For release 10:00 a.m. (EDT), Thursday, June 19, 2014 USDL-14-1138 

Technical Information: (202) 691-6567 • QCEWInfo@bls.gov • www.bls.gov/cew 

Media Contact: (202) 691-5902 • PressOffice@bls.gov 

COUNTY EMPLOYMENT AND WAGES

Fourth Quarter 2013 

From December 2012 to December 2013, employment increased in 292 of the 334 largest U.S. 

counties, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Weld, Colo., had the largest increase, with 

a gain of 6.0 percent over the year, compared with national job growth of 1.8 percent. Within Weld, the 

largest employment increase occurred in construction, which gained 1,864 jobs over the year (25.5 

percent). St. Clair, Ill., had the largest over-the-year decrease in employment among the largest counties 

in the U.S. with a loss of 3.1 percent. County employment and wage data are compiled under the 

Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) program, which produces detailed information 

on county employment and wages within 6 months after the end of each quarter. 

The U.S. average weekly wage was unchanged over the year, remaining at $1,000 in the fourth quarter 

of 2013. Santa Cruz, Calif., had the largest over-the-year increase in average weekly wages with a gain 

of 6.5 percent. Within Santa Cruz, an average weekly wage gain of $416, or 32.9 percent, in 

manufacturing made the largest contribution to the increase in average weekly wages. Douglas, Colo., 

experienced the largest decrease in average weekly wages with a loss of 29.7 percent over the year. 

Chart 1. Large counties ranked by percent increase in 

employment, December 2012-13 

(U.S. average = 1.8 percent) 

Chart 2. Large counties ranked by percent increase in 

average weekly wages, fourth quarter 2012-13 

(U.S. average = 0.0 percent) 

0

2

4

6

8

Santa Cruz,

Calif.

Ada,

Idaho

Washington,

Ore.

Union,

N.J.

Clayton,

Ga.

Percent

0

2

4

6

8

Weld,

Colo.

Lee,

Fla.

Sonoma,

Calif.

Douglas,

Colo.

Sarasota,

Fla.

Percent
- 2 - 

Table A. Large counties ranked by December 2013 employment, December 2012-13 employment 

increase, and December 2012-13 percent increase in employment 

 

Employment in large counties 

 

December 2013 employment Increase in employment, Percent increase in employment, 

(thousands) December 2012-13 December 2012-13 

 (thousands) 

United States 136,129.4 United States 2,344.4 United States 1.8 

Los Angeles, Calif. 4,176.8 Los Angeles, Calif. 76.6 Weld, Colo. 6.0

New York, N.Y. 2,500.2 Harris, Texas 64.2 Lee, Fla. 5.5

Cook, Ill. 2,463.3 New York, N.Y. 58.4 Sonoma, Calif. 5.2

Harris, Texas 2,225.4 Maricopa, Ariz. 50.9 Douglas, Colo. 5.2

Maricopa, Ariz. 1,771.9 Dallas, Texas 48.1 Sarasota, Fla. 4.9

Dallas, Texas 1,530.1 King, Wash. 40.8 Ocean, N.J. 4.8

Orange, Calif. 1,463.1 Santa Clara, Calif. 38.2 Fort Bend, Texas 4.8

San Diego, Calif. 1,330.2 Orange, Calif. 29.0 Midland, Texas 4.8

King, Wash. 1,223.4 Cook, Ill. 27.5 Placer, Calif. 4.7

Miami-Dade, Fla. 1,047.5 Clark, Nev. 26.5 Williamson, Texas 4.7

Large County Employment 

In December 2013, national employment was 136.1 million (as measured by the QCEW program). Over 

the year, employment increased 1.8 percent, or 2.3 million. The 334 U.S. counties with 75,000 or more 

jobs accounted for 71.7 percent of total U.S. employment and 77.2 percent of total wages. These 334 

counties had a net job growth of 1.8 million over the year, accounting for 76.2 percent of the overall 

U.S. employment increase. (See chart 3.) 

Weld, Colo., had the largest percentage increase in employment (6.0 percent) among the largest U.S. 

counties. The five counties with the largest increases in employment level were Los Angeles, Calif.; 

Harris, Texas; New York, N.Y.; Maricopa, Ariz.; and Dallas, Texas. These counties had a combined 

over-the-year employment gain of 298,200 jobs, which was 12.7 percent of the overall job increase for 

the U.S. (See table A.) 

Employment declined in 39 of the large counties from December 2012 to December 2013. St. Clair, Ill., 

had the largest over-the-year percentage decrease in employment (-3.1 percent). Within St. Clair, 

professional and business services had the largest decrease in employment, with a loss of 798 jobs (-9.2 

percent). Peoria, Ill., and Broome, N.Y., tied for the second largest percentage decrease in employment, 

followed by Caddo, La., and Winnebago, Wis. (See table 1.) 

 
- 3 - 

Table B. Large counties ranked by fourth quarter 2013 average weekly wages, fourth quarter 2012-13 

increase in average weekly wages, and fourth quarter 2012-13 percent increase in average weekly wages 

 

Average weekly wage in large counties 

 

Average weekly wage, Increase in average weekly Percent increase in average 

fourth quarter 2013 wage, fourth quarter 2012-13 weekly wage, fourth 

 quarter 2012-13 

United States $1,000 United States $0 United States 0.0 

San Mateo, Calif. $2,724 Morris, N.J. $74 Santa Cruz, Calif. 6.5

New York, N.Y. 2,041 Santa Clara, Calif. 65 Ada, Idaho 6.4

Santa Clara, Calif. 1,972 Washington, Ore. 65 Washington, Ore. 5.9

San Francisco, Calif. 1,753 Union, N.J. 63 Union, N.J. 5.2

Suffolk, Mass. 1,741 Santa Cruz, Calif. 55 Clayton, Ga. 5.1

Fairfield, Conn. 1,653 Ada, Idaho 54 Morris, N.J. 5.0

Washington, D.C. 1,638 San Francisco, Calif. 51 Winnebago, Wis. 5.0

Arlington, Va. 1,588 Winnebago, Wis. 46 Weld, Colo. 4.8

Fairfax, Va. 1,558 Albany, N.Y. 45 Dane, Wis. 4.7

Morris, N.J. 1,553 Dane, Wis. 45 Albany, N.Y. 4.6

Large County Average Weekly Wages 

Average weekly wages for the nation were unchanged during the year ending in the fourth quarter of 

2013. Among the 334 largest counties, 185 had over-the-year increases in average weekly wages. (See 

chart 4.) Santa Cruz, Calif., had the largest wage increase among the largest U.S. counties (6.5 percent). 

Of the 334 largest counties, 140 experienced over-the-year decreases in average weekly wages. Douglas, 

Colo., had the largest percentage decrease in average weekly wage, with a loss of 29.7 percent. Within 

Douglas, professional and business services had the largest impact on the county’s average weekly wage 

decrease. Within this industry, average weekly wages declined by $2,545 (-57.4 percent) over the year. 

San Mateo, Calif., had the second largest percentage decrease in average weekly wages, followed by 

Virginia Beach City, Va.; McHenry, Ill.; and Shawnee, Kan. (See table 1.) 

Ten Largest U.S. Counties 

All of the 10 largest counties had over-the-year percentage increases in employment in December 2013. 

King, Wash., had the largest gain (3.5 percent). Within King, trade, transportation, and utilities had the 

largest over-the-year employment level increase among all private industry groups with a gain of 10,127 

jobs, or 4.6 percent. Cook, Ill., had the smallest percentage increase in employment (1.1 percent) among 

the 10 largest counties. (See table 2.) 

Average weekly wages increased over the year in 3 of the 10 largest U.S. counties. King, Wash., 

experienced the largest percentage gain in average weekly wages (1.9 percent). Within King, 

information had the largest impact on the county’s average weekly wage growth. Within this industry, 

average weekly wages increased by $68, or 2.7 percent, over the year. New York, N.Y., had the largest 

decline in average weekly wages (-3.3 percent) among the 10 largest counties. 
- 4 - 

For More Information

The tables and charts included in this release contain data for the nation and for the 334 U.S. counties 

with annual average employment levels of 75,000 or more in 2012. December 2013 employment and 

2013 fourth quarter average weekly wages for all states are provided in table 3 of this release. 

The employment and wage data by county are compiled under the 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 9.3 million employer reports cover 136.1 million full- and parttime workers. The QCEW program provides a quarterly and annual universe count of establishments, 

employment, and wages at the county, MSA, state, and national levels by detailed industry. Data for the 

fourth quarter of 2013 will be available later at www.bls.gov/cew/. For additional information about the 

quarterly employment and wages data, please read the Technical Note. Additional information about the 

QCEW data may be obtained by calling (202) 691-6567. 

Several BLS regional offices are issuing QCEW news releases targeted to local data users. For links to 

these releases, see www.bls.gov/cew/cewregional.htm. 

 

The County Employment and Wages release for first quarter 2014 is scheduled to be released on 

Thursday, September 18, 2014. 
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. QCEW data in this release are based on the 2012 North American Industry Classification 

System. Data for 2013 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 335 counties presented in 

this release were derived using 2012 preliminary annual averages of 

employment. For 2013 data, six counties have been added to the publication tables: Boone, Ky.; Warren, Ohio; Jackson, Ore.; York, S.C.; 

Midland, Texas; and Potter, Texas. These counties will be included 

in all 2013 quarterly releases. The counties in table 2 are selected and 

sorted each year based on the annual average employment from the 

preceding year. 

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

QCEW BED CES 

Source  Count of UI administrative records 

submitted by 9.2 million establishments in first quarter of 2013 

 Count of longitudinally-linked UI administrative records submitted by 

7.3 million private-sector employers 

 Sample survey: 557,000 establishments 

Coverage  UI and UCFE coverage, including 

all employers subject to state and 

federal UI laws 

 UI coverage, excluding government, 

private households, and establishments with zero employment 

Nonfarm wage and salary jobs: 

 UI coverage, excluding agriculture, private 

households, and self-employed workers 

 Other employment, including railroads, 

religious organizations, and other nonUI-covered jobs 

Publication frequency 

 Quarterly 

— 6 months after the end of each 

quarter 

 Quarterly 

— 8 months after the end of each 

quarter 

 Monthly 

— Usually first Friday of following 

month 

Use of UI file  Directly summarizes and publishes 

each new quarter of UI data 

 Links each new UI quarter to longitudinal database and directly summarizes gross job gains and losses  Uses UI file as a sampling frame and to 

annually realign sample-based estimates 

to population counts (benchmarking) 

Principal 

products 

 Provides a quarterly and annual universe count of establishments, employment, and wages at the county, 

MSA, state, and national levels by 

detailed industry 

 Provides quarterly employer dynamics data on establishment openings, 

closings, expansions, and contractions 

at the national level by NAICS supersectors and by size of firm, and at the 

state private-sector total level 

 Future expansions will include data 

with greater industry detail and data 

at the county and MSA level 

 Provides current monthly estimates of 

employment, hours, and earnings at the 

MSA, state, and national level by industry 

Principal uses  Major uses include: 

— Detailed locality data 

— Periodic universe counts for 

benchmarking sample survey estimates 

— Sample frame for BLS establishment surveys 

 Major uses include: 

— Business cycle analysis 

— Analysis of employer dynamics 

underlying economic expansions 

and contractions 

— Analysis of employment expansion and contraction by size of 

firm 

 Major uses include: 

— Principal national economic indicator 

— Official time series for employment 

change measures 

— Input into other major economic indicators 

Program Web 

sites 

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

 
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 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.) Additional information on each program can be obtained from the program Web sites shown in the table. 

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 submitted by four major federal payroll processing centers on behalf of 

all federal agencies, with the exception of a few agencies which still 

report directly to the individual SWA. 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. QCEW employment and wage 

data are derived from microdata summaries of 9.1 million employer 

reports of employment and wages submitted by states to the BLS in 

2012. These reports are based on place of employment rather than 

place of residence. 

UI and UCFE coverage is broad and has been basically comparable 

from state to state since 1978, when the 1976 amendments to the Federal Unemployment Tax Act became effective, expanding coverage to 

include most State and local government employees. In 2012, UI and 

UCFE programs covered workers in 131.7 million jobs. The estimated 

126.9 million workers in these jobs (after adjustment for multiple jobholders) represented 95.5 percent of civilian wage and salary employment. Covered workers received $6.491 trillion in pay, representing 

93.7 percent of the wage and salary component of personal income 

and 40.0 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 overthe-year comparisons presented in this news release. 

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 parttime workers as well as the number of individuals in high-paying and 

low-paying occupations and the incidence of pay periods within a 

quarter. For instance, the average weekly wage of the workforce 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. 

Wages measured by QCEW may be subject to periodic and sometimes large fluctuations. This variability may be due to calendar effects resulting from some quarters having more pay dates than others. 

The effect is most visible in counties with a dominant employer. In 

particular, this effect has been observed in counties where government 

employers represent a large fraction of overall employment. Similar 

calendar effects can result from private sector pay practices. However, 

these effects are typically less pronounced for two reasons: employment is less concentrated in a single private employer, and private employers use a variety of pay period types (weekly, biweekly, semimonthly, monthly). 

For example, the effect on over-the-year pay comparisons can be 

pronounced in federal government due to the uniform nature of federal 

payroll processing. Most federal employees are paid on a biweekly 

pay schedule. As a result, in some quarters federal wages include six 

pay dates, while in other quarters there are seven pay dates. Over-theyear comparisons of average weekly wages may also reflect this calendar effect. Growth in average weekly wages may be attributed, in 

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

include seven pay dates, with year-ago wages that reflect only six pay 

dates. An opposite effect will occur when wages in the current quarter 

reflecting six pay dates are compared with year-ago wages for a quarter including seven pay dates. 

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-theyear changes. Percent changes are calculated using an adjusted version of the final 2012 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 prior-year 

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. Beginning with the first quarter of 2008, adjusted data account 

for administrative changes caused by multi-unit employers who start 

reporting for each individual establishment rather than as a single entity. Beginning with the second quarter of 2011, adjusted data account 

for selected large administrative changes in employment and wages. 

These new adjustments allow QCEW to include county employment 

and wage growth rates in this news release that would otherwise not 

meet publication standards. 

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 

Employment and Wages Annual Averages Online features comprehensive information by detailed industry on establishments, employment, and wages for the nation and all states. The 2012 edition of this 

publication, which was published in September 2013, contains selected data produced by Business Employment Dynamics (BED) on 

job gains and losses, as well as selected data from the first quarter 

2013 version of this news release. Tables and additional content from 

Employment and Wages Annual Averages 2012 are now available 

online at http://www.bls.gov/cew/cewbultn12.htm. The 2013 edition 

of Employment and Wages Annual Averages Online will be available 

in September 2014. 

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. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 335 largest counties,

fourth quarter 2013

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2013

(thousands)

December

2013

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2012-133

Ranking by

percent

change

Fourth

quarter

2013

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2012-133

Ranking by

percent

change

United States4.............................. 9,333.7 136,129.4 1.8 - $1,000 0.0 -

Jefferson, AL................................ 17.7 341.7 1.1 200 993 -1.9 302

Madison, AL................................. 9.0 183.2 0.3 271 1,078 -0.4 220

Mobile, AL.................................... 9.6 165.9 0.4 260 864 -1.9 302

Montgomery, AL........................... 6.3 129.2 0.4 260 879 -0.6 232

Tuscaloosa, AL............................. 4.3 87.5 1.2 188 847 -0.1 195

Anchorage Borough, AK............... 8.4 153.3 0.2 279 1,050 1.1 95

Maricopa, AZ................................ 92.8 1,771.9 3.0 61 952 -1.3 272

Pima, AZ....................................... 18.6 356.3 0.5 249 840 0.2 165

Benton, AR................................... 5.7 100.8 2.1 118 913 1.1 95

Pulaski, AR................................... 14.6 246.4 0.1 290 899 -3.1 323

Washington, AR........................... 5.7 95.2 0.6 239 857 2.5 29

Alameda, CA................................ 56.7 687.3 2.5 90 1,267 0.8 120

Contra Costa, CA......................... 29.7 339.6 2.4 98 1,191 1.9 54

Fresno, CA................................... 30.7 348.0 3.7 34 771 -1.0 253

Kern, CA....................................... 17.2 303.9 2.6 88 849 0.4 150

Los Angeles, CA........................... 440.9 4,176.8 1.9 130 1,161 -1.9 302

Marin, CA..................................... 12.0 112.0 3.0 61 1,213 -0.7 238

Monterey, CA............................... 13.0 155.6 1.9 130 828 2.1 43

Orange, CA.................................. 107.0 1,463.1 2.0 122 1,114 -1.8 299

Placer, CA.................................... 11.2 139.6 4.7 9 978 0.0 186

Riverside, CA............................... 52.4 613.2 3.9 31 773 1.4 75

Sacramento, CA........................... 52.0 610.7 2.7 81 1,069 1.2 91

San Bernardino, CA..................... 50.8 653.2 3.8 33 824 -1.1 257

San Diego, CA.............................. 99.8 1,330.2 1.9 130 1,107 0.8 120

San Francisco, CA....................... 56.9 630.5 4.1 24 1,753 3.0 19

San Joaquin, CA.......................... 16.8 212.0 2.7 81 815 0.6 134

San Luis Obispo, CA.................... 9.8 107.6 3.6 39 805 -1.5 280

San Mateo, CA............................. 25.6 366.1 4.0 29 2,724 -15.8 333

Santa Barbara, CA....................... 14.6 182.4 2.5 90 936 -3.0 321

Santa Clara, CA........................... 65.2 965.7 4.1 24 1,972 3.4 17

Santa Cruz, CA............................ 9.1 92.1 2.0 122 907 6.5 1

Solano, CA................................... 10.2 127.4 2.0 122 1,015 2.9 22

Sonoma, CA................................. 19.0 189.5 5.2 3 913 -0.7 238

Stanislaus, CA.............................. 14.3 165.7 2.4 98 801 1.1 95

Tulare, CA.................................... 9.2 145.7 3.5 42 696 0.0 186

Ventura, CA.................................. 24.8 314.0 1.2 188 978 -0.6 232

Yolo, CA....................................... 6.0 91.3 2.4 98 1,021 2.3 36

Adams, CO................................... 9.0 177.1 4.6 11 946 2.3 36

Arapahoe, CO.............................. 19.2 300.5 2.8 76 1,145 -0.9 250

Boulder, CO.................................. 13.3 167.6 3.0 61 1,174 3.7 13

Denver, CO.................................. 27.0 451.2 4.0 29 1,224 1.0 106

Douglas, CO................................. 10.0 106.3 5.2 3 1,123 -29.7 334

El Paso, CO.................................. 16.9 246.4 2.0 122 887 0.2 165

Jefferson, CO............................... 17.8 218.3 1.8 139 1,005 -0.2 205

Larimer, CO.................................. 10.3 138.3 2.9 72 900 1.4 75

Weld, CO...................................... 6.0 93.2 6.0 1 871 4.8 8

Fairfield, CT................................. 33.7 420.0 0.7 230 1,653 -3.3 325

Hartford, CT.................................. 26.2 501.8 0.2 279 1,197 -1.0 253

New Haven, CT............................ 22.9 361.9 0.2 279 1,040 0.5 141

New London, CT.......................... 7.1 121.7 -1.5 329 971 0.1 174

 See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 335 largest counties,

fourth quarter 2013 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2013

(thousands)

December

2013

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2012-133

Ranking by

percent

change

Fourth

quarter

2013

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2012-133

Ranking by

percent

change

New Castle, DE............................ 17.3 277.4 1.8 139 $1,160 -1.2 265

Washington, DC........................... 36.0 727.3 0.6 239 1,638 -3.9 328

Alachua, FL.................................. 6.7 119.0 1.0 207 865 3.0 19

Brevard, FL................................... 14.8 190.0 0.5 249 874 -0.2 205

Broward, FL.................................. 66.2 742.7 2.8 76 920 -0.1 195

Collier, FL..................................... 12.5 131.0 4.2 20 861 2.4 31

Duval, FL..................................... 28.0 458.8 2.2 113 946 -0.9 250

Escambia, FL............................... 8.1 123.2 1.7 150 774 -1.5 280

Hillsborough, FL........................... 39.7 624.7 3.4 46 960 0.4 150

Lake, FL....................................... 7.5 85.1 2.4 98 668 2.3 36

Lee, FL......................................... 19.8 223.5 5.5 2 783 1.3 83

Leon, FL....................................... 8.4 141.4 1.0 207 824 1.9 54

Manatee, FL................................. 9.8 113.3 3.0 61 746 2.3 36

Marion, FL.................................... 8.1 93.3 0.7 230 692 0.3 160

Miami-Dade, FL............................ 94.5 1,047.5 2.5 90 982 0.8 120

Okaloosa, FL................................ 6.1 76.3 0.2 279 786 -0.6 232

Orange, FL................................... 38.2 723.6 3.0 61 861 0.3 160

Palm Beach, FL............................ 51.8 543.7 3.6 39 993 -1.3 272

Pasco, FL..................................... 10.2 103.2 2.1 118 695 1.6 64

Pinellas, FL................................... 31.6 396.9 1.0 207 907 1.0 106

Polk, FL........................................ 12.6 200.6 2.4 98 748 1.1 95

Sarasota, FL................................ 14.9 149.8 4.9 5 834 0.5 141

Seminole, FL................................ 14.2 166.7 3.0 61 814 0.2 165

Volusia, FL................................... 13.5 155.1 2.2 113 702 -0.4 220

Bibb, GA....................................... 4.6 81.8 1.2 188 765 0.8 120

Chatham, GA................................ 8.1 137.1 2.3 107 839 1.3 83

Clayton, GA.................................. 4.3 112.3 1.5 163 910 5.1 5

Cobb, GA...................................... 22.3 320.0 3.3 51 1,043 0.6 134

De Kalb, GA................................. 18.5 282.9 3.3 51 994 -1.6 289

Fulton, GA.................................... 43.6 761.2 2.8 76 1,290 -2.3 309

Gwinnett, GA................................ 24.8 318.9 3.6 39 958 -0.9 250

Muscogee, GA.............................. 4.7 94.9 0.2 279 788 0.9 114

Richmond, GA.............................. 4.7 100.7 0.5 249 823 -0.8 245

Honolulu, HI.................................. 24.9 463.6 1.6 156 909 0.1 174

Ada, ID......................................... 13.8 209.6 4.1 24 901 6.4 2

Champaign, IL.............................. 4.4 89.0 0.7 230 827 2.7 27

Cook, IL........................................ 153.8 2,463.3 1.1 200 1,174 -1.0 253

Du Page, IL.................................. 38.1 596.0 1.2 188 1,180 1.5 69

Kane, IL........................................ 13.7 203.9 1.9 130 876 1.2 91

Lake, IL........................................ 22.7 330.7 1.2 188 1,289 0.3 160

McHenry, IL.................................. 8.8 95.1 1.9 130 825 -8.8 331

McLean, IL.................................... 3.9 85.2 -0.7 317 956 1.1 95

Madison, IL................................... 6.1 95.4 -0.4 308 822 2.1 43

Peoria, IL...................................... 4.7 101.8 -2.2 332 935 0.5 141

St. Clair, IL.................................... 5.7 92.2 -3.1 334 779 -0.3 214

Sangamon, IL............................... 5.4 126.8 0.6 239 999 1.6 64

Will, IL.......................................... 15.8 214.6 3.1 59 860 1.3 83

Winnebago, IL.............................. 6.8 124.6 -0.1 296 849 2.2 41

Allen, IN........................................ 8.9 178.1 1.1 200 772 -0.3 214

Elkhart, IN..................................... 4.8 117.4 4.3 17 787 1.0 106

 See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 335 largest counties,

fourth quarter 2013 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2013

(thousands)

December

2013

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2012-133

Ranking by

percent

change

Fourth

quarter

2013

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2012-133

Ranking by

percent

change

Hamilton, IN.................................. 8.7 121.9 4.1 24 $934 1.5 69

Lake, IN........................................ 10.3 189.5 -0.6 316 876 -2.9 320

Marion, IN..................................... 23.9 580.0 1.5 163 974 -1.7 293

St. Joseph, IN............................... 5.9 117.7 0.5 249 786 -0.1 195

Tippecanoe, IN............................. 3.3 80.3 0.3 271 816 0.9 114

Vanderburgh, IN........................... 4.8 104.8 -0.4 308 796 0.1 174

Johnson, IA.................................. 3.9 80.6 1.5 163 879 3.3 18

Linn, IA......................................... 6.4 128.1 0.4 260 959 1.3 83

Polk, IA........................................ 15.9 282.5 2.9 72 991 0.8 120

Scott, IA........................................ 5.5 89.9 1.0 207 836 -1.1 257

Johnson, KS................................. 21.3 325.6 2.5 90 1,022 -2.1 307

Sedgwick, KS............................... 12.2 245.9 1.2 188 908 -0.7 238

Shawnee, KS................................ 4.8 96.8 1.8 139 806 -5.1 330

Wyandotte, KS............................. 3.3 84.8 3.4 46 899 2.5 29

Boone, KY................................... 4.1 78.9 0.5 249 870 -1.1 257

Fayette, KY................................... 10.3 189.3 3.3 51 845 -1.1 257

Jefferson, KY................................ 24.2 441.3 1.3 175 929 -0.5 226

Caddo, LA.................................... 7.5 116.0 -1.8 330 825 0.0 186

Calcasieu, LA............................... 5.0 85.8 1.3 175 858 1.3 83

East Baton Rouge, LA.................. 14.9 265.7 0.9 218 938 -1.3 272

Jefferson, LA................................ 13.7 193.4 -0.1 296 912 -0.2 205

Lafayette, LA................................ 9.3 141.8 2.0 122 987 -0.3 214

Orleans, LA.................................. 11.5 186.2 4.2 20 973 -1.8 299

St. Tammany, LA.......................... 7.7 82.2 1.5 163 858 1.7 62

Cumberland, ME.......................... 12.8 173.6 0.7 230 904 1.3 83

Anne Arundel, MD........................ 14.6 254.9 1.3 175 1,066 0.5 141

Baltimore, MD............................... 21.2 367.7 0.4 260 1,008 -0.5 226

Frederick, MD............................... 6.2 95.4 -0.5 314 946 -1.1 257

Harford, MD.................................. 5.6 89.1 -0.9 320 964 -1.7 293

Howard, MD................................. 9.4 160.1 0.1 290 1,193 -1.2 265

Montgomery, MD.......................... 33.1 454.9 0.0 293 1,316 -2.3 309

Prince Georges, MD..................... 15.6 303.1 0.0 293 1,003 -1.3 272

Baltimore City, MD....................... 13.9 333.1 -0.2 300 1,163 -1.2 265

Barnstable, MA............................. 8.9 86.9 1.2 188 854 1.5 69

Bristol, MA.................................... 16.1 217.0 1.0 207 908 0.8 120

Essex, MA.................................... 21.8 314.3 1.5 163 1,047 -0.8 245

Hampden, MA.............................. 15.9 201.2 1.4 170 905 0.4 150

Middlesex, MA.............................. 49.3 849.5 1.4 170 1,437 0.1 174

Norfolk, MA................................... 23.3 336.8 1.3 175 1,214 0.5 141

Plymouth, MA............................... 14.0 180.6 1.3 175 950 2.4 31

Suffolk, MA................................... 24.1 614.3 2.3 107 1,741 0.6 134

Worcester, MA.............................. 21.7 326.8 1.0 207 1,000 3.5 16

Genesee, MI................................. 7.1 133.2 0.2 279 817 0.4 150

Ingham, MI................................... 6.2 152.6 0.9 218 935 0.2 165

Kalamazoo, MI............................. 5.2 112.3 0.9 218 908 1.2 91

Kent, MI....................................... 14.0 359.6 4.3 17 880 0.0 186

Macomb, MI.................................. 17.3 304.8 2.7 81 1,010 0.7 128

Oakland, MI.................................. 38.0 690.7 1.9 130 1,115 -2.5 315

Ottawa, MI.................................... 5.5 111.3 3.1 59 867 4.1 11

Saginaw, MI.................................. 4.1 85.3 1.3 175 804 2.0 47

 See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 335 largest counties,

fourth quarter 2013 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2013

(thousands)

December

2013

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2012-133

Ranking by

percent

change

Fourth

quarter

2013

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2012-133

Ranking by

percent

change

Washtenaw, MI............................. 8.2 200.8 1.0 207 $1,030 -0.2 205

Wayne, MI.................................... 31.0 690.6 -0.2 300 1,085 0.0 186

Anoka, MN.................................... 6.9 116.6 3.0 61 902 0.6 134

Dakota, MN.................................. 9.5 180.3 2.5 90 941 0.2 165

Hennepin, MN.............................. 40.9 867.7 1.7 150 1,208 -2.4 311

Olmsted, MN................................ 3.3 91.9 -1.0 322 1,084 3.6 14

Ramsey, MN................................. 13.2 323.2 1.5 163 1,095 1.9 54

St. Louis, MN................................ 5.3 95.9 0.5 249 798 2.8 24

Stearns, MN................................. 4.3 83.0 1.8 139 819 1.6 64

Harrison, MS................................ 4.5 83.6 1.4 170 692 0.4 150

Hinds, MS..................................... 6.1 120.5 -0.4 308 863 0.7 128

Boone, MO................................... 4.7 89.7 2.2 113 765 0.4 150

Clay, MO...................................... 5.2 90.8 3.5 42 890 1.5 69

Greene, MO.................................. 8.1 157.4 1.2 188 737 -0.1 195

Jackson, MO................................ 19.4 350.7 0.4 260 1,003 -2.7 317

St. Charles, MO............................ 8.5 134.5 2.9 72 770 0.1 174

St. Louis, MO................................ 33.3 581.9 1.7 150 1,091 0.1 174

St. Louis City, MO........................ 10.3 221.1 -0.1 296 1,034 -0.6 232

Yellowstone, MT........................... 6.2 77.9 0.4 260 856 1.1 95

Douglas, NE................................. 18.2 326.7 1.9 130 890 -1.5 280

Lancaster, NE............................... 9.8 163.6 2.1 118 790 -0.3 214

Clark, NV..................................... 50.8 854.4 3.2 57 875 0.9 114

Washoe, NV................................. 13.8 193.1 3.4 46 894 1.0 106

Hillsborough, NH.......................... 12.1 195.3 1.6 156 1,135 -0.4 220

Rockingham, NH.......................... 10.6 139.6 1.3 175 986 -5.0 329

Atlantic, NJ................................... 6.6 130.4 -0.9 320 813 0.0 186

Bergen, NJ................................... 32.9 446.1 3.0 61 1,240 -2.7 317

Burlington, NJ............................... 11.0 198.0 -0.2 300 1,029 -0.5 226

Camden, NJ................................. 12.0 198.0 1.4 170 1,025 2.0 47

Essex, NJ.................................... 20.5 338.1 -0.4 308 1,237 1.4 75

Gloucester, NJ.............................. 6.1 100.4 1.8 139 901 2.6 28

Hudson, NJ................................... 14.3 239.9 0.3 271 1,284 -0.6 232

Mercer, NJ.................................... 11.1 235.3 1.0 207 1,290 -1.6 289

Middlesex, NJ.............................. 21.9 397.2 0.3 271 1,186 2.4 31

Monmouth, NJ.............................. 20.0 246.9 1.7 150 1,034 -0.4 220

Morris, NJ..................................... 17.2 283.3 1.8 139 1,553 5.0 6

Ocean, NJ.................................... 12.6 154.5 4.8 6 826 -1.8 299

Passaic, NJ.................................. 12.3 171.9 -0.8 318 990 -1.1 257

Somerset, NJ............................... 10.1 179.3 1.8 139 1,484 2.8 24

Union, NJ..................................... 14.3 223.3 -0.5 314 1,283 5.2 4

Bernalillo, NM............................... 18.0 314.8 0.9 218 836 -0.1 195

Albany, NY................................... 10.1 225.8 0.7 230 1,019 4.6 10

Bronx, NY..................................... 17.3 247.7 2.9 72 948 1.5 69

Broome, NY.................................. 4.6 88.3 -2.2 332 765 0.3 160

Dutchess, NY............................... 8.3 113.2 0.9 218 958 -1.7 293

Erie, NY........................................ 24.3 463.6 0.4 260 857 0.5 141

Kings, NY..................................... 55.8 557.1 4.5 14 816 -0.1 195

Monroe, NY.................................. 18.5 380.3 0.2 279 894 0.3 160

Nassau, NY.................................. 53.3 616.7 2.3 107 1,120 -1.5 280

New York, NY............................... 125.1 2,500.2 2.4 98 2,041 -3.3 325

 See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 335 largest counties,

fourth quarter 2013 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2013

(thousands)

December

2013

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2012-133

Ranking by

percent

change

Fourth

quarter

2013

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2012-133

Ranking by

percent

change

Oneida, NY................................... 5.3 105.2 -0.4 308 $772 -0.5 226

Onondaga, NY.............................. 13.0 245.8 0.5 249 914 -1.7 293

Orange, NY.................................. 10.0 135.7 0.6 239 815 -0.7 238

Queens, NY.................................. 49.0 544.5 1.5 163 955 2.1 43

Richmond, NY.............................. 9.3 98.9 4.4 15 849 0.2 165

Rockland, NY............................... 10.1 119.5 1.8 139 1,063 -0.2 205

Saratoga, NY................................ 5.7 80.6 1.9 130 887 1.1 95

Suffolk, NY................................... 51.5 640.5 1.2 188 1,079 1.9 54

Westchester, NY.......................... 36.2 414.4 0.2 279 1,348 -0.3 214

Buncombe, NC............................. 8.1 118.8 1.6 156 758 0.7 128

Catawba, NC................................ 4.3 81.7 1.6 156 731 0.8 120

Cumberland, NC........................... 6.2 118.0 -1.0 322 766 -0.8 245

Durham, NC................................. 7.4 186.9 1.3 175 1,255 3.6 14

Forsyth, NC.................................. 9.0 178.2 2.7 81 895 2.2 41

Guilford, NC.................................. 14.1 271.6 1.1 200 858 -0.1 195

Mecklenburg, NC.......................... 33.1 606.8 3.7 34 1,098 -0.5 226

New Hanover, NC........................ 7.3 101.4 2.7 81 799 1.1 95

Wake, NC..................................... 30.0 485.0 3.7 34 984 0.5 141

Cass, ND...................................... 6.4 111.7 2.7 81 894 1.4 75

Butler, OH..................................... 7.5 142.6 2.3 107 846 -0.1 195

Cuyahoga, OH.............................. 35.8 716.4 0.6 239 1,012 -0.7 238

Delaware, OH............................... 4.6 82.2 1.3 175 955 -0.3 214

Franklin, OH................................. 30.0 708.0 2.7 81 971 0.5 141

Hamilton, OH................................ 23.3 499.0 1.2 188 1,074 -1.6 289

Lake, OH...................................... 6.3 94.0 -0.3 305 817 1.0 106

Lorain, OH.................................... 6.0 95.7 0.9 218 800 -1.7 293

Lucas, OH.................................... 10.1 206.7 1.9 130 852 -1.5 280

Mahoning, OH.............................. 6.0 99.1 0.3 271 709 -1.1 257

Montgomery, OH.......................... 12.0 245.6 0.4 260 861 -0.2 205

Stark, OH..................................... 8.8 157.2 0.2 279 758 0.7 128

Summit, OH................................. 14.1 260.1 0.5 249 878 -1.3 272

Warren, OH................................. 4.4 78.9 2.6 88 835 -2.8 319

Oklahoma, OK.............................. 25.8 440.4 0.9 218 962 0.7 128

Tulsa, OK..................................... 21.3 341.3 0.2 279 950 -3.6 327

Clackamas, OR............................ 13.1 143.8 0.7 230 914 2.1 43

Jackson, OR................................ 6.7 79.9 2.0 122 722 2.0 47

Lane, OR...................................... 11.0 141.1 1.3 175 772 2.3 36

Marion, OR................................... 9.6 135.8 4.3 17 778 2.4 31

Multnomah, OR............................ 30.8 461.1 2.8 76 1,006 2.0 47

Washington, OR........................... 17.1 262.6 3.7 34 1,163 5.9 3

Allegheny, PA............................... 34.8 691.0 0.4 260 1,068 1.1 95

Berks, PA..................................... 8.9 166.6 0.6 239 874 0.1 174

Bucks, PA..................................... 19.5 250.5 0.4 260 958 0.1 174

Butler, PA..................................... 4.9 84.5 -0.4 308 944 3.9 12

Chester, PA.................................. 15.1 242.1 0.6 239 1,293 -0.1 195

Cumberland, PA........................... 6.1 126.2 0.5 249 890 2.8 24

Dauphin, PA................................ 7.3 176.4 0.8 227 970 1.8 59

Delaware, PA............................... 13.6 217.9 1.3 175 1,071 0.9 114

Erie, PA........................................ 7.1 124.0 -0.1 296 774 -0.4 220

Lackawanna, PA.......................... 5.8 97.9 -0.3 305 741 1.8 59

 See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 335 largest counties,

fourth quarter 2013 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2013

(thousands)

December

2013

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2012-133

Ranking by

percent

change

Fourth

quarter

2013

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2012-133

Ranking by

percent

change

Lancaster, PA............................... 12.7 223.3 0.7 230 $828 1.7 62

Lehigh, PA.................................... 8.6 181.5 1.7 150 962 -0.5 226

Luzerne, PA.................................. 7.5 142.0 0.9 218 749 1.5 69

Montgomery, PA........................... 27.1 475.1 0.3 271 1,216 -3.0 321

Northampton, PA.......................... 6.5 105.7 0.8 227 851 2.0 47

Philadelphia, PA........................... 34.3 641.1 0.6 239 1,181 0.0 186

Washington, PA............................ 5.3 86.1 0.0 293 993 -2.4 311

Westmoreland, PA....................... 9.3 132.3 -1.3 327 795 0.1 174

York, PA....................................... 8.9 172.5 0.1 290 839 0.2 165

Providence, RI.............................. 17.5 276.5 1.3 175 1,015 2.0 47

Charleston, SC............................. 12.4 222.0 2.8 76 846 1.4 75

Greenville, SC.............................. 12.6 242.6 3.3 51 854 1.1 95

Horry, SC..................................... 7.8 106.9 1.6 156 587 1.4 75

Lexington, SC............................... 5.8 109.7 4.1 24 723 -1.0 253

Richland, SC................................ 9.3 208.0 0.8 227 846 0.6 134

Spartanburg, SC........................... 6.0 122.7 3.4 46 824 -0.4 220

York, SC....................................... 4.8 78.7 4.2 20 798 1.4 75

Minnehaha, SD............................. 6.8 120.0 2.3 107 847 0.4 150

Davidson, TN................................ 19.1 449.9 2.4 98 1,061 -1.7 293

Hamilton, TN................................ 8.7 189.1 0.3 271 905 0.9 114

Knox, TN...................................... 11.1 223.9 0.9 218 875 -0.2 205

Rutherford, TN.............................. 4.6 110.7 3.5 42 880 0.1 174

Shelby, TN.................................... 19.4 482.4 -0.2 300 1,019 -1.1 257

Williamson, TN............................. 6.9 105.6 4.6 11 1,169 -2.2 308

Bell, TX......................................... 4.9 111.9 1.8 139 790 0.6 134

Bexar, TX..................................... 36.6 784.1 2.3 107 882 0.7 128

Brazoria, TX................................. 5.2 96.1 1.7 150 965 2.9 22

Brazos, TX.................................... 4.1 94.5 3.4 46 735 0.4 150

Cameron, TX................................ 6.4 133.7 1.2 188 598 -1.5 280

Collin, TX...................................... 20.5 336.7 3.9 31 1,146 -1.5 280

Dallas, TX..................................... 71.0 1,530.1 3.2 57 1,197 -1.2 265

Denton, TX.................................. 12.2 199.0 4.4 15 875 0.2 165

El Paso, TX.................................. 14.3 285.7 1.0 207 686 -1.6 289

Fort Bend, TX............................... 10.7 162.4 4.8 6 1,025 1.6 64

Galveston, TX............................... 5.6 100.2 2.5 90 877 -2.4 311

Gregg, TX..................................... 4.2 77.8 1.1 200 922 3.0 19

Harris, TX..................................... 107.0 2,225.4 3.0 61 1,316 -1.2 265

Hidalgo, TX................................... 11.7 240.8 2.4 98 620 1.0 106

Jefferson, TX................................ 5.8 119.4 -0.2 300 997 -1.2 265

Lubbock, TX................................. 7.2 131.1 2.2 113 771 -0.1 195

McLennan, TX.............................. 5.0 103.1 0.2 279 809 -0.7 238

Midland, TX.................................. 5.2 86.5 4.8 6 1,299 2.0 47

Montgomery, TX........................... 9.7 155.1 4.6 11 1,006 1.0 106

Nueces, TX.................................. 8.1 162.2 2.4 98 875 -1.2 265

Potter, TX..................................... 4.0 78.4 0.5 249 803 0.0 186

Smith, TX..................................... 5.8 97.3 2.5 90 854 -0.8 245

Tarrant, TX................................... 39.6 820.4 2.0 122 988 1.6 64

Travis, TX..................................... 34.1 644.8 3.3 51 1,108 -0.6 232

Webb, TX..................................... 5.0 94.4 2.0 122 670 -2.0 305

Williamson, TX............................. 8.6 143.2 4.7 9 945 0.5 141

 See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 335 largest counties,

fourth quarter 2013 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2013

(thousands)

December

2013

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2012-133

Ranking by

percent

change

Fourth

quarter

2013

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2012-133

Ranking by

percent

change

Davis, UT..................................... 7.7 111.8 3.0 61 $767 -1.4 278

Salt Lake, UT................................ 40.3 625.6 3.3 51 933 -1.5 280

Utah, UT....................................... 13.8 191.5 4.2 20 812 -2.5 315

Weber, UT.................................... 5.6 94.3 2.1 118 721 -0.8 245

Chittenden, VT............................. 6.3 99.9 0.4 260 994 1.2 91

Arlington, VA................................ 8.8 165.5 -1.1 324 1,588 -2.4 311

Chesterfield, VA........................... 8.0 128.0 2.5 90 875 0.6 134

Fairfax, VA.................................... 35.1 588.4 -1.2 326 1,558 -2.0 305

Henrico, VA.................................. 10.4 180.7 -0.8 318 960 1.3 83

Loudoun, VA................................ 10.4 148.6 1.6 156 1,190 1.0 106

Prince William, VA........................ 8.1 117.7 0.7 230 863 -0.7 238

Alexandria City, VA...................... 6.2 95.6 -1.4 328 1,414 -3.2 324

Chesapeake City, VA................... 5.7 96.8 0.6 239 775 0.1 174

Newport News City, VA................ 3.7 99.4 1.0 207 920 0.8 120

Norfolk City, VA........................... 5.6 137.9 -0.3 305 953 -1.5 280

Richmond City, VA....................... 7.1 148.5 0.3 271 1,068 0.1 174

Virginia Beach City, VA................ 11.3 169.5 1.2 188 780 -10.0 332

Benton, WA.................................. 6.2 76.9 0.6 239 978 0.9 114

Clark, WA..................................... 15.0 137.2 3.7 34 896 0.4 150

King, WA...................................... 88.9 1,223.4 3.5 42 1,300 1.9 54

Kitsap, WA.................................... 7.1 81.5 1.3 175 847 -1.3 272

Pierce, WA................................... 23.6 275.7 3.0 61 869 0.0 186

Snohomish, WA............................ 21.2 267.3 1.8 139 1,020 1.1 95

Spokane, WA............................... 17.1 204.0 1.6 156 821 1.4 75

Thurston, WA............................... 8.1 101.2 2.2 113 860 2.4 31

Whatcom, WA.............................. 7.4 83.2 1.8 139 806 1.3 83

Yakima, WA................................. 9.5 95.7 0.7 230 689 1.8 59

Kanawha, WV............................... 6.0 104.4 -1.1 324 844 0.4 150

Brown, WI..................................... 6.6 149.8 1.4 170 894 -0.2 205

Dane, WI...................................... 14.4 313.9 1.1 200 1,003 4.7 9

Milwaukee, WI.............................. 24.8 481.7 0.5 249 963 -0.2 205

Outagamie, WI............................. 5.1 103.2 1.0 207 833 0.2 165

Waukesha, WI.............................. 12.6 231.8 1.1 200 993 -1.4 278

Winnebago, WI............................. 3.6 90.0 -1.8 330 962 5.0 6

San Juan, PR............................... 11.2 268.1 -2.1 (5) 659 -0.5 (5)

1 Includes areas not officially designated as counties. See Technical Note.

2 Average weekly wages were calculated using unrounded data.

3 Percent changes were computed from quarterly employment and pay data adjusted for noneconomic county reclassifications. See Technical

Note.

4 Totals for the United States do not include data for Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands.

5 This county was not included in the U.S. rankings.

Note: Data are preliminary. Includes workers covered by Unemployment Insurance (UI) and Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees

(UCFE) programs. These 334 U.S. counties comprise 71.7 percent of the total covered workers in the U.S.
Table 2. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 10 largest counties,

fourth quarter 2013

Employment Average weekly wage 1

County by NAICS supersector

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2013

(thousands)

December

2013

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2012-132

Fourth

quarter

2013

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2012-132

United States3................................................................. 9,333.7 136,129.4 1.8 $1,000 0.0

 Private industry............................................................. 9,041.0 114,706.1 2.1 1,006 -0.2

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 134.6 1,930.2 2.0 1,164 1.4

 Construction............................................................... 749.4 5,840.7 3.6 1,119 1.6

 Manufacturing............................................................ 336.5 12,051.4 0.8 1,220 1.3

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 1,909.1 26,685.6 2.0 831 0.7

 Information................................................................. 146.3 2,724.5 0.5 1,754 -3.4

 Financial activities...................................................... 825.6 7,673.9 1.2 1,587 -2.6

 Professional and business services........................... 1,652.0 18,834.1 2.9 1,331 -1.3

 Education and health services................................... 1,484.4 20,493.9 1.5 913 0.2

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 787.6 14,087.6 3.0 421 1.0

 Other services............................................................ 799.4 4,159.3 1.1 663 2.2

 Government.................................................................. 292.7 21,423.3 -0.3 965 0.5

Los Angeles, CA.............................................................. 440.9 4,176.8 1.9 1,161 -1.9

 Private industry............................................................. 435.1 3,639.6 2.2 1,150 -2.3

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.5 9.9 5.7 1,778 1.3

 Construction............................................................... 12.5 117.9 5.2 1,176 1.6

 Manufacturing............................................................ 12.5 366.0 0.2 1,183 0.3

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 52.1 806.8 1.7 914 0.8

 Information................................................................. 8.7 197.8 -0.5 2,197 -3.9

 Financial activities...................................................... 23.0 212.2 -0.7 1,765 -4.4

 Professional and business services........................... 45.1 615.2 3.3 1,418 -4.8

 Education and health services................................... 202.6 706.0 0.7 878 -0.7

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 28.8 443.8 4.6 946 -5.5

 Other services............................................................ 25.6 141.1 1.5 682 0.9

 Government.................................................................. 5.8 537.2 -0.2 1,232 1.1

Cook, IL........................................................................... 153.8 2,463.3 1.1 1,174 -1.0

 Private industry............................................................. 152.5 2,167.6 1.3 1,174 -1.4

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.1 0.8 0.0 1,103 2.9

 Construction............................................................... 12.7 62.3 1.5 1,511 1.8

 Manufacturing............................................................ 6.6 188.2 -1.1 1,265 0.9

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 30.3 466.5 0.9 913 1.4

 Information................................................................. 2.8 53.5 -2.6 1,666 2.6

 Financial activities...................................................... 15.9 183.9 -0.1 2,179 -6.5

 Professional and business services........................... 32.7 446.9 3.7 1,531 -3.7

 Education and health services................................... 16.2 420.9 1.4 960 -0.6

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 13.8 245.3 1.3 488 3.4

 Other services............................................................ 17.0 94.8 0.0 867 3.3

 Government.................................................................. 1.3 295.7 0.0 1,175 2.4

New York, NY.................................................................. 125.1 2,500.2 2.4 2,041 -3.3

 Private industry............................................................. 124.8 2,058.5 2.8 2,239 -4.1

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.0 0.2 1.3 1,932 2.6

 Construction............................................................... 2.2 33.4 1.0 2,099 5.1

 Manufacturing............................................................ 2.3 26.0 0.1 1,546 0.6

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 20.8 273.4 1.8 1,400 -8.8

 Information................................................................. 4.5 147.1 2.6 2,525 1.3

 Financial activities...................................................... 19.1 356.2 0.5 4,740 -8.4

 Professional and business services........................... 26.3 516.7 2.8 2,446 0.4

 Education and health services................................... 9.6 324.6 3.1 1,261 2.8

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 13.4 276.9 5.8 923 1.8

 Other services............................................................ 19.5 97.5 2.8 1,126 3.4

 Government.................................................................. 0.3 441.7 0.4 1,126 2.4

 See footnotes at end of table.
Table 2. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 10 largest counties,

fourth quarter 2013 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 1

County by NAICS supersector

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2013

(thousands)

December

2013

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2012-132

Fourth

quarter

2013

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2012-132

Harris, TX........................................................................ 107.0 2,225.4 3.0 $1,316 -1.2

 Private industry............................................................. 106.5 1,963.3 3.1 1,354 -1.4

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 1.8 97.7 7.5 3,383 -4.2

 Construction............................................................... 6.6 145.8 2.1 1,358 0.2

 Manufacturing............................................................ 4.6 198.0 2.9 1,591 -6.2

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 24.1 469.0 2.8 1,157 -2.8

 Information................................................................. 1.2 29.0 2.1 1,434 0.2

 Financial activities...................................................... 11.0 118.6 2.7 1,669 -2.2

 Professional and business services........................... 21.5 375.2 1.8 1,667 1.6

 Education and health services................................... 14.7 266.6 3.0 1,016 0.3

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 8.9 201.6 5.1 439 1.4

 Other services............................................................ 11.6 61.0 2.6 763 3.0

 Government.................................................................. 0.6 262.1 2.3 1,033 0.7

Maricopa, AZ.................................................................... 92.8 1,771.9 3.0 952 -1.3

 Private industry............................................................. 92.1 1,562.1 3.3 951 -1.8

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.5 8.2 -2.6 937 -4.2

 Construction............................................................... 7.4 92.3 4.2 1,039 -0.8

 Manufacturing............................................................ 3.1 113.7 0.0 1,308 1.3

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 20.5 361.3 3.0 855 -5.2

 Information................................................................. 1.5 32.2 3.5 1,242 -5.0

 Financial activities...................................................... 11.1 152.6 4.5 1,188 -1.1

 Professional and business services........................... 22.0 303.6 3.8 1,076 -1.2

 Education and health services................................... 10.8 258.0 2.1 1,009 0.6

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 7.4 191.1 5.8 440 -0.9

 Other services............................................................ 6.5 47.9 1.5 642 1.1

 Government.................................................................. 0.7 209.9 0.4 959 1.4

Dallas, TX........................................................................ 71.0 1,530.1 3.2 1,197 -1.2

 Private industry............................................................. 70.5 1,364.2 3.5 1,213 -1.4

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.6 9.3 5.4 3,778 -12.9

 Construction............................................................... 4.1 73.6 5.7 1,165 0.0

 Manufacturing............................................................ 2.7 106.9 -4.0 1,373 -2.0

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 15.4 321.3 5.6 1,058 -0.6

 Information................................................................. 1.4 48.7 4.1 1,779 6.5

 Financial activities...................................................... 8.7 150.6 3.9 1,585 -4.6

 Professional and business services........................... 15.8 295.6 3.3 1,460 0.1

 Education and health services................................... 8.7 178.3 2.8 1,042 -2.0

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 6.1 139.6 4.5 521 -1.3

 Other services............................................................ 6.8 39.7 2.0 770 -0.8

 Government.................................................................. 0.5 166.0 1.3 1,064 0.5

Orange, CA...................................................................... 107.0 1,463.1 2.0 1,114 -1.8

 Private industry............................................................. 105.7 1,325.5 2.1 1,119 -2.0

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.2 3.1 1.9 738 1.2

 Construction............................................................... 6.1 77.8 6.0 1,240 -1.8

 Manufacturing............................................................ 4.8 157.5 -0.6 1,341 -0.7

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 16.4 263.5 1.3 993 -0.8

 Information................................................................. 1.2 24.9 1.2 1,677 -0.5

 Financial activities...................................................... 10.0 112.5 0.6 1,915 -5.8

 Professional and business services........................... 19.7 265.9 0.9 1,335 -1.3

 Education and health services................................... 26.1 183.8 3.1 971 -2.9

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 7.5 188.1 3.7 438 1.2

 Other services............................................................ 6.2 41.0 0.7 689 6.2

 Government.................................................................. 1.3 137.6 1.2 1,067 0.4

 See footnotes at end of table.
Table 2. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 10 largest counties,

fourth quarter 2013 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 1

County by NAICS supersector

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2013

(thousands)

December

2013

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2012-132

Fourth

quarter

2013

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2012-132

San Diego, CA................................................................ 99.8 1,330.2 1.9 $1,107 0.8

 Private industry............................................................. 98.3 1,110.8 2.2 1,103 1.3

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.7 9.2 1.1 662 -0.3

 Construction............................................................... 6.0 62.1 6.4 1,121 -0.8

 Manufacturing............................................................ 3.0 95.1 -0.1 1,499 -2.0

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 13.8 223.2 1.1 818 -2.2

 Information................................................................. 1.1 23.9 -1.8 1,719 7.8

 Financial activities...................................................... 8.8 70.8 -0.8 1,370 -1.4

 Professional and business services........................... 17.2 226.7 2.6 1,787 5.9

 Education and health services................................... 27.2 179.8 1.3 955 -0.1

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 7.3 167.6 3.3 443 0.9

 Other services............................................................ 6.7 46.1 3.1 584 -3.2

 Government.................................................................. 1.4 219.5 0.4 1,130 -1.1

King, WA......................................................................... 88.9 1,223.4 3.5 1,300 1.9

 Private industry............................................................. 88.4 1,063.5 3.7 1,316 1.9

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.4 2.4 -0.8 1,360 -33.2

 Construction............................................................... 5.8 53.7 6.6 1,267 1.8

 Manufacturing............................................................ 2.3 105.6 2.6 1,532 3.2

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 14.8 231.3 4.6 1,110 2.4

 Information................................................................. 1.9 83.3 3.4 2,559 2.7

 Financial activities...................................................... 6.4 65.5 2.2 1,589 0.5

 Professional and business services........................... 15.1 202.1 3.5 1,704 0.6

 Education and health services................................... 26.8 158.5 2.8 946 1.1

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 6.8 120.7 4.5 532 9.9

 Other services............................................................ 8.2 40.4 3.8 811 5.3

 Government.................................................................. 0.5 159.8 1.8 1,190 1.1

Miami-Dade, FL............................................................... 94.5 1,047.5 2.5 982 0.8

 Private industry............................................................. 94.1 909.7 3.0 962 0.7

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.5 9.5 5.0 545 -7.3

 Construction............................................................... 5.3 33.8 10.0 945 -6.3

 Manufacturing............................................................ 2.7 36.5 2.6 952 2.0

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 27.8 274.6 3.0 890 4.7

 Information................................................................. 1.6 18.2 3.7 1,531 1.9

 Financial activities...................................................... 9.7 69.9 3.8 1,521 0.0

 Professional and business services........................... 20.0 141.1 2.9 1,268 -4.1

 Education and health services................................... 10.2 160.5 1.0 942 1.4

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 7.2 127.1 2.3 555 0.9

 Other services............................................................ 8.2 37.2 2.8 606 2.5

 Government.................................................................. 0.3 137.9 -0.5 1,112 1.8

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. See Technical Note.

3 Totals for the United States do not include data for Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands.

Note: Data are preliminary. Counties selected are based on 2012 annual average employment. Includes workers covered by Unemployment Insurance

(UI) and Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees (UCFE) programs.
Table 3. Covered establishments, employment, and wages by state,

fourth quarter 2013

Employment Average weekly wage 1

State

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2013

(thousands)

December

2013

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2012-13

Fourth

quarter

2013

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2012-13

United States2.......................................... 9,333.7 136,129.4 1.8 $1,000 0.0

Alabama.................................................... 117.0 1,866.5 1.0 851 -0.5

Alaska........................................................ 22.0 315.1 0.0 1,022 1.6

Arizona...................................................... 145.8 2,571.0 2.4 906 -0.5

Arkansas................................................... 87.5 1,154.3 -0.5 771 0.4

California................................................... 1,376.4 15,650.3 2.8 1,175 -0.9

Colorado.................................................... 175.3 2,383.9 3.1 1,023 -0.9

Connecticut............................................... 113.7 1,661.2 0.3 1,238 -1.3

Delaware................................................... 28.5 419.6 1.8 1,035 -0.6

District of Columbia................................... 36.0 727.3 0.6 1,638 -3.9

Florida....................................................... 635.5 7,739.5 2.7 883 0.2

Georgia...................................................... 278.6 3,986.9 2.5 924 -0.1

Hawaii........................................................ 38.9 632.9 1.7 871 0.3

Idaho......................................................... 54.1 634.5 2.6 754 3.0

Illinois........................................................ 404.2 5,758.9 1.0 1,060 0.2

Indiana....................................................... 159.6 2,896.9 1.6 814 -0.2

Iowa........................................................... 98.4 1,510.9 1.4 834 1.6

Kansas...................................................... 85.1 1,359.5 1.6 832 -0.4

Kentucky.................................................... 119.5 1,818.0 1.2 804 0.2

Louisiana................................................... 129.0 1,911.6 0.9 889 0.5

Maine......................................................... 49.8 586.8 0.8 786 1.7

Maryland.................................................... 166.2 2,555.1 0.4 1,076 -0.9

Massachusetts.......................................... 222.1 3,332.9 1.5 1,258 0.8

Michigan.................................................... 235.7 4,072.4 2.0 952 -0.2

Minnesota.................................................. 164.5 2,720.6 1.7 988 0.3

Mississippi................................................. 71.3 1,108.1 1.1 729 1.3

Missouri..................................................... 182.4 2,670.4 1.1 861 -0.2

Montana.................................................... 43.6 440.0 1.3 760 0.4

Nebraska................................................... 69.5 944.3 1.4 796 -0.1

Nevada...................................................... 75.1 1,180.5 3.0 884 0.7

New Hampshire......................................... 50.1 629.3 1.4 1,017 -0.8

New Jersey............................................... 265.3 3,887.5 1.2 1,186 1.1

New Mexico............................................... 56.4 796.2 -0.1 814 1.4

New York.................................................. 617.6 8,888.6 1.7 1,266 -1.1

North Carolina........................................... 258.2 4,045.5 1.9 860 0.7

North Dakota............................................. 31.2 435.0 3.3 980 3.8

Ohio........................................................... 288.9 5,175.4 1.4 887 0.0

Oklahoma.................................................. 106.4 1,581.3 0.6 851 -0.1

Oregon...................................................... 136.0 1,699.6 2.5 894 2.6

Pennsylvania............................................. 345.9 5,650.3 0.4 976 0.4

Rhode Island............................................. 35.6 462.7 1.4 960 1.5

South Carolina.......................................... 118.1 1,875.8 2.3 793 1.0

South Dakota............................................ 31.8 407.1 1.3 759 1.3

Tennessee................................................. 144.3 2,758.3 1.8 895 -0.9

Texas......................................................... 613.7 11,246.3 2.6 1,027 0.0

Utah........................................................... 89.9 1,284.7 3.1 836 -0.9

Vermont..................................................... 24.6 308.5 0.6 848 2.3

Virginia...................................................... 240.6 3,670.0 0.1 1,028 -1.3

Washington............................................... 253.8 2,976.0 2.5 1,034 1.7

West Virginia............................................. 49.8 710.1 -0.6 792 0.5

Wisconsin.................................................. 164.9 2,751.8 1.0 865 1.2

 See footnotes at end of table.
Table 3. Covered establishments, employment, and wages by state,

fourth quarter 2013 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 1

State

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2013

(thousands)

December

2013

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2012-13

Fourth

quarter

2013

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2012-13

Wyoming................................................... 25.6 279.2 0.6 $917 1.0

Puerto Rico............................................... 48.0 958.3 -2.3 551 0.2

Virgin Islands............................................ 3.3 38.5 -3.6 754 2.4

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.
Largest Counties

Higher than U.S. average

U.S. average or lower

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics 

 June 2014

Chart 3. Percent change in employment in counties with 75,000 or more employees,

December 2012-13 (U.S. average = 1.8 percent)
Largest Counties

Higher than U.S. average

U.S. average or lower

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics 

 June 2014

Chart 4. Percent change in average weekly wage in counties with 75,000 

or more employees, fourth quarter 2012-13 (U.S. average = 0.0 percent)