3 104 763 0.9 179

Ada, ID ............................... 14.2 203.5 5.4 14 751 1.2 154

Champaign, IL ................... 4.0 91.6 0.8 202 679 0.6 209

Cook, IL ............................. 132.3 2,547.4 0.9 192 1,000 1.4 138

Du Page, IL ........................ 34.0 591.4 0.6 216 967 -0.7 271

Kane, IL ............................. 11.8 207.6 1.6 140 776 1.7 114

Lake, IL .............................. 19.8 325.3 0.0 251 1,025 -0.6 267

McHenry, IL ....................... 7.9 98.9 2.2 109 746 1.8 107

McLean, IL ......................... 3.5 85.6 2.5 95 761 -4.4 314

Madison, IL ........................ 5.8 93.8 -0.3 273 718 3.3 49

Peoria, IL ........................... 4.6 100.9 1.2 164 800 1.4 138

Rock Island, IL ................... 3.4 79.4 1.6 140 908 0.6 209

St. Clair, IL ......................... 5.2 95.0 1.0 180 664 2.8 61

Sangamon, IL .................... 5.2 131.5 0.7 210 788 2.1 94

Will, IL ................................ 11.9 173.7 4.3 35 773 0.5 221

Winnebago, IL .................... 6.8 137.1 -1.0 302 707 1.0 170

Allen, IN ............................. 8.8 183.7 1.2 164 704 -0.8 275

Elkhart, IN .......................... 4.8 127.8 3.1 70 730 2.1 94

Hamilton, IN ....................... 6.8 98.0 4.8 22 823 -2.0 298

See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered1 establishments, employment, and wages in the 323 largest counties,

fourth quarter 20052 — Continued

County3

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2005

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage5

December

2005

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2004-054

Ranking by

percent

change

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2004-054

Ranking by

percent

change

Lake, IN ............................. 10.0 196.1 0.9 192 $716 -2.3 301

Marion, IN .......................... 23.5 585.3 0.1 241 839 0.8 189

St. Joseph, IN .................... 6.0 126.8 -0.1 260 689 0.6 209

Vanderburgh, IN ................ 4.8 110.1 1.5 145 682 -0.3 253

Linn, IA ............................... 6.1 119.6 0.8 202 802 1.5 128

Polk, IA .............................. 14.2 267.6 1.7 134 828 1.2 154

Scott, IA ............................. 5.1 89.7 2.3 104 684 0.1 239

Johnson, KS ...................... 19.6 306.7 2.3 104 846 0.5 221

Sedgwick, KS ..................... 12.0 247.9 0.8 202 746 2.6 68

Shawnee, KS ..................... 4.8 94.4 -0.6 291 691 1.0 170

Wyandotte, KS ................... 3.2 78.1 1.4 152 782 -0.5 264

Fayette, KY ........................ 8.9 172.3 1.7 134 757 1.3 147

Jefferson, KY ..................... 22.1 429.5 0.8 202 798 -1.5 288

Caddo, LA .......................... 7.2 126.2 3.2 69 689 1.6 119

Calcasieu, LA ..................... 4.8 84.7 1.3 156 697 4.7 19

East Baton Rouge, LA ....... 13.5 262.2 5.6 10 711 3.5 42

Jefferson, LA ...................... 14.3 179.5 -17.0 313 812 16.2 3

Lafayette, LA ...................... 8.0 127.7 5.5 12 754 4.7 19

Orleans, LA ........................ 12.6 149.5 -39.3 315 968 28.7 1

Cumberland, ME ................ 11.8 173.7 -0.3 273 749 -2.3 301

Anne Arundel, MD ............. 14.2 227.0 2.0 116 853 2.4 80

Baltimore, MD .................... 21.3 378.9 1.5 145 872 1.3 147

Frederick, MD .................... 5.8 92.5 0.3 233 779 1.6 119

Harford, MD ....................... 5.5 82.7 2.2 109 742 -0.8 275

Howard, MD ....................... 8.3 141.3 1.7 134 962 0.1 239

Montgomery, MD ............... 32.5 467.9 1.6 140 1,109 4.0 31

Prince Georges, MD .......... 15.5 318.2 -0.1 260 897 3.8 33

Baltimore City, MD ............. 14.0 353.0 -0.7 297 992 7.1 9

Barnstable, MA .................. 9.2 88.4 0.0 251 730 0.8 189

Bristol, MA ......................... 15.5 223.1 0.1 241 737 1.4 138

Essex, MA .......................... 20.5 298.4 0.8 202 885 2.3 87

Hampden, MA .................... 14.2 201.3 -0.4 282 758 1.2 154

Middlesex, MA ................... 47.3 803.7 1.3 156 1,158 1.0 170

Norfolk, MA ........................ 21.6 323.7 0.9 192 1,013 0.6 209

Plymouth, MA .................... 13.7 178.6 0.7 210 804 0.2 235

Suffolk, MA ........................ 21.7 572.6 1.3 156 1,412 3.7 36

Worcester, MA ................... 20.5 322.1 0.1 241 831 0.5 221

Genesee, MI ...................... 8.3 151.1 (7) - 771 -3.3 309

Ingham, MI ......................... 7.1 162.3 (7) - 789 2.9 59

Kalamazoo, MI ................... 5.5 117.8 1.0 180 741 0.8 189

Kent, MI ............................. 14.5 346.1 1.8 128 770 -1.2 286

Macomb, MI ....................... 18.1 332.1 0.4 225 890 -0.6 267

Oakland, MI ....................... 40.5 721.7 -0.8 299 1,018 0.8 189

Ottawa, MI ......................... 5.8 112.6 1.1 170 744 0.8 189

Saginaw, MI ....................... 4.5 89.4 -1.5 311 747 -0.8 275

Washtenaw, MI .................. 8.1 197.0 -1.1 304 915 1.1 162

Wayne, MI .......................... 34.0 793.6 -1.4 309 951 0.2 235

Anoka, MN ......................... 8.0 116.7 1.8 128 774 -4.7 316

Dakota, MN ........................ 10.6 174.2 1.1 170 807 -1.8 295

Hennepin, MN .................... 42.9 850.6 1.3 156 1,013 -3.4 310

See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered1 establishments, employment, and wages in the 323 largest counties,

fourth quarter 20052 — Continued

County3

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2005

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage5

December

2005

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2004-054

Ranking by

percent

change

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2004-054

Ranking by

percent

change

Olmsted, MN ...................... 3.6 89.4 1.2 164 $811 1.0 170

Ramsey, MN ...................... 15.8 334.5 1.1 170 884 -3.5 311

St. Louis, MN ..................... 6.0 96.0 1.3 156 674 -2.3 301

Stearns, MN ....................... 4.5 79.6 1.9 123 640 -3.2 308

Harrison, MS ...................... 4.5 72.2 -20.2 314 680 18.9 2

Hinds, MS .......................... 6.5 128.6 -0.6 291 736 3.2 51

Boone, MO ......................... 4.4 81.7 3.0 77 626 -0.3 253

Clay, MO ............................ 5.0 88.0 1.5 145 755 0.1 239

Greene, MO ....................... 8.1 153.3 3.5 60 626 1.5 128

Jackson, MO ...................... 18.8 367.3 0.7 210 839 2.6 68

St. Charles, MO ................. 7.7 119.1 2.0 116 706 1.1 162

St. Louis, MO ..................... 34.0 627.5 0.3 233 887 3.0 55

St. Louis City, MO .............. 8.1 223.2 0.5 222 897 1.6 119

Douglas, NE ....................... 15.4 314.7 1.0 180 789 4.2 27

Lancaster, NE .................... 7.8 154.5 0.9 192 662 1.1 162

Clark, NV ........................... 43.3 895.6 6.7 5 771 0.1 239

Washoe, NV ....................... 13.5 217.6 2.9 79 782 1.7 114

Hillsborough, NH ................ 12.3 200.3 1.0 180 949 1.9 103

Rockingham, NH ................ 10.9 138.6 1.1 170 860 -1.5 288

Atlantic, NJ ......................... 6.7 145.5 -0.3 273 749 0.7 203

Bergen, NJ ......................... 34.3 456.2 0.1 241 1,072 0.5 221

Burlington, NJ .................... 11.3 203.7 0.1 241 878 1.3 147

Camden, NJ ....................... 13.5 212.9 -0.2 269 892 3.1 53

Essex, NJ ........................... 21.4 364.8 0.0 251 1,069 -1.7 293

Gloucester, NJ ................... 6.3 106.9 3.3 65 766 0.9 179

Hudson, NJ ........................ 14.1 239.0 -0.2 269 1,068 0.8 189

Mercer, NJ ......................... 10.9 227.6 2.4 99 1,085 1.9 103

Middlesex, NJ .................... 20.9 396.8 -0.3 273 1,043 -0.6 267

Monmouth, NJ ................... 20.3 258.1 0.4 225 925 1.2 154

Morris, NJ .......................... 17.9 288.0 -0.1 260 1,239 1.7 114

Ocean, NJ .......................... 11.7 146.9 2.1 113 745 0.7 203

Passaic, NJ ........................ 12.5 180.2 0.9 192 893 -0.4 260

Somerset, NJ ..................... 10.1 174.8 3.3 65 1,296 4.5 22

Union, NJ ........................... 14.8 229.5 (7) - 1,078 0.7 203

Bernalillo, NM .................... 16.7 326.5 2.3 104 731 0.4 228

Albany, NY ......................... 9.7 231.6 -0.5 288 826 0.6 209

Bronx, NY .......................... 15.7 224.5 1.7 134 780 0.9 179

Broome, NY ....................... 4.5 96.1 -0.1 260 631 1.1 162

Dutchess, NY ..................... 8.1 119.4 -0.9 300 823 1.6 119

Erie, NY ............................. 23.3 461.3 -1.0 302 708 -0.7 271

Kings, NY ........................... 43.0 464.1 1.1 170 741 0.8 189

Monroe, NY ........................ 17.7 390.5 0.8 202 785 0.8 189

Nassau, NY ........................ 51.7 613.4 0.1 241 953 3.0 55

New York, NY .................... 114.8 2,310.7 2.0 116 1,684 4.3 25

Oneida, NY ........................ 5.3 110.0 (7) - 633 0.6 209

Onondaga, NY ................... 12.7 253.1 0.2 235 770 0.8 189

Orange, NY ........................ 9.6 130.9 -0.1 260 708 0.9 179

Queens, NY ....................... 41.1 487.0 1.0 180 822 0.7 203

Richmond, NY .................... 8.3 91.6 -0.3 273 738 0.4 228

Rockland, NY ..................... 9.5 115.0 -0.1 260 873 1.3 147

See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered1 establishments, employment, and wages in the 323 largest counties,

fourth quarter 20052 — Continued

County3

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2005

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage5

December

2005

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2004-054

Ranking by

percent

change

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2004-054

Ranking by

percent

change

Suffolk, NY ......................... 48.8 617.5 0.2 235 $894 1.5 128

Westchester, NY ................ 35.9 420.7 -0.3 273 1,173 5.4 14

Buncombe, NC .................. 7.2 110.6 0.4 225 658 1.2 154

Catawba, NC ..................... 4.4 87.6 -0.6 291 638 -0.3 253

Cumberland, NC ................ 5.8 116.6 1.6 140 620 2.5 75

Durham, NC ....................... 6.3 172.3 1.5 145 1,015 -1.2 286

Forsyth, NC ........................ 8.6 184.0 2.2 109 754 -2.2 300

Guilford, NC ....................... 13.7 275.5 1.1 170 743 0.4 228

Mecklenburg, NC ............... 28.2 533.2 2.5 95 932 -1.6 291

New Hanover, NC .............. 6.7 98.5 5.1 17 683 4.4 23

Wake, NC .......................... 24.4 416.9 4.3 35 828 1.5 128

Cass, ND ........................... 5.8 92.9 2.6 91 691 0.1 239

Butler, OH .......................... 7.0 139.5 2.2 109 734 -0.9 280

Cuyahoga, OH ................... 38.0 756.8 -0.6 291 855 -0.6 267

Franklin, OH ....................... 29.1 693.9 0.4 225 806 0.1 239

Hamilton, OH ..................... 24.5 547.2 -0.1 260 895 2.8 61

Lake, OH ............................ 6.9 100.8 0.4 225 692 -0.1 249

Lorain, OH ......................... 6.2 101.8 -1.1 304 702 -1.8 295

Lucas, OH .......................... 10.9 229.2 -0.2 269 730 -2.0 298

Mahoning, OH .................... 6.4 107.3 0.7 210 624 0.2 235

Montgomery, OH ............... 13.1 280.8 -1.4 309 777 -0.5 264

Stark, OH ........................... 9.2 166.5 -1.8 312 649 -0.3 253

Summit, OH ....................... 14.9 274.6 1.0 180 767 -2.5 305

Trumbull, OH ..................... 4.8 84.3 -0.5 288 704 -5.8 318

Oklahoma, OK ................... 22.6 420.6 1.4 152 713 2.3 87

Tulsa, OK ........................... 18.7 339.4 3.9 52 744 1.6 119

Clackamas, OR .................. 12.2 147.4 4.4 29 761 1.2 154

Jackson, OR ...................... 6.5 85.5 3.9 52 602 1.2 154

Lane, OR ........................... 10.7 149.7 4.4 29 656 2.2 90

Marion, OR ........................ 9.0 134.6 3.4 61 638 1.4 138

Multnomah, OR .................. 26.4 438.8 2.5 95 822 1.0 170

Washington, OR ................ 15.4 242.7 4.3 35 904 -0.8 275

Allegheny, PA .................... 34.8 687.7 0.0 251 858 0.8 189

Berks, PA ........................... 9.0 167.4 1.3 156 725 -1.0 283

Bucks, PA .......................... 19.7 264.5 1.4 152 807 0.7 203

Chester, PA ....................... 15.0 235.3 1.9 123 1,062 0.5 221

Cumberland, PA ................ 5.8 125.9 -0.6 291 754 0.1 239

Dauphin, PA ....................... 7.1 177.9 0.8 202 785 -3.1 307

Delaware, PA ..................... 13.7 211.7 0.0 251 892 2.2 90

Erie, PA .............................. 7.1 127.9 -0.3 273 646 0.2 235

Lackawanna, PA ................ 5.7 101.3 0.9 192 648 1.7 114

Lancaster, PA .................... 12.0 229.8 0.6 216 712 0.1 239

Lehigh, PA ......................... 8.2 176.2 0.7 210 820 -0.7 271

Luzerne, PA ....................... 7.9 142.9 -0.2 269 650 0.8 189

Montgomery, PA ................ 27.7 491.3 1.5 145 1,024 1.1 162

Northampton, PA ............... 6.2 95.2 1.5 145 723 0.4 228

Philadelphia, PA ................ 29.0 640.6 0.2 235 962 -0.9 280

Washington, PA ................. 5.3 75.9 0.0 251 700 1.0 170

Westmoreland, PA ............. 9.5 139.4 0.4 225 635 -1.9 297

York, PA ............................. 8.8 175.5 2.0 116 781 10.8 4

See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered1 establishments, employment, and wages in the 323 largest counties,

fourth quarter 20052 — Continued

County3

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2005

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage5

December

2005

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2004-054

Ranking by

percent

change

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2004-054

Ranking by

percent

change

Kent, RI .............................. 5.7 83.5 0.0 251 $735 1.4 138

Providence, RI ................... 18.2 289.9 0.1 241 813 3.4 46

Charleston, SC .................. 12.6 199.5 1.8 128 703 5.2 16

Greenville, SC .................... 12.7 229.8 1.0 180 725 0.8 189

Horry, SC ........................... 8.6 105.6 3.7 57 556 -0.2 251

Lexington, SC .................... 5.9 90.2 2.0 116 628 -1.1 284

Richland, SC ...................... 9.8 210.1 0.0 251 696 -0.3 253

Spartanburg, SC ................ 6.4 116.1 -1.1 304 700 1.3 147

Minnehaha, SD .................. 6.1 113.0 3.1 70 678 2.4 80

Davidson, TN ..................... 18.0 453.2 2.9 79 835 0.7 203

Hamilton, TN ...................... 8.4 194.6 0.1 241 724 2.5 75

Knox, TN ............................ 10.5 222.2 1.0 180 729 3.0 55

Rutherford, TN ................... 3.8 97.4 3.6 59 730 -2.4 304

Shelby, TN ......................... 19.8 509.2 0.9 192 848 1.8 107

Bell, TX .............................. 4.3 94.9 2.7 86 616 2.7 66

Bexar, TX ........................... 30.5 687.8 4.2 43 744 3.6 40

Brazoria, TX ....................... 4.3 81.8 4.4 29 757 2.2 90

Brazos, TX ......................... 3.6 83.4 4.4 29 588 2.6 68

Cameron, TX ..................... 6.2 118.5 2.0 116 506 1.4 138

Collin, TX ........................... 14.6 255.2 5.4 14 964 1.4 138

Dallas, TX .......................... 66.5 1,457.5 2.8 81 1,033 3.4 46

Denton, TX ......................... 9.4 154.3 5.3 16 725 2.0 99

El Paso, TX ........................ 12.9 263.7 2.8 81 575 -0.3 253

Fort Bend, TX .................... 7.3 114.1 4.8 22 854 2.2 90

Galveston, TX .................... 4.9 89.2 3.1 70 723 4.9 17

Harris, TX ........................... 91.1 1,919.8 3.8 55 1,014 3.8 33

Hidalgo, TX ........................ 9.8 204.3 4.2 43 512 1.6 119

Jefferson, TX ..................... 5.8 120.5 4.3 35 815 5.4 14

Lubbock, TX ....................... 6.5 121.3 2.1 113 619 2.5 75

McLennan, TX ................... 4.8 102.7 1.1 170 647 0.6 209

Montgomery, TX ................ 7.1 107.4 6.6 6 781 4.4 23

Nueces, TX ........................ 8.1 148.3 2.0 116 687 1.5 128

Potter, TX ........................... 3.7 71.9 -0.3 273 667 3.3 49

Smith, TX ........................... 5.0 91.7 2.8 81 723 3.6 40

Tarrant, TX ......................... 34.9 730.8 2.8 81 827 1.6 119

Travis, TX .......................... 25.7 538.9 3.7 57 935 0.6 209

Webb, TX ........................... 4.5 84.3 5.7 9 548 1.9 103

Williamson, TX ................... 6.0 104.4 5.5 12 807 -8.6 319

Davis, UT ........................... 6.9 97.8 3.8 55 670 4.2 27

Salt Lake, UT ..................... 37.7 558.0 4.3 35 769 3.4 46

Utah, UT ............................ 12.3 161.9 4.9 20 629 2.1 94

Weber, UT ......................... 5.6 89.5 1.0 180 607 2.4 80

Chittenden, VT ................... 5.8 95.8 -1.1 304 789 1.0 170

Arlington, VA ...................... 7.3 156.5 -0.1 260 1,345 4.2 27

Chesterfield, VA ................. 6.9 117.7 2.6 91 753 1.3 147

Fairfax, VA ......................... 31.3 578.9 3.1 70 1,247 0.4 228

Henrico, VA ........................ 8.6 174.2 0.4 225 887 2.8 61

Loudoun, VA ...................... 7.2 124.5 4.1 48 1,059 2.7 66

Prince William, VA ............. 6.4 103.6 4.3 35 749 2.6 68

Alexandria City, VA ............ 5.9 94.9 0.2 235 1,077 2.4 80

See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered1 establishments, employment, and wages in the 323 largest counties,

fourth quarter 20052 — Continued

County3

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2005

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage5

December

2005

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2004-054

Ranking by

percent

change

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2004-054

Ranking by

percent

change

Chesapeake City, VA ......... 5.2 97.6 2.6 91 $660 2.6 68

Newport News City, VA ..... 3.9 99.5 0.6 216 737 -0.4 260

Norfolk City, VA ................. 5.7 144.5 -0.9 300 807 3.5 42

Richmond City, VA ............. 7.0 162.0 1.2 164 940 3.2 51

Virginia Beach City, VA ...... 11.1 178.0 1.5 145 658 2.0 99

Clark, WA ........................... 11.0 128.8 4.9 20 734 2.5 75

King, WA ............................ 76.3 1,145.1 3.4 61 985 1.1 162

Kitsap, WA ......................... 6.4 83.7 2.4 99 733 6.4 13

Pierce, WA ......................... 19.8 264.3 3.3 65 711 2.0 99

Snohomish, WA ................. 16.5 227.5 4.8 22 815 3.8 33

Spokane, WA ..................... 14.7 201.3 2.7 86 643 1.1 162

Thurston, WA ..................... 6.4 95.1 3.1 70 709 1.9 103

Whatcom, WA .................... 6.6 79.9 3.9 52 613 2.5 75

Yakima, WA ....................... 7.8 87.2 -0.5 288 552 2.0 99

Kanawha, WV .................... 6.1 108.2 -0.6 291 699 1.3 147

Brown, WI .......................... 6.8 149.2 0.9 192 732 -5.1 317

Dane, WI ............................ 14.2 302.8 1.0 180 756 -1.7 293

Milwaukee, WI ................... 21.9 497.8 -0.4 282 833 0.6 209

Outagamie, WI ................... 5.0 101.2 -0.3 273 722 2.1 94

Racine, WI ......................... 4.3 76.6 -0.4 282 783 -3.9 312

Waukesha, WI ................... 13.5 233.2 0.2 235 826 0.1 239

Winnebago, WI .................. 3.9 88.5 0.6 216 776 -2.9 306

San Juan, PR ..................... 14.5 330.1 -2.0 (8) 549 3.0 (8) 

1 Includes workers covered by Unemployment Insurance (UI) and Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees (UCFE) programs.

These 322 U.S. counties comprise 70.8 percent of the total covered workers in the U.S. 2 Data are preliminary. 3 Includes areas not officially designated as counties. See Technical Note. 4 Percent changes were computed from quarterly employment and pay data adjusted for noneconomic county reclassifications. See Technical

Note. 5 Average weekly wages were calculated using unrounded data. 6 Totals for the United States do not include data for Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands. 7 Data do not meet BLS or State agency disclosure standards. 8 This county was not included in the U.S. rankings.
Table 2. Covered1 establishments, employment, and wages in the ten largest counties,

fourth quarter 20052

County by NAICS supersector

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2005

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage4

December

2005

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2004-053

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2004-053

United States5 .................................................... 8,690.4 133,834.6 1.7 $825 1.5

Private industry .............................................. 8,413.4 112,417.0 1.9 829 1.6

Natural resources and mining .................... 123.4 1,650.4 3.7 802 5.7

Construction ............................................... 857.7 7,396.7 5.4 892 3.2

Manufacturing ............................................ 365.1 14,199.1 -0.6 991 0.6

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 1,876.6 26,693.7 1.4 707 0.4

Information ................................................. 142.6 3,077.0 -0.6 1,246 0.5

Financial activities ...................................... 825.4 8,155.9 2.1 1,280 3.3

Professional and business services ........... 1,390.3 17,256.9 3.5 1,039 2.1

Education and health services ................... 775.0 16,754.9 2.3 782 1.0

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 697.1 12,547.1 1.4 353 2.0

Other services ............................................ 1,121.1 4,336.1 0.9 525 1.4

Government ................................................... 277.1 21,417.6 0.7 807 1.5

Los Angeles, CA ................................................ 378.7 4,196.5 1.8 966 0.3

Private industry .............................................. 374.9 3,609.5 1.9 967 0.4

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.5 10.4 -2.0 911 -29.0

Construction ............................................... 13.5 154.5 8.7 961 2.6

Manufacturing ............................................ 16.1 466.4 -2.3 966 0.9

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 53.1 833.5 2.5 781 -0.3

Information ................................................. 8.7 211.8 -2.6 1,765 -0.3

Financial activities ...................................... 23.7 248.8 2.8 1,412 3.2

Professional and business services ........... 40.5 592.5 2.9 1,141 0.6

Education and health services ................... 27.4 466.7 0.3 885 1.7

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 26.1 385.1 2.0 799 1.9

Other services ............................................ 165.0 239.2 9.1 427 -3.0

Government ................................................... 3.8 587.1 0.9 964 0.3

Cook, IL .............................................................. 132.3 2,547.4 0.9 1,000 1.4

Private industry .............................................. 131.1 2,234.1 1.1 1,009 1.7

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.1 1.4 9.4 1,091 1.9

Construction ............................................... 11.4 92.5 -1.0 1,238 4.0

Manufacturing ............................................ 7.5 252.1 -1.9 1,029 -0.6

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 27.2 494.5 0.2 802 -0.1

Information ................................................. 2.5 60.2 -2.8 1,341 0.8

Financial activities ...................................... 14.8 220.2 1.5 1,639 3.8

Professional and business services ........... 27.2 430.3 3.9 1,328 1.2

Education and health services ................... 13.0 361.1 1.1 849 1.8

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 11.1 221.9 2.5 406 5.2

Other services ............................................ 13.2 95.2 -0.5 696 1.6

Government ................................................... 1.2 313.3 -0.7 936 -0.3

New York, NY ..................................................... 114.8 2,310.7 2.0 1,684 4.3

Private industry .............................................. 114.6 1,860.6 2.3 1,840 4.2

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.0 0.1 0.0 4,005 175.4

Construction ............................................... 2.1 29.9 2.5 1,621 2.5

Manufacturing ............................................ 3.1 41.7 -6.7 1,393 -2.4

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 21.3 253.5 1.8 1,234 4.6

Information ................................................. 4.1 131.4 1.2 1,947 4.5

Financial activities ...................................... 17.3 365.3 2.9 3,632 4.7

Professional and business services ........... 22.6 459.4 1.9 1,910 4.8

Education and health services ................... 8.1 281.6 2.2 997 3.2

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 10.4 200.3 1.5 826 -0.8

Other services ............................................ 16.5 85.8 2.1 944 4.2

Government ................................................... 0.2 450.1 0.7 1,044 4.1

See footnotes at end of table.
Table 2. Covered1 establishments, employment, and wages in the ten largest counties,

fourth quarter 20052 — Continued

County by NAICS supersector

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2005

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage4

December

2005

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2004-053

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2004-053

Harris, TX ........................................................... 91.1 1,919.8 3.8 $1,014 3.8

Private industry .............................................. 90.7 1,669.7 4.0 1,040 4.2

Natural resources and mining .................... 1.3 68.0 5.5 2,693 13.3

Construction ............................................... 6.2 135.5 3.9 974 6.4

Manufacturing ............................................ 4.5 170.4 4.0 1,262 2.8

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 21.0 416.5 3.3 885 1.8

Information ................................................. 1.3 31.8 -4.3 1,191 3.9

Financial activities ...................................... 9.9 117.8 2.4 1,323 5.3

Professional and business services ........... 17.7 309.8 7.2 1,213 3.6

Education and health services ................... 9.4 199.4 3.4 869 -1.4

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 6.8 160.9 1.7 365 2.2

Other services ............................................ 10.6 55.2 0.9 579 3.0

Government ................................................... 0.4 250.1 2.5 840 0.7

Maricopa, AZ ...................................................... 86.1 1,784.8 5.8 818 2.1

Private industry .............................................. 85.5 1,571.9 6.5 821 2.6

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.5 8.9 -1.7 704 6.2

Construction ............................................... 8.8 170.7 13.6 860 5.1

Manufacturing ............................................ 3.3 134.5 2.6 1,103 3.4

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 18.9 370.4 5.6 765 1.2

Information ................................................. 1.4 32.9 0.8 939 -3.2

Financial activities ...................................... 10.4 150.0 7.3 1,087 6.3

Professional and business services ........... 18.6 300.6 6.4 845 1.6

Education and health services ................... 8.3 180.9 5.1 893 1.6

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 6.1 171.0 5.4 383 3.2

Other services ............................................ 6.0 46.4 3.3 563 3.7

Government ................................................... 0.6 212.8 0.9 796 -1.6

Orange, CA ........................................................ 91.7 1,507.7 1.9 964 2.6

Private industry .............................................. 90.3 1,375.1 2.2 971 2.8

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.2 5.2 8.7 612 -6.6

Construction ............................................... 6.8 105.8 11.4 1,042 2.5

Manufacturing ............................................ 5.7 181.8 -1.7 1,123 1.5

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 17.2 285.5 1.2 856 -0.2

Information ................................................. 1.4 32.1 -2.6 1,248 0.9

Financial activities ...................................... 10.5 144.7 2.9 1,641 8.0

Professional and business services ........... 18.0 272.3 3.5 1,050 2.0

Education and health services ................... 9.4 132.2 1.6 894 1.6

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 6.8 166.5 1.5 379 4.4

Other services ............................................ 14.3 48.8 2.6 574 4.4

Government ................................................... 1.4 132.6 -0.8 899 1.1

Dallas, TX ........................................................... 66.5 1,457.5 2.8 1,033 3.4

Private industry .............................................. 66.1 1,296.2 2.9 1,053 3.3

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.5 7.5 7.1 3,177 14.3

Construction ............................................... 4.3 77.3 5.1 969 6.6

Manufacturing ............................................ 3.3 147.7 1.7 1,101 -2.6

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 14.8 312.1 1.3 1,001 8.2

Information ................................................. 1.7 53.8 -0.2 1,311 -1.9

Financial activities ...................................... 8.4 138.6 2.4 1,368 3.4

Professional and business services ........... 13.8 259.7 7.4 1,209 0.8

Education and health services ................... 6.2 134.9 1.5 980 2.9

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 5.1 122.3 0.2 473 2.6

Other services ............................................ 6.5 39.0 0.1 638 3.2

Government ................................................... 0.4 161.3 1.9 868 4.2

See footnotes at end of table.
Table 2. Covered1 establishments, employment, and wages in the ten largest counties,

fourth quarter 20052 — Continued

County by NAICS supersector

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2005

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage4

December

2005

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2004-053

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2004-053

San Diego, CA ................................................... 88.9 1,315.8 0.9 $890 1.8

Private industry .............................................. 87.5 1,096.1 1.1 881 1.5

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.8 11.2 3.2 567 4.0

Construction ............................................... 6.9 92.9 3.3 960 0.6

Manufacturing ............................................ 3.4 103.2 -1.0 1,169 3.5

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 14.2 230.2 2.1 686 -1.0

Information ................................................. 1.3 37.3 -0.5 1,990 4.7

Financial activities ...................................... 9.4 84.5 1.2 1,211 5.4

Professional and business services ........... 15.2 209.7 -0.6 1,081 0.7

Education and health services ................... 7.7 121.8 0.1 854 2.4

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 6.7 149.6 2.8 382 3.5

Other services ............................................ 21.8 55.6 1.5 474 0.2

Government ................................................... 1.4 219.7 0.2 931 2.6

King, WA ............................................................ 76.3 1,145.1 3.4 985 1.1

Private industry .............................................. 75.8 993.2 4.0 994 0.8

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.4 2.9 7.0 1,200 -0.5

Construction ............................................... 6.5 63.1 11.8 970 1.7

Manufacturing ............................................ 2.6 108.6 5.7 1,297 8.9

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 14.8 227.2 1.3 853 -0.2

Information ................................................. 1.6 70.8 2.6 1,775 -8.0

Financial activities ...................................... 6.5 76.1 0.8 1,236 7.3

Professional and business services ........... 12.2 175.4 7.4 1,182 -1.3

Education and health services ................... 6.2 117.2 3.3 782 0.3

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 5.8 106.6 4.8 413 -0.7

Other services ............................................ 19.2 45.2 -1.3 534 5.3

Government ................................................... 0.5 152.0 -0.5 925 2.4

Miami-Dade, FL .................................................. 84.4 1,022.1 2.1 833 1.5

Private industry .............................................. 84.1 869.1 2.5 817 2.6

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.5 9.6 -7.9 482 6.9

Construction ............................................... 5.6 47.5 10.8 901 7.0

Manufacturing ............................................ 2.7 48.3 -2.3 747 3.3

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 23.6 253.0 1.4 761 2.0

Information ................................................. 1.8 22.9 (6) 1,190 (6) 

Financial activities ...................................... 9.7 71.0 4.2 1,212 3.9

Professional and business services ........... 16.8 149.3 5.9 1,018 0.9

Education and health services ................... 8.5 128.8 2.2 807 1.5

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 5.7 99.0 0.3 450 0.0

Other services ............................................ 7.7 35.7 1.4 482 0.6

Government ................................................... 0.3 153.0 0.1 927 -3.0

1 Includes workers covered by Unemployment Insurance (UI) and Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees (UCFE)

programs. 2 Data are preliminary. 3 Percent changes were computed from quarterly employment and pay data adjusted for noneconomic county reclassifications. See

Technical Note. 4 Average weekly wages were calculated using unrounded data. 5 Totals for the United States do not include data for Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands. 6 Data do not meet BLS or State agency disclosure standards.
Table 3. Covered1 establishments, employment, and wages in the largest county

by state, fourth quarter 20052

County3

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2005

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage5

December

2005

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2004-054

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2004-054

United States6 .................... 8,690.4 133,834.6 1.7 $825 1.5

Jefferson, AL ...................... 18.9 375.8 0.8 836 0.5

Anchorage Borough, AK .... 7.9 144.0 1.1 837 0.8

Maricopa, AZ ..................... 86.1 1,784.8 5.8 818 2.1

Pulaski, AR ........................ 13.7 248.7 1.2 749 -1.1

Los Angeles, CA ................ 378.7 4,196.5 1.8 966 0.3

Denver, CO ........................ 24.9 431.6 1.8 1,003 0.9

Hartford, CT ....................... 24.6 493.5 1.3 1,033 1.5

New Castle, DE ................. 19.5 286.6 0.0 1,068 9.0

Washington, DC ................. 30.9 673.5 1.0 1,354 4.9

Miami-Dade, FL ................. 84.4 1,022.1 2.1 833 1.5

Fulton, GA .......................... 38.3 757.1 1.7 1,139 7.6

Honolulu, HI ....................... 23.9 452.5 2.3 763 0.9

Ada, ID ............................... 14.2 203.5 5.4 751 1.2

Cook, IL ............................. 132.3 2,547.4 0.9 1,000 1.4

Marion, IN .......................... 23.5 585.3 0.1 839 0.8

Polk, IA .............................. 14.2 267.6 1.7 828 1.2

Johnson, KS ...................... 19.6 306.7 2.3 846 0.5

Jefferson, KY ..................... 22.1 429.5 0.8 798 -1.5

Orleans, LA ........................ 12.6 149.5 -39.3 968 28.7

Cumberland, ME ................ 11.8 173.7 -0.3 749 -2.3

Montgomery, MD ............... 32.5 467.9 1.6 1,109 4.0

Middlesex, MA ................... 47.3 803.7 1.3 1,158 1.0

Wayne, MI .......................... 34.0 793.6 -1.4 951 0.2

Hennepin, MN .................... 42.9 850.6 1.3 1,013 -3.4

Hinds, MS .......................... 6.5 128.6 -0.6 736 3.2

St. Louis, MO ..................... 34.0 627.5 0.3 887 3.0

Yellowstone, MT ................ 5.4 73.8 2.4 650 1.9

Douglas, NE ....................... 15.4 314.7 1.0 789 4.2

Clark, NV ........................... 43.3 895.6 6.7 771 0.1

Hillsborough, NH ................ 12.3 200.3 1.0 949 1.9

Bergen, NJ ......................... 34.3 456.2 0.1 1,072 0.5

Bernalillo, NM .................... 16.7 326.5 2.3 731 0.4

New York, NY .................... 114.8 2,310.7 2.0 1,684 4.3

Mecklenburg, NC ............... 28.2 533.2 2.5 932 -1.6

Cass, ND ........................... 5.8 92.9 2.6 691 0.1

Cuyahoga, OH ................... 38.0 756.8 -0.6 855 -0.6

Oklahoma, OK ................... 22.6 420.6 1.4 713 2.3

Multnomah, OR .................. 26.4 438.8 2.5 822 1.0

Allegheny, PA .................... 34.8 687.7 0.0 858 0.8

Providence, RI ................... 18.2 289.9 0.1 813 3.4

Greenville, SC .................... 12.7 229.8 1.0 725 0.8

Minnehaha, SD .................. 6.1 113.0 3.1 678 2.4

Shelby, TN ......................... 19.8 509.2 0.9 848 1.8

Harris, TX ........................... 91.1 1,919.8 3.8 1,014 3.8

Salt Lake, UT ..................... 37.7 558.0 4.3 769 3.4

Chittenden, VT ................... 5.8 95.8 -1.1 789 1.0

Fairfax, VA ......................... 31.3 578.9 3.1 1,247 0.4

King, WA ............................ 76.3 1,145.1 3.4 985 1.1

Kanawha, WV .................... 6.1 108.2 -0.6 699 1.3

Milwaukee, WI ................... 21.9 497.8 -0.4 833 0.6

See footnotes at end of table.
Table 3. Covered1 establishments, employment, and wages in the largest county

by state, fourth quarter 20052 — Continued

County3

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2005

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage5

December

2005

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2004-054

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2004-054

Laramie, WY ...................... 3.0 41.3 4.0 $647 2.7

San Juan, PR ..................... 14.5 330.1 -2.0 549 3.0

St. Thomas, VI ................... 1.8 23.5 1.6 625 -1.3

1 Includes workers covered by Unemployment Insurance (UI) and Unemployment Compensation for Federal

Employees (UCFE) programs. 2 Data are preliminary. 3 Includes areas not officially designated as counties. See Technical Note. 4 Percent changes were computed from quarterly employment and pay data adjusted for noneconomic county

reclassifications. See Technical Note. 5 Average weekly wages were calculated using unrounded data. 6 Totals for the United States do not include data for Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands.
Table 4. Covered1 establishments, employment, and wages by state, 

fourth quarter 20052

State

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2005

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage3

December

2005

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2004-05

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2004-05

United States4 .................... 8,690.4 133,834.6 1.7 $825 1.5

Alabama ............................. 117.9 1,929.6 2.5 706 1.6

Alaska ................................ 20.7 291.8 1.3 793 1.5

Arizona ............................... 139.3 2,596.6 5.4 769 2.5

Arkansas ............................ 78.3 1,168.4 1.8 633 1.6

California ............................ 1,261.8 15,515.7 2.4 944 1.6

Colorado ............................ 170.1 2,234.8 2.4 835 0.5

Connecticut ........................ 110.8 1,671.0 0.6 1,080 2.2

Delaware ............................ 29.6 422.9 1.1 937 6.2

District of Columbia ............ 30.9 673.5 1.0 1,354 4.9

Florida ................................ 573.6 7,999.0 3.5 752 1.9

Georgia .............................. 258.9 4,007.3 2.5 794 2.7

Hawaii ................................ 36.8 619.6 2.7 736 1.8

Idaho .................................. 53.1 625.5 4.6 628 1.6

Illinois ................................. 342.9 5,830.1 1.0 887 1.1

Indiana ............................... 154.2 2,906.4 0.8 705 -0.1

Iowa ................................... 91.8 1,465.0 1.6 672 0.7

Kansas ............................... 84.1 1,325.6 0.7 680 1.6

Kentucky ............................ 107.3 1,783.6 1.2 682 0.1

Louisiana ........................... 120.9 1,783.8 -5.5 710 7.4

Maine ................................. 48.7 598.2 -0.6 662 0.3

Maryland ............................ 160.1 2,540.2 1.3 910 3.5

Massachusetts ................... 208.4 3,206.4 0.9 1,026 2.0

Michigan ............................ 255.9 4,320.9 -0.6 835 0.0

Minnesota .......................... 168.5 2,687.5 1.8 808 -3.2

Mississippi ......................... 68.2 1,114.5 -0.2 614 4.6

Missouri ............................. 171.6 2,700.9 1.2 723 2.0

Montana ............................. 40.6 418.9 2.4 591 3.3

Nebraska ........................... 57.4 900.2 0.9 663 2.3

Nevada .............................. 68.8 1,253.2 5.7 775 0.9

New Hampshire ................. 48.1 630.8 1.0 848 1.1

New Jersey ........................ 274.0 3,988.9 0.9 1,011 0.8

New Mexico ....................... 51.1 793.2 2.5 658 2.0

New York ........................... 564.7 8,531.8 0.8 1,048 2.9

North Carolina .................... 236.1 3,916.7 1.7 718 0.4

North Dakota ...................... 25.1 332.7 2.0 614 2.3

Ohio ................................... 289.9 5,359.4 0.2 751 -0.4

Oklahoma .......................... 94.9 1,502.5 2.8 642 2.4

Oregon ............................... 125.6 1,686.0 3.8 728 1.3

Pennsylvania ..................... 332.4 5,619.5 0.8 801 0.6

Rhode Island ...................... 35.7 483.6 0.3 787 2.7

South Carolina ................... 120.9 1,830.0 1.0 666 1.7

South Dakota ..................... 29.4 378.6 2.0 589 1.4

Tennessee ......................... 133.4 2,742.6 1.5 736 1.2

Texas ................................. 525.4 9,821.7 3.5 823 3.0

Utah ................................... 84.0 1,149.3 4.4 687 3.5

Vermont ............................. 24.7 308.1 1.1 684 1.0

Virginia ............................... 216.0 3,637.5 1.9 855 1.7

Washington ........................ 213.4 2,794.2 3.0 804 1.8

West Virginia ...................... 48.0 704.3 1.2 627 1.1

Wisconsin .......................... 163.1 2,773.4 0.6 713 -0.8

See footnotes at end of table.
Table 4. Covered1 establishments, employment, and wages by state, 

fourth quarter 20052 — Continued

State

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2005

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage3

December

2005

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2004-05

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2004-05

Wyoming ............................ 23.2 258.4 4.1 $678 5.8

Puerto Rico ........................ 57.8 1,093.7 -0.5 474 1.7

Virgin Islands ..................... 3.5 44.9 2.0 664 0.5

1 Includes workers covered by Unemployment Insurance (UI) and Unemployment Compensation for Federal

Employees (UCFE) programs. 2 Data are preliminary. 3 Average weekly wages were calculated using unrounded data. 4 Totals for the United States do not include data for Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands.
Chart 1. Percent change in employment in counties with 75,000 emp

December 200405 (U.S. Average = 1.7%)

Note: The following counties have fewer than 75,000 employees

but are included because they are the largest county in their state

or territory: Laramie, Wyo., Yellowstone, Mont., and St. Thomas, V.I.

So

Ju
Chart 2. Percent change in average weekly wage in counties with 75,

or more, fourth quarter 200405 (U.S. Average = 1.5%)

Note: The following counties have fewer than 75,000 employees

but are included because they are the largest county in their state

or territory: Laramie, Wyo., Yellowstone, Mont., and St. Thomas, V.I.

So

Ju