For release 10:00 a.m. (EDT), Thursday, June 28, 2012 USDL-12-1290 

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 2011 

From December 2010 to December 2011, employment increased in 266 of the 322 largest U.S. 

counties, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Kern, Calif., posted the largest increase, 

with a gain of 5.3 percent over the year, compared with national job growth of 1.4 percent. Within Kern, 

the largest employment increase occurred in natural resources and mining, which gained 8,896 jobs over 

the year (16.7 percent). Benton, Wash., experienced the largest over-the-year decrease in employment 

among the largest counties in the U.S. with a loss of 3.4 percent. 

The U.S. average weekly wage decreased over the year by 1.7 percent to $955 in the fourth quarter of 

2011. This is one of only five declines in the history of the series which dates back to 1978. (See 

Technical Note.) This is the only quarter in which the average weekly wage decline occurred while 

employment grew over the year and total wages decreased (-0.5 percent). Smaller bonus payments in the 

fourth quarter of 2011 contributed to the decrease in the average weekly wage. In contrast, the average 

weekly wage declines posted in the first two quarters of 2009 resulted from significant declines in both 

employment and wages. During this period, total wage declines were 5.0 percent or more, while 

employment losses were above 3.0 percent. In the fourth quarter of 2011, Olmsted, Minn., had the 

largest over-the-year decrease in average weekly wages with a loss of 21.3 percent. Within Olmsted, a 

total wage decline of $287.3 million (-29.1 percent) in the education and health services industry had the 

largest impact on the county’s decrease in average weekly wages. 

Chart 1. Large counties ranked by percent increase in 

employment, December 2010-11 

(U.S. average = 1.4 percent) 

Chart 2. Large counties ranked by percent decrease in 

average weekly wages, fourth quarter 2010-11 

(U.S. average = -1.7 percent) 

5.3

4.5 4.3 4.3 4.3

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Kern, 

Calif.

Fort Bend, 

Texas

Weld, 

Colo.

Williamson, 

Tenn.

Utah, 

Utah

-21.3

-8.6

-6.7 -6.5 -6.2

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

Olmsted, 

Minn.

Douglas, 

Colo.

Williamson, 

Tenn.

Durham, 

N.C.

St. Clair, 

Ill.
- 2 - 

Table A. Large counties ranked by December 2011 employment, December 2010-11 employment 

increase, and December 2010-11 percent increase in employment 

Employment in large counties

December 2011 employment Increase in employment, Percent increase in employment, 

(thousands) December 2010-11 December 2010-11

(thousands)

United States 131,254.2 United States 1,782.4 United States 1.4

Los Angeles, Calif. 3,953.7 Harris, Texas 62.7 Kern, Calif. 5.3

Cook, Ill. 2,413.1 New York, N.Y. 51.9 Fort Bend, Texas 4.5

New York, N.Y. 2,387.3 Maricopa, Ariz. 41.6 Weld, Colo. 4.3

Harris, Texas 2,081.7 Dallas, Texas 32.2 Williamson, Tenn. 4.3

Maricopa, Ariz. 1,683.7 Cook, Ill. 31.1 Utah, Utah 4.3

Dallas, Texas 1,460.4 Los Angeles, Calif. 27.5 Washington, Pa. 4.0

Orange, Calif. 1,390.2 King, Wash. 26.9 Rutherford, Tenn. 4.0

San Diego, Calif. 1,264.2 Hennepin, Minn. 23.4 Montgomery, Texas 4.0

King, Wash. 1,156.6 Oakland, Mich. 22.2 Harford, Md. 3.9

Miami-Dade, Fla. 996.2 Miami-Dade, Fla. 21.1 Webb, Texas 3.9

Tulsa, Okla., experienced the largest increase in average weekly wages with a gain of 8.6 percent over 

the year. County employment and wage data are compiled under the Quarterly Census of Employment 

and Wages (QCEW) program. 

Large County Employment 

In December 2011, national employment, as measured by the QCEW program, was 131.3 million, up 

by 1.4 percent or 1.8 million jobs, from December 2010. The 322 U.S. counties with 75,000 or more 

jobs accounted for 70.7 percent of total U.S. employment and 76.4 percent of total wages. These 322 

counties had a net job growth of 1.2 million over the year, accounting for 68.8 percent of the overall 

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

Kern, Calif., had the largest percentage increase in employment among the largest U.S. counties (5.3 

percent). The five counties with the largest increases in employment level were Harris, Texas; New 

York, N.Y.; Maricopa, Ariz.; Dallas, Texas; and Cook, Ill. These counties had a combined over-the-year 

gain of 219,500, or 12.3 percent of the overall employment increase for the U.S. 

Employment declined in 46 of the large counties from December 2010 to December 2011. Benton, 

Wash., had the largest over-the-year percentage decrease in employment (-3.4 percent). Within Benton, 

professional and business services was the largest contributor to the decrease in employment with a loss 

of 2,280 jobs (-9.5 percent). St. Clair, Ill., had the second largest employment decrease, followed by 

Jackson, Ore.; Frederick, Md.; and Monmouth, N.J. (See table 1.) 
- 3 - 

Table B. Large counties ranked by fourth quarter 2011 average weekly wages, fourth quarter 2010-11 

decrease in average weekly wages, and fourth quarter 2010-11 percent decrease in average weekly wages 

Average weekly wage in large counties

Average weekly wage, Decrease in average weekly Percent decrease in average 

fourth quarter 2011 wage, fourth quarter 2010-11 weekly wage, fourth

quarter 2010-11

United States $955 United States -$17 United States -1.7

New York, N.Y. $1,889 Olmsted, Minn. -$279 Olmsted, Minn. -21.3

Santa Clara, Calif. 1,836 Santa Clara, Calif. -111 Douglas, Colo. -8.6

Washington, D.C. 1,668 Douglas, Colo. -100 Williamson, Tenn. -6.7

Suffolk, Mass. 1,599 Durham, N.C. -84 Durham, N.C. -6.5

San Francisco, Calif. 1,597 Arlington, Va. -84 St. Clair, Ill. -6.2

Arlington, Va. 1,591 Fairfield, Conn. -77 Kitsap, Wash. -6.0

Fairfield, Conn. 1,589 Williamson, Tenn. -75 Santa Clara, Calif. -5.7

San Mateo, Calif. 1,556 Somerset, N.J. -74 Vanderburgh, Ind. -5.6

Fairfax, Va. 1,519 Loudoun, Va. -60 Williamson, Texas -5.3

Alexandria City, Va. 1,434 Denver, Colo. -59 Somerset, N.J. -5.0

Arlington, Va. -5.0

Loudoun, Va. -5.0

Large County Average Weekly Wages 

Average weekly wages for the nation decreased by 1.7 percent during the year ending in the fourth 

quarter of 2011. Among the 322 largest counties, 282 had over-the-year declines in average weekly 

wages. (See chart 4.) Olmsted, Minn., had the largest wage loss among the largest U.S. counties (-21.3 

percent). This decline reflects a return to normal pay in 2011 following a big payout in education and 

health services in the fourth quarter of 2010. 

Of the 322 largest counties, 36 experienced over-the-year increases in average weekly wages. Tulsa, 

Okla., had the largest average weekly wage increase with a gain of 8.6 percent. An acquisition within 

professional and business services resulted in large payouts in the fourth quarter of 2011, which 

significantly boosted the county’s average weekly wage. Total wages in this industry in Tulsa increased 

by $219.4 million (33.3 percent) over the year. Harford, Md., had the second largest increase in average 

weekly wages, followed by Lake, Ohio; Snohomish, Wash.; and Westmoreland, Pa. (See table 1.) 

Ten Largest U.S. Counties 

All of the 10 largest counties experienced over-the-year percentage increases in employment in 

December 2011. Harris, Texas, experienced the largest gain in employment (3.1 percent). Within Harris, 

professional and business services had the largest over-the-year level increase among all private industry 

groups with a gain of 16,195 jobs (5.0 percent). Orange, Calif., had the smallest percent increase in 

employment among the 10 largest counties. (See table 2.) 

Eight of the 10 largest U.S. counties had an over-the-year decrease in average weekly wages. San 

Diego, Calif., experienced the largest decrease in average weekly wages with a loss of 3.6 percent, 
- 4 - 

largely due to significant total wage declines over the year in financial activities (-$226.6 million or 

-17.3 percent). King, Wash., had the largest average weekly wage increase. 

For More Information

The tables and charts included in this release contain data for the nation and for the 322 U.S. counties 

with annual average employment levels of 75,000 or more in 2010. December 2011 employment and 

2011 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 9.2 million employer reports cover 131.3 million full- and parttime workers. For additional information about the quarterly employment and wages data, please read 

the Technical Note. Data for the fourth quarter of 2011 will be available later at 

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

The County Employment and Wages release for first quarter 2012 is scheduled to be released on 

Thursday, September 27, 2012. 
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 2011 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 2010 preliminary annual averages of employment. For 2011 data, four counties, Okaloosa, Fla., Rock Island, Ill., St. Tammany, La., and Potter, Texas, 

which were published in the 2010 releases, will be excluded from 

this and future 2011 releases because their 2010 annual average 

employment levels were less than 75,000.

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

QCEW BED CES

Source Count of UI administrative records 

submitted by 9.1 million establishments in first quarter of 2011

Count of longitudinally-linked UI 

administrative records submitted by 

6.7 million private-sector employers

Sample survey: 486,000 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

— 7 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 lossesUses UI file as a sampling frame and 

annually realigns (benchmarks) sample 

estimates to first quarter UI levels

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/
No counties have been added to the publication tables. 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 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 9.0 million employer reports of employment and wages submitted 

by states to the BLS in 2010. 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 2010, 

UI and UCFE programs covered workers in 127.8 million jobs. The 

estimated 123.2 million workers in these jobs (after adjustment for 

multiple jobholders) represented 95.3 percent of civilian wage and 

salary employment. Covered workers received $5.976 trillion in pay, 

representing 93.3 percent of the wage and salary component of personal income and 41.1 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. 

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 4-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 overthe-year changes. Percent changes are calculated using an adjusted 

version of the final 2010 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. 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. 

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 2010 edition 

of this publication, which was published in November 2011, contains selected data produced by Business Employment Dynamics 

(BED) on job gains and losses, as well as selected data from the first 

quarter 2011 version of this news release. Tables and additional 

content from Employment and Wages Annual Averages 2010 are 

now available online at http://www.bls.gov/cew/cewbultn10.htm. 

The 2011 edition of Employment and Wages Annual Averages Online will be available later in 2012. 

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 1 establishments, employment, and wages in the 323 largest counties,

fourth quarter 2011 2

County 3

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2011

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage 4

December

2011

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2010-11 5

Ranking by

percent

change

Fourth

quarter

2011

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2010-11 5

Ranking by

percent

change

United States 6 ................... 9,178.6 131,254.2 1.4 – $955 -1.7 – 

Jefferson, AL ...................... 17.7 334.7 0.9 172 964 -0.8 80

Madison, AL ....................... 8.9 179.1 -0.5 291 1,077 -0.6 67

Mobile, AL .......................... 9.8 165.6 -0.9 306 876 1.9 9

Montgomery, AL ................ 6.3 128.5 -0.7 303 877 0.5 28

Tuscaloosa, AL .................. 4.2 84.5 1.0 156 828 -0.4 55

Anchorage Borough, AK .... 8.3 152.1 1.6 97 1,015 -1.2 109

Maricopa, AZ ..................... 96.1 1,683.7 2.5 42 929 -1.0 95

Pima, AZ ............................ 19.0 348.9 0.1 256 828 -1.9 167

Benton, AR ........................ 5.5 95.8 2.0 78 869 2.7 6

Pulaski, AR ........................ 15.1 246.5 0.3 238 869 -0.5 58

Washington, AR ................. 5.6 92.3 1.9 83 828 ( 7) – 

Alameda, CA ...................... 57.5 641.2 1.6 97 1,212 -3.8 280

Contra Costa, CA ............... 30.6 319.5 0.7 191 1,139 -2.9 240

Fresno, CA ......................... 31.5 329.2 0.6 205 751 -1.8 157

Kern, CA ............................ 18.3 285.2 5.3 1 826 -0.8 80

Los Angeles, CA ................ 447.9 3,953.7 0.7 191 1,124 -3.2 258

Marin, CA ........................... 12.0 105.1 2.3 52 1,181 -1.1 105

Monterey, CA ..................... 13.2 147.5 2.1 70 799 -2.9 240

Orange, CA ........................ 106.1 1,390.2 0.6 205 1,080 -3.1 254

Placer, CA .......................... 11.1 128.0 2.1 70 935 -2.7 232

Riverside, CA ..................... 51.3 565.1 0.6 205 759 -1.6 137

Sacramento, CA ................ 55.1 575.4 -0.2 283 1,042 -1.4 121

San Bernardino, CA ........... 52.6 609.6 0.2 248 811 -1.6 137

San Diego, CA ................... 102.3 1,264.2 1.0 156 1,041 -3.6 275

San Francisco, CA ............. 56.7 572.3 3.3 20 1,597 0.8 24

San Joaquin, CA ................ 17.9 200.0 0.9 172 799 -3.0 247

San Luis Obispo, CA ......... 9.9 100.0 1.1 144 798 -2.0 176

San Mateo, CA .................. 24.9 333.9 2.5 42 1,556 0.1 36

Santa Barbara, CA ............. 14.8 173.6 2.5 42 894 -2.6 224

Santa Clara, CA ................. 64.3 883.0 2.3 52 1,836 -5.7 313

Santa Cruz, CA .................. 9.3 86.1 -0.9 306 860 -0.2 45

Solano, CA ......................... 10.3 120.7 0.5 222 925 -3.6 275

Sonoma, CA ...................... 19.4 177.9 0.6 205 895 -3.0 247

Stanislaus, CA ................... 15.4 158.2 0.7 191 775 -2.1 185

Tulare, CA .......................... 9.6 140.4 0.9 172 669 -0.6 67

Ventura, CA ....................... 24.5 301.5 0.6 205 954 -3.1 254

Yolo, CA ............................. 6.2 87.7 0.8 179 922 -4.9 307

Adams, CO ........................ 8.8 156.3 1.2 130 860 -2.4 212

Arapahoe, CO .................... 18.7 282.8 3.3 20 1,108 -1.4 121

Boulder, CO ....................... 12.9 158.8 2.6 38 1,114 -0.6 67

Denver, CO ........................ 25.4 429.3 2.2 63 1,162 -4.8 305

Douglas, CO ...................... 9.4 93.5 2.9 30 1,065 -8.6 318

El Paso, CO ....................... 16.7 236.5 1.0 156 870 -2.1 185

Jefferson, CO ..................... 17.7 208.0 2.0 78 976 -3.9 283

Larimer, CO ....................... 10.0 130.2 2.5 42 857 -0.1 38

Weld, CO ........................... 5.8 83.2 4.3 3 808 -1.5 126

Fairfield, CT ....................... 32.5 412.7 1.5 109 1,589 -4.6 300

Hartford, CT ....................... 25.4 495.5 0.7 191 1,145 -2.5 220

New Haven, CT ................. 22.3 356.3 1.0 156 1,006 -3.2 258

New London, CT ................ 6.9 123.5 -1.1 311 953 -0.4 55

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

fourth quarter 2011 2—Continued

County 3

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2011

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage 4

December

2011

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2010-11 5

Ranking by

percent

change

Fourth

quarter

2011

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2010-11 5

Ranking by

percent

change

New Castle, DE ................. 17.1 270.4 0.8 179 $1,102 -1.6 137

Washington, DC ................. 36.4 708.0 1.3 119 1,668 -1.2 109

Alachua, FL ........................ 6.5 116.1 0.2 248 825 -1.2 109

Brevard, FL ........................ 14.4 189.6 0.3 238 863 -4.7 303

Broward, FL ....................... 63.1 701.2 0.8 179 891 -3.4 267

Collier, FL .......................... 11.7 122.9 2.1 70 809 -4.3 294

Duval, FL ........................... 26.9 444.1 0.5 222 900 -4.1 289

Escambia, FL ..................... 7.8 120.2 0.0 267 765 -0.9 88

Hillsborough, FL ................. 37.5 587.1 1.3 119 920 -2.3 202

Lake, FL ............................. 7.2 80.0 0.6 205 649 -1.5 126

Lee, FL ............................... 18.5 201.1 1.1 144 761 -2.1 185

Leon, FL ............................. 8.2 138.9 -0.6 298 807 -2.7 232

Manatee, FL ....................... 9.2 107.3 3.3 20 736 -0.8 80

Marion, FL .......................... 7.9 89.9 -0.6 298 672 -1.0 95

Miami-Dade, FL ................. 87.8 996.2 2.2 63 939 -2.5 220

Orange, FL ......................... 35.9 672.5 2.0 78 828 -4.1 289

Palm Beach, FL ................. 49.4 511.7 2.4 48 931 -4.8 305

Pasco, FL ........................... 9.9 100.0 -0.1 275 666 -2.8 238

Pinellas, FL ........................ 30.6 382.4 0.6 205 884 -1.6 137

Polk, FL .............................. 12.4 192.7 -1.5 314 718 -0.8 80

Sarasota, FL ...................... 14.4 137.5 2.1 70 800 -1.8 157

Seminole, FL ...................... 13.8 157.2 1.1 144 781 -2.1 185

Volusia, FL ......................... 13.2 149.9 -0.1 275 673 -2.3 202

Bibb, GA ............................ 4.6 80.6 1.3 119 742 -2.2 195

Chatham, GA ..................... 7.7 131.2 1.1 144 806 -1.9 167

Clayton, GA ....................... 4.3 102.0 0.0 267 823 -0.5 58

Cobb, GA ........................... 21.1 297.0 1.9 83 975 -3.1 254

De Kalb, GA ....................... 17.8 278.6 1.2 130 979 -1.0 95

Fulton, GA .......................... 41.2 735.5 1.8 89 1,238 -3.9 283

Gwinnett, GA ..................... 24.0 305.4 1.6 97 922 -2.6 224

Muscogee, GA ................... 4.7 94.1 1.1 144 761 -2.6 224

Richmond, GA ................... 4.7 98.9 0.2 248 804 -2.1 185

Honolulu, HI ....................... 24.6 446.3 1.2 130 882 -1.5 126

Ada, ID ............................... 13.9 197.7 2.4 48 833 -4.0 286

Champaign, IL ................... 4.2 87.4 -0.5 291 786 -0.6 67

Cook, IL ............................. 147.3 2,413.1 1.3 119 1,122 -2.9 240

Du Page, IL ........................ 37.0 570.9 2.2 63 1,112 -1.1 105

Kane, IL ............................. 13.3 192.5 0.2 248 863 -0.9 88

Lake, IL .............................. 21.9 313.6 0.1 256 1,208 -4.5 298

McHenry, IL ....................... 8.6 92.4 -0.6 298 820 0.6 26

McLean, IL ......................... 3.8 86.2 0.3 238 937 1.5 11

Madison, IL ........................ 6.0 94.9 -0.7 303 791 -1.5 126

Peoria, IL ........................... 4.7 102.6 0.4 231 926 0.3 32

St. Clair, IL ......................... 5.6 96.6 -2.9 319 796 -6.2 315

Sangamon, IL .................... 5.3 130.5 0.8 179 956 -0.1 38

Will, IL ................................ 14.9 201.4 1.1 144 827 -4.4 296

Winnebago, IL .................... 6.8 125.8 0.1 256 815 -1.5 126

Allen, IN ............................. 9.0 174.6 1.0 156 775 -0.9 88

Elkhart, IN .......................... 4.9 104.6 3.8 11 717 -2.4 212

Hamilton, IN ....................... 8.4 112.9 3.4 19 877 -4.2 292

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

fourth quarter 2011 2—Continued

County 3

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2011

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage 4

December

2011

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2010-11 5

Ranking by

percent

change

Fourth

quarter

2011

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2010-11 5

Ranking by

percent

change

Lake, IN ............................. 10.4 188.4 2.1 70 $868 0.7 25

Marion, IN .......................... 23.9 558.9 1.7 94 948 -1.9 167

St. Joseph, IN .................... 6.0 117.7 1.5 109 763 -4.5 298

Vanderburgh, IN ................ 4.9 107.0 2.0 78 786 -5.6 312

Linn, IA ............................... 6.2 126.8 0.6 205 942 1.5 11

Polk, IA .............................. 14.7 270.2 1.8 89 940 -3.2 258

Scott, IA ............................. 5.2 87.8 1.6 97 799 -0.2 45

Johnson, KS ...................... 22.0 308.0 2.4 48 985 -1.0 95

Sedgwick, KS ..................... 12.7 240.9 0.2 248 877 -2.6 224

Shawnee, KS ..................... 5.0 94.9 -0.3 286 789 -1.6 137

Wyandotte, KS ................... 3.4 81.6 1.0 156 875 -2.1 185

Fayette, KY ........................ 9.3 179.5 ( 7) – 836 -1.9 167

Jefferson, KY ..................... 22.0 420.1 0.5 222 915 -1.0 95

Caddo, LA .......................... 7.4 122.3 0.0 267 812 -0.5 58

Calcasieu, LA ..................... 4.8 82.0 -0.5 291 817 0.6 26

East Baton Rouge, LA ....... 14.4 257.9 1.1 144 888 -3.0 247

Jefferson, LA ...................... 13.6 193.9 -0.9 306 896 -1.9 167

Lafayette, LA ...................... 8.9 136.2 2.7 33 951 -0.2 45

Orleans, LA ........................ 10.9 177.1 2.6 38 987 -4.6 300

Cumberland, ME ................ 12.6 171.1 0.7 191 865 -1.1 105

Anne Arundel, MD ............. 14.3 235.4 2.8 32 1,025 -2.3 202

Baltimore, MD .................... 20.8 366.8 0.5 222 988 -3.4 267

Frederick, MD .................... 6.1 91.5 -2.0 317 943 -2.5 220

Harford, MD ....................... 5.5 86.0 3.9 9 996 5.8 2

Howard, MD ....................... 8.9 153.4 2.2 63 1,159 -2.4 212

Montgomery, MD ............... 32.4 456.5 1.0 156 1,324 -0.5 58

Prince Georges, MD .......... 15.3 303.4 -0.4 288 1,009 -2.6 224

Baltimore City, MD ............. 13.7 332.1 0.8 179 1,114 -3.6 275

Barnstable, MA .................. 9.3 83.2 0.1 256 828 -1.3 119

Bristol, MA ......................... 16.5 212.3 0.3 238 856 -0.5 58

Essex, MA .......................... 22.2 302.5 1.4 115 1,024 -1.8 157

Hampden, MA .................... 15.5 197.2 0.5 222 864 -2.0 176

Middlesex, MA ................... 50.6 824.0 1.0 156 1,376 -3.0 247

Norfolk, MA ........................ 24.2 323.8 1.2 130 1,159 -2.1 185

Plymouth, MA .................... 14.4 173.9 0.6 205 903 -1.2 109

Suffolk, MA ........................ 23.9 593.5 2.2 63 1,599 -2.9 240

Worcester, MA ................... 22.0 319.5 1.3 119 965 -0.2 45

Genesee, MI ...................... 7.1 130.3 0.9 172 829 -0.1 38

Ingham, MI ......................... 6.2 155.2 0.1 256 899 -3.2 258

Kalamazoo, MI ................... 5.2 108.3 0.4 231 862 -2.0 176

Kent, MI ............................. 13.6 327.8 3.6 14 854 -1.7 151

Macomb, MI ....................... 16.6 287.4 2.0 78 999 1.1 19

Oakland, MI ....................... 36.6 650.0 3.5 17 1,104 -1.6 137

Ottawa, MI ......................... 5.4 105.0 3.6 14 833 -0.6 67

Saginaw, MI ....................... 4.0 83.4 2.3 52 786 -1.5 126

Washtenaw, MI .................. 7.8 194.9 0.5 222 993 -1.6 137

Wayne, MI .......................... 30.4 684.9 2.3 52 1,075 1.2 16

Anoka, MN ......................... 7.2 109.4 3.1 24 867 -3.1 254

Dakota, MN ........................ 9.7 171.5 1.2 130 900 -4.7 303

Hennepin, MN .................... 43.6 842.8 2.9 30 1,157 -4.6 300

Olmsted, MN ...................... 3.4 89.0 2.1 70 1,032 -21.3 319

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

fourth quarter 2011 2—Continued

County 3

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2011

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage 4

December

2011

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2010-11 5

Ranking by

percent

change

Fourth

quarter

2011

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2010-11 5

Ranking by

percent

change

Ramsey, MN ...................... 13.9 321.3 1.8 89 $1,027 -3.9 283

St. Louis, MN ..................... 5.6 93.3 -0.1 275 772 -1.2 109

Stearns, MN ....................... 4.3 80.6 2.3 52 756 -0.5 58

Harrison, MS ...................... 4.5 82.5 0.0 267 685 -3.5 274

Hinds, MS .......................... 6.1 122.8 0.1 256 828 -2.2 195

Boone, MO ......................... 4.5 85.4 3.5 17 732 -1.2 109

Clay, MO ............................ 5.0 89.4 0.0 267 884 -0.1 38

Greene, MO ....................... 8.0 151.8 2.5 42 709 -2.6 224

Jackson, MO ...................... 18.4 344.0 0.5 222 961 -2.0 176

St. Charles, MO ................. 8.2 125.4 2.3 52 746 -1.2 109

St. Louis, MO ..................... 32.0 569.5 0.4 231 1,017 -2.9 240

St. Louis City, MO .............. 9.1 218.9 1.3 119 1,029 -1.5 126

Yellowstone, MT ................ 6.0 77.5 2.7 33 803 -0.1 38

Douglas, NE ....................... 16.1 315.7 0.1 256 858 -2.6 224

Lancaster, NE .................... 8.3 156.2 1.2 130 763 -0.9 88

Clark, NV ........................... 47.8 807.9 1.2 130 841 -3.4 267

Washoe, NV ....................... 13.7 186.3 -0.3 286 860 -1.8 157

Hillsborough, NH ................ 11.9 190.7 0.7 191 1,093 -0.1 38

Rockingham, NH ................ 10.6 135.3 0.9 172 923 -2.3 202

Atlantic, NJ ......................... 6.7 131.8 0.2 248 827 -0.2 45

Bergen, NJ ......................... 33.4 435.4 0.7 191 1,198 -2.4 212

Burlington, NJ .................... 11.1 193.0 -0.5 291 1,020 -2.1 185

Camden, NJ ....................... 12.3 197.3 0.6 205 987 -4.0 286

Essex, NJ ........................... 20.8 343.9 0.3 238 1,178 -4.2 292

Gloucester, NJ ................... 6.2 97.9 -0.9 306 853 -1.3 119

Hudson, NJ ........................ 13.9 233.6 0.1 256 1,268 -1.1 105

Mercer, NJ ......................... 11.1 229.2 0.7 191 1,260 -2.2 195

Middlesex, NJ .................... 21.8 384.7 0.7 191 1,146 -2.3 202

Monmouth, NJ ................... 20.1 242.1 -1.6 316 1,005 -3.0 247

Morris, NJ .......................... 17.4 271.6 -0.2 283 1,400 -1.5 126

Ocean, NJ .......................... 12.2 145.6 1.1 144 797 -3.7 278

Passaic, NJ ........................ 12.3 175.4 1.4 115 1,024 2.4 7

Somerset, NJ ..................... 10.1 171.3 0.7 191 1,393 -5.0 308

Union, NJ ........................... 14.5 221.6 0.8 179 1,222 1.0 21

Bernalillo, NM .................... 17.8 310.2 -0.8 305 829 -2.7 232

Albany, NY ......................... 10.0 220.1 -0.1 275 957 -2.2 195

Bronx, NY .......................... 16.9 235.6 -0.1 275 908 ( 7) – 

Broome, NY ....................... 4.5 90.9 -0.5 291 749 -1.6 137

Dutchess, NY ..................... 8.2 113.2 0.6 205 956 -1.4 121

Erie, NY ............................. 23.7 459.4 0.4 231 828 -1.0 95

Kings, NY ........................... 52.0 518.8 2.3 52 806 -3.4 267

Monroe, NY ........................ 18.2 379.7 1.7 94 887 -0.6 67

Nassau, NY ........................ 52.7 603.4 1.3 119 1,110 -0.9 88

New York, NY .................... 122.0 2,387.3 2.2 63 1,889 -2.3 202

Oneida, NY ........................ 5.2 106.9 -1.5 314 749 -1.7 151

Onondaga, NY ................... 12.9 243.1 0.0 267 879 -1.6 137

Orange, NY ........................ 9.9 133.3 0.6 205 806 -1.6 137

Queens, NY ....................... 46.4 512.3 2.3 52 916 -2.4 212

Richmond, NY .................... 9.0 93.7 1.2 130 814 -3.3 263

Rockland, NY ..................... 9.9 116.7 1.3 119 991 -4.3 294

Suffolk, NY ......................... 50.6 621.7 0.7 191 1,056 -0.8 80

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

fourth quarter 2011 2—Continued

County 3

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2011

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage 4

December

2011

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2010-11 5

Ranking by

percent

change

Fourth

quarter

2011

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2010-11 5

Ranking by

percent

change

Westchester, NY ................ 36.0 410.2 0.8 179 $1,278 -4.1 289

Buncombe, NC .................. 8.0 113.0 0.8 179 734 -1.5 126

Catawba, NC ..................... 4.4 79.2 1.0 156 730 -0.3 54

Cumberland, NC ................ 6.3 120.2 0.8 179 771 0.5 28

Durham, NC ....................... 7.3 182.4 1.6 97 1,205 -6.5 316

Forsyth, NC ........................ 9.0 174.4 1.2 130 853 -3.4 267

Guilford, NC ....................... 14.2 265.3 1.1 144 819 -2.4 212

Mecklenburg, NC ............... 32.8 565.5 3.1 24 1,047 -3.3 263

New Hanover, NC .............. 7.4 96.6 1.1 144 790 -1.9 167

Wake, NC .......................... 29.6 447.9 2.1 70 945 -1.6 137

Cass, ND ........................... 6.1 105.0 3.7 12 830 0.4 30

Butler, OH .......................... 7.4 141.4 0.6 205 821 -1.8 157

Cuyahoga, OH ................... 36.1 695.8 0.9 172 971 -1.9 167

Franklin, OH ....................... 29.8 669.6 2.3 52 932 -0.6 67

Hamilton, OH ..................... 23.4 490.7 1.2 130 1,032 -1.4 121

Lake, OH ............................ 6.5 94.8 1.3 119 842 4.9 3

Lorain, OH ......................... 6.1 95.0 2.1 70 797 1.1 19

Lucas, OH .......................... 10.3 203.6 1.2 130 837 -1.2 109

Mahoning, OH .................... 6.1 98.1 0.7 191 693 -1.8 157

Montgomery, OH ............... 12.2 244.3 0.8 179 841 -2.0 176

Stark, OH ........................... 8.8 153.9 1.5 109 730 -1.6 137

Summit, OH ....................... 14.4 257.3 0.3 238 858 -1.7 151

Oklahoma, OK ................... 24.7 426.4 1.6 97 902 -0.2 45

Tulsa, OK ........................... 20.3 333.4 1.0 156 963 8.6 1

Clackamas, OR .................. 12.7 140.1 1.3 119 862 -0.6 67

Jackson, OR ...................... 6.6 75.8 -2.6 318 689 -1.7 151

Lane, OR ........................... 10.8 136.8 0.8 179 738 -0.9 88

Marion, OR ........................ 9.4 128.8 -0.6 298 734 -1.2 109

Multnomah, OR .................. 29.4 437.7 1.8 89 969 -1.0 95

Washington, OR ................ 16.3 248.0 2.7 33 1,085 1.4 14

Allegheny, PA .................... 35.5 685.4 1.2 130 1,011 -1.9 167

Berks, PA ........................... 9.0 164.8 0.6 205 851 -2.0 176

Bucks, PA .......................... 19.9 252.3 0.5 222 929 -2.3 202

Butler, PA ........................... 4.9 82.6 1.9 83 856 -0.1 38

Chester, PA ....................... 15.2 238.6 0.1 256 1,284 1.3 15

Cumberland, PA ................ 6.1 124.4 0.9 172 843 -4.0 286

Dauphin, PA ....................... 7.5 174.8 -0.4 288 917 -3.8 280

Delaware, PA ..................... 13.7 210.3 0.1 256 1,003 -0.9 88

Erie, PA .............................. 7.8 125.4 1.2 130 761 0.9 22

Lackawanna, PA ................ 5.9 97.8 -1.2 312 718 -3.0 247

Lancaster, PA .................... 12.7 219.5 -0.1 275 787 -2.7 232

Lehigh, PA ......................... 8.6 177.9 1.1 144 938 -2.4 212

Luzerne, PA ....................... 7.8 140.7 0.7 191 723 -3.0 247

Montgomery, PA ................ 27.3 467.3 0.1 256 1,173 -2.2 195

Northampton, PA ............... 6.5 100.7 1.0 156 833 -2.0 176

Philadelphia, PA ................ 34.8 632.6 -0.6 298 1,133 -2.2 195

Washington, PA ................. 5.7 85.5 4.0 6 900 2.0 8

Westmoreland, PA ............. 9.5 131.8 -0.1 275 803 2.9 5

York, PA ............................. 9.2 171.3 0.3 238 808 -3.3 263

Providence, RI ................... 17.3 270.0 -0.1 275 964 -1.6 137

Charleston, SC .................. 11.8 213.3 2.7 33 829 -1.2 109

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

fourth quarter 2011 2—Continued

County 3

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2011

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage 4

December

2011

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2010-11 5

Ranking by

percent

change

Fourth

quarter

2011

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2010-11 5

Ranking by

percent

change

Greenville, SC .................... 12.2 235.1 3.0 28 $814 -3.8 280

Horry, SC ........................... 7.6 101.9 0.2 248 569 -2.7 232

Lexington, SC .................... 5.5 97.9 2.7 33 712 -1.4 121

Richland, SC ...................... 8.9 204.1 0.4 231 827 -0.7 77

Spartanburg, SC ................ 5.8 114.0 1.0 156 817 -0.2 45

Minnehaha, SD .................. 6.6 115.3 1.5 109 814 0.9 22

Davidson, TN ..................... 18.1 429.9 2.3 52 1,022 -2.9 240

Hamilton, TN ...................... 8.4 185.2 1.1 144 861 -0.2 45

Knox, TN ............................ 10.7 222.1 1.9 83 842 -0.7 77

Rutherford, TN ................... 4.4 100.3 4.0 6 841 -2.2 195

Shelby, TN ......................... 18.9 475.9 1.8 89 968 -3.7 278

Williamson, TN ................... 6.1 95.1 4.3 3 1,050 -6.7 317

Bell, TX .............................. 4.8 108.1 1.5 109 773 1.2 16

Bexar, TX ........................... 34.7 741.7 1.6 97 863 -0.2 45

Brazoria, TX ....................... 4.9 89.6 1.6 97 909 1.5 11

Brazos, TX ......................... 4.0 87.2 -1.4 313 707 -1.0 95

Cameron, TX ..................... 6.4 126.8 0.0 267 597 -1.8 157

Collin, TX ........................... 18.9 302.4 2.6 38 1,085 0.0 37

Dallas, TX .......................... 69.1 1,460.4 2.3 52 1,148 -2.0 176

Denton, TX ......................... 11.3 184.1 3.7 12 831 -1.0 95

El Paso, TX ........................ 14.0 277.0 0.3 238 674 -2.3 202

Fort Bend, TX .................... 9.6 140.7 4.5 2 954 -2.7 232

Galveston, TX .................... 5.4 96.1 1.3 119 869 -0.5 58

Harris, TX ........................... 102.9 2,081.7 3.1 24 1,239 0.2 34

Hidalgo, TX ........................ 11.3 229.0 1.4 115 601 -1.6 137

Jefferson, TX ..................... 5.9 124.0 1.6 97 966 1.2 16

Lubbock, TX ....................... 7.1 125.6 -0.2 283 717 -3.4 267

McLennan, TX ................... 4.9 100.7 0.4 231 773 -2.4 212

Montgomery, TX ................ 9.0 137.9 4.0 6 910 -1.8 157

Nueces, TX ........................ 7.9 154.2 1.2 130 841 1.6 10

Smith, TX ........................... 5.6 94.1 0.6 205 817 -1.7 151

Tarrant, TX ......................... 38.3 775.2 2.2 63 933 -4.4 296

Travis, TX .......................... 31.4 591.6 3.1 24 1,080 0.2 34

Webb, TX ........................... 4.9 91.5 3.9 9 651 -0.5 58

Williamson, TX ................... 7.8 130.5 1.9 83 914 -5.3 311

Davis, UT ........................... 7.3 106.4 ( 7) – 771 ( 7) – 

Salt Lake, UT ..................... 37.7 582.3 2.6 38 896 -2.9 240

Utah, UT ............................ 13.0 174.1 4.3 3 760 -0.8 80

Weber, UT ......................... 5.5 89.8 1.4 115 703 -2.1 185

Chittenden, VT ................... 6.0 98.4 3.0 28 943 -1.8 157

Arlington, VA ...................... 8.4 168.4 0.3 238 1,591 -5.0 308

Chesterfield, VA ................. 7.7 116.6 1.6 97 852 -2.5 220

Fairfax, VA ......................... 34.9 592.7 1.7 94 1,519 -1.5 126

Henrico, VA ........................ 10.0 175.5 1.0 156 939 -2.0 176

Loudoun, VA ...................... 9.9 139.8 2.5 42 1,136 -5.0 308

Prince William, VA ............. 7.9 110.9 3.2 23 848 -2.8 238

Alexandria City, VA ............ 6.3 96.0 0.6 205 1,434 0.4 30

Chesapeake City, VA ......... 5.7 96.4 0.2 248 751 -0.7 77

Newport News City, VA ..... 3.8 98.1 1.9 83 876 -1.7 151

Norfolk City, VA ................. 5.6 139.6 0.8 179 933 -2.6 224

Richmond City, VA ............. 7.3 150.3 1.6 97 1,027 -3.3 263

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

fourth quarter 2011 2—Continued

County 3

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2011

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage 4

December

2011

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2010-11 5

Ranking by

percent

change

Fourth

quarter

2011

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2010-11 5

Ranking by

percent

change

Virginia Beach City, VA ...... 11.4 162.6 0.5 222 $763 -0.8 80

Benton, WA ........................ 5.6 77.5 -3.4 320 991 -3.2 258

Clark, WA ........................... 13.3 129.0 1.0 156 844 -2.3 202

King, WA ............................ 82.0 1,156.6 2.4 48 1,220 0.3 32

Kitsap, WA ......................... 6.6 81.0 -0.5 291 836 -6.0 314

Pierce, WA ......................... 21.4 261.8 0.0 267 842 -1.8 157

Snohomish, WA ................. 18.9 252.1 3.6 14 1,001 3.0 4

Spokane, WA ..................... 15.7 198.1 0.4 231 783 -0.6 67

Thurston, WA ..................... 7.3 96.3 -0.9 306 831 -2.1 185

Whatcom, WA .................... 6.9 79.3 1.0 156 773 -0.5 58

Yakima, WA ....................... 8.8 93.9 1.5 109 648 -0.8 80

Kanawha, WV .................... 6.0 106.6 1.6 97 834 -1.0 95

Brown, WI .......................... 6.5 146.4 0.3 238 851 -1.5 126

Dane, WI ............................ 14.0 304.5 1.0 156 907 -2.3 202

Milwaukee, WI ................... 22.5 472.9 -0.4 288 942 -3.4 267

Outagamie, WI ................... 5.0 102.1 0.6 205 797 -0.4 55

Waukesha, WI ................... 12.6 224.7 0.7 191 940 -0.6 67

Winnebago, WI .................. 3.7 89.6 -0.5 291 885 -1.9 167

San Juan, PR ..................... 11.3 272.5 0.7 ( 8) 655 -1.8 ( 8) 

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

These 322 large U.S. counties comprise 70.7 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 Average weekly wages were calculated using unrounded data. 5 Percent changes were computed from quarterly employment and pay data adjusted for noneconomic county reclassifications. See Technical

Note. 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. Covered 1 establishments, employment, and wages in the 10 largest counties,

fourth quarter 2011 2

County by NAICS supersector

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2011

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage 3

December

2011

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2010-11 4

Fourth

quarter

2011

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2010-11 4

United States 5 ................................................... 9,178.6 131,254.2 1.4 $955 -1.7

Private industry .............................................. 8,881.5 109,730.2 1.9 957 -1.6

Natural resources and mining .................... 129.2 1,848.4 7.0 1,082 1.9

Construction ............................................... 762.3 5,466.3 1.3 1,050 -0.9

Manufacturing ............................................ 337.4 11,789.5 1.9 1,169 -3.1

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 1,880.8 25,771.9 1.7 796 -1.2

Information ................................................. 144.0 2,684.6 -1.1 1,500 -0.9

Financial activities ...................................... 811.1 7,470.7 0.5 1,462 -1.7

Professional and business services ........... 1,580.3 17,615.4 3.0 1,266 -1.8

Education and health services ................... 916.6 19,305.0 1.9 904 -2.2

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 762.3 13,143.3 2.2 404 -1.2

Other services ............................................ 1,342.4 4,414.6 1.1 600 -0.7

Government ................................................... 297.1 21,523.9 -1.4 944 -2.0

Los Angeles, CA ................................................ 447.9 3,953.7 0.7 1,124 -3.2

Private industry .............................................. 442.3 3,398.7 1.2 1,117 -3.5

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.4 9.5 3.4 1,413 -21.6

Construction ............................................... 12.3 106.5 3.5 1,113 -2.8

Manufacturing ............................................ 12.7 363.9 -1.6 1,140 -4.6

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 50.7 774.0 1.5 867 -1.5

Information ................................................. 8.4 193.0 -4.0 2,077 -6.5

Financial activities ...................................... 22.0 211.6 0.0 1,536 -3.3

Professional and business services ........... 42.0 556.7 2.1 1,401 -5.7

Education and health services ................... 29.3 520.9 2.0 1,053 -1.0

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 27.2 401.2 2.4 911 -2.8

Other services ............................................ 212.4 239.1 -1.7 458 -3.6

Government ................................................... 5.6 555.0 -2.0 1,166 -1.2

Cook, IL .............................................................. 147.3 2,413.1 1.3 1,122 -2.9

Private industry .............................................. 145.9 2,115.1 1.6 1,124 -3.1

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.1 0.8 -2.0 1,111 -2.9

Construction ............................................... 12.3 61.6 1.2 1,402 -1.3

Manufacturing ............................................ 6.6 194.3 -0.4 1,201 -3.7

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 28.6 456.8 1.3 858 -3.3

Information ................................................. 2.6 51.6 -0.6 1,571 0.4

Financial activities ...................................... 15.6 185.1 -1.6 2,013 1.0

Professional and business services ........... 31.1 425.6 3.2 1,483 -6.1

Education and health services ................... 15.5 408.0 1.8 961 -1.3

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 13.0 232.9 3.1 459 -2.1

Other services ............................................ 16.2 95.4 1.8 804 -1.7

Government ................................................... 1.4 298.0 -0.7 1,109 -1.8

New York, NY ..................................................... 122.0 2,387.3 2.2 1,889 -2.3

Private industry .............................................. 121.8 1,950.0 2.9 2,071 -2.9

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.0 0.1 -13.2 1,666 -49.8

Construction ............................................... 2.1 30.2 -0.1 1,951 -2.7

Manufacturing ............................................ 2.4 25.9 -0.4 1,783 -7.9

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 20.9 259.6 3.8 1,347 -0.4

Information ................................................. 4.3 140.3 4.5 2,315 2.3

Financial activities ...................................... 19.0 356.4 0.9 4,092 -3.4

Professional and business services ........... 25.3 481.6 3.3 2,263 -3.7

Education and health services ................... 9.3 307.3 1.4 1,198 -0.7

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 12.9 250.9 4.7 883 -3.9

Other services ............................................ 18.9 90.9 2.1 1,113 -0.6

Government ................................................... 0.3 437.3 -0.8 1,088 -0.5

See footnotes at end of table.
Table 2. Covered 1 establishments, employment, and wages in the 10 largest counties,

fourth quarter 2011 2—Continued

County by NAICS supersector

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2011

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage 3

December

2011

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2010-11 4

Fourth

quarter

2011

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2010-11 4

Harris, TX ........................................................... 102.9 2,081.7 3.1 $1,239 0.2

Private industry .............................................. 102.3 1,827.4 4.1 1,273 0.1

Natural resources and mining .................... 1.7 85.8 12.0 3,219 0.7

Construction ............................................... 6.5 134.6 2.2 1,235 0.7

Manufacturing ............................................ 4.5 183.5 7.4 1,555 -1.8

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 23.0 446.8 3.5 1,104 0.4

Information ................................................. 1.3 27.9 -1.6 1,393 -2.5

Financial activities ...................................... 10.6 112.8 0.4 1,548 -0.6

Professional and business services ........... 20.5 341.3 5.0 1,568 -0.9

Education and health services ................... 11.6 248.7 3.0 959 -1.6

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 8.4 183.6 3.7 416 -1.0

Other services ............................................ 13.7 61.5 2.3 682 0.4

Government ................................................... 0.6 254.3 -3.5 996 -0.8

Maricopa, AZ ...................................................... 96.1 1,683.7 2.5 929 -1.0

Private industry .............................................. 95.4 1,469.8 3.0 932 -1.0

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.5 8.1 4.3 919 10.5

Construction ............................................... 8.4 81.8 2.5 976 -1.4

Manufacturing ............................................ 3.2 110.0 1.3 1,285 -3.3

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 22.2 353.5 3.5 896 4.4

Information ................................................. 1.6 27.3 1.2 1,230 -3.9

Financial activities ...................................... 11.2 141.5 5.4 1,122 -1.2

Professional and business services ........... 22.8 277.4 2.3 1,022 -1.6

Education and health services ................... 10.6 246.9 3.6 987 -4.3

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 7.4 176.0 2.7 432 -2.5

Other services ............................................ 6.7 46.8 0.7 611 -1.9

Government ................................................... 0.7 213.9 -0.8 906 -1.4

Dallas, TX ........................................................... 69.1 1,460.4 2.3 1,148 -2.0

Private industry .............................................. 68.6 1,297.1 3.1 1,164 -2.2

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.6 9.9 10.2 4,425 7.9

Construction ............................................... 4.0 67.0 0.6 1,100 -2.1

Manufacturing ............................................ 2.8 114.9 1.1 1,324 -4.6

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 15.0 297.7 3.4 1,012 -2.7

Information ................................................. 1.6 45.9 0.9 1,605 -2.1

Financial activities ...................................... 8.6 141.7 3.2 1,483 -0.3

Professional and business services ........... 15.2 277.9 4.1 1,384 -2.1

Education and health services ................... 7.4 170.4 2.4 1,038 -4.2

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 5.8 131.1 4.3 497 -3.7

Other services ............................................ 7.2 39.8 3.4 702 0.1

Government ................................................... 0.5 163.3 -4.2 1,022 -1.2

Orange, CA ........................................................ 106.1 1,390.2 0.6 1,080 -3.1

Private industry .............................................. 104.7 1,254.0 1.3 1,086 -3.0

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.2 3.3 -4.1 699 -3.7

Construction ............................................... 6.2 69.5 1.3 1,180 -4.6

Manufacturing ............................................ 4.8 153.8 0.6 1,291 -4.4

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 15.9 254.7 0.5 985 -3.4

Information ................................................. 1.2 23.4 -2.8 1,504 -7.3

Financial activities ...................................... 9.6 106.3 0.3 1,878 -0.1

Professional and business services ........... 18.6 251.3 0.6 1,260 -3.5

Education and health services ................... 10.4 160.6 1.9 1,034 -1.6

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 7.2 175.7 3.3 413 -2.1

Other services ............................................ 22.4 48.3 -0.5 565 1.1

Government ................................................... 1.4 136.2 ( 6) 1,030 ( 6) 

See footnotes at end of table.
Table 2. Covered 1 establishments, employment, and wages in the 10 largest counties,

fourth quarter 2011 2—Continued

County by NAICS supersector

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2011

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage 3

December

2011

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2010-11 4

Fourth

quarter

2011

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2010-11 4

San Diego, CA ................................................... 102.3 1,264.2 1.0 $1,041 -3.6

Private industry .............................................. 100.9 1,046.5 1.5 1,029 -3.3

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.7 10.4 3.3 574 -2.2

Construction ............................................... 6.0 54.8 0.6 1,135 -3.2

Manufacturing ............................................ 2.9 93.1 -0.2 1,448 -2.0

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 13.4 210.8 1.5 785 -3.1

Information ................................................. 1.2 24.3 -2.4 1,605 0.4

Financial activities ...................................... 8.4 68.3 0.4 1,222 -17.5

Professional and business services ........... 16.2 215.2 1.3 1,524 -1.5

Education and health services ................... 8.5 149.4 2.2 1,009 -0.9

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 7.0 155.6 1.5 441 -0.5

Other services ............................................ 29.4 57.9 ( 6) 519 -2.1

Government ................................................... 1.4 217.7 -1.6 1,095 -5.3

King, WA ............................................................ 82.0 1,156.6 2.4 1,220 0.3

Private industry .............................................. 81.4 1,000.4 2.9 1,229 0.2

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.4 2.7 13.5 1,487 -1.5

Construction ............................................... 5.5 46.3 1.1 1,265 1.6

Manufacturing ............................................ 2.2 101.5 4.5 1,520 2.1

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 14.5 217.3 3.1 1,028 0.3

Information ................................................. 1.8 80.0 1.4 2,213 5.1

Financial activities ...................................... 6.2 64.5 -1.4 1,454 -0.5

Professional and business services ........... 13.8 185.9 3.8 1,596 -2.2

Education and health services ................... 7.2 137.5 3.2 989 -1.3

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 6.4 111.6 4.0 477 -0.2

Other services ............................................ 23.5 53.0 1.4 587 -2.3

Government ................................................... 0.6 156.3 -0.6 1,162 0.5

Miami-Dade, FL .................................................. 87.8 996.2 2.2 939 -2.5

Private industry .............................................. 87.5 856.1 3.0 909 -2.8

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.5 9.1 -1.5 594 14.2

Construction ............................................... 4.9 29.2 -6.0 917 -5.0

Manufacturing ............................................ 2.6 35.9 1.2 897 -2.6

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 25.1 259.8 3.9 813 -4.0

Information ................................................. 1.4 17.4 -0.4 1,371 -4.2

Financial activities ...................................... 9.0 63.3 2.9 1,385 -2.2

Professional and business services ........... 18.2 131.3 3.8 1,229 -5.5

Education and health services ................... 9.8 156.4 2.1 925 1.1

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 6.6 115.0 3.9 536 0.2

Other services ............................................ 7.8 37.2 4.2 568 -3.2

Government ................................................... 0.4 140.1 -2.8 1,117 -0.4

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

programs. 2 Data are preliminary. Counties selected are based on 2010 annual average employment. 3 Average weekly wages were calculated using unrounded data. 4 Percent changes were computed from quarterly employment and pay data adjusted for noneconomic county reclassifications. See

Technical Note. 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. Covered 1 establishments, employment, and wages by state, 

fourth quarter 2011 2

State

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2011

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage 3

December

2011

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2010-11

Fourth

quarter

2011

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2010-11

United States 4 ................... 9,178.6 131,254.2 1.4 $955 -1.7

Alabama ............................. 116.7 1,828.3 0.2 832 -0.8

Alaska ................................ 21.8 311.3 1.6 982 -0.5

Arizona ............................... 146.6 2,458.4 1.7 882 -1.1

Arkansas ............................ 84.8 1,157.1 0.9 736 -1.2

California ............................ 1,417.5 14,731.8 1.3 1,100 -2.7

Colorado ............................ 169.6 2,250.1 2.1 975 -2.6

Connecticut ........................ 110.7 1,642.0 0.9 1,188 -3.1

Delaware ............................ 27.7 405.9 0.4 984 -1.6

District of Columbia ............ 36.4 708.0 1.3 1,668 -1.2

Florida ................................ 602.0 7,364.1 1.4 847 -2.8

Georgia .............................. 268.9 3,826.9 1.0 885 -2.2

Hawaii ................................ 38.5 607.0 1.4 845 -1.5

Idaho .................................. 54.0 606.4 0.8 717 -2.2

Illinois ................................. 388.2 5,635.9 1.1 1,013 -2.1

Indiana ............................... 160.4 2,799.2 2.0 789 -1.9

Iowa ................................... 93.9 1,464.2 1.1 793 -0.8

Kansas ............................... 88.4 1,320.1 0.7 800 -1.5

Kentucky ............................ 108.0 1,770.2 1.3 786 -1.0

Louisiana ........................... 124.8 1,870.8 1.0 850 -1.7

Maine ................................. 49.2 580.9 0.4 755 -1.8

Maryland ............................ 162.2 2,516.4 1.1 1,058 -2.0

Massachusetts ................... 227.5 3,230.8 1.3 1,192 -2.1

Michigan ............................ 242.3 3,911.8 2.4 933 -0.5

Minnesota .......................... 168.6 2,636.4 2.1 936 -3.9

Mississippi ......................... 69.3 1,083.8 0.3 699 -1.1

Missouri ............................. 175.7 2,617.0 0.8 825 -1.7

Montana ............................. 42.2 426.7 1.8 727 0.7

Nebraska ........................... 61.2 910.5 0.8 762 -1.3

Nevada .............................. 72.1 1,124.1 0.8 852 -3.2

New Hampshire ................. 48.8 615.4 0.9 971 -0.7

New Jersey ........................ 264.8 3,811.6 0.6 1,138 -2.1

New Mexico ....................... 55.5 784.3 -0.3 799 -2.2

New York ........................... 599.5 8,618.4 1.4 1,197 -1.8

North Carolina .................... 257.5 3,885.9 1.3 824 -2.0

North Dakota ...................... 28.1 397.0 7.6 871 7.7

Ohio ................................... 289.3 5,027.6 1.3 855 -1.3

Oklahoma .......................... 103.4 1,530.0 1.3 817 2.6

Oregon ............................... 132.3 1,629.8 1.2 850 -0.2

Pennsylvania ..................... 351.0 5,595.1 0.7 936 -1.6

Rhode Island ...................... 35.0 451.9 0.1 919 -2.1

South Carolina ................... 111.3 1,796.1 1.3 763 -1.5

South Dakota ..................... 31.4 397.0 1.5 724 1.4

Tennessee ......................... 139.6 2,654.9 2.1 858 -2.3

Texas ................................. 588.0 10,607.9 2.4 973 -0.3

Utah ................................... 85.5 1,202.8 2.8 806 -2.5

Vermont ............................. 24.4 303.9 1.3 809 -0.5

Virginia ............................... 237.4 3,625.0 1.3 1,004 -2.4

Washington ........................ 231.9 2,843.6 1.4 979 -0.2

West Virginia ...................... 49.1 714.0 2.2 776 -0.3

Wisconsin .......................... 160.5 2,689.6 0.7 817 -2.4

See footnotes at end of table.
Table 3. Covered 1 establishments, employment, and wages by state, 

fourth quarter 2011 2—Continued

State

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2011

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage 3

December

2011

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2010-11

Fourth

quarter

2011

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2010-11

Wyoming ............................ 25.3 276.9 2.3 $876 0.6

Puerto Rico ........................ 48.2 960.9 0.1 552 -1.1

Virgin Islands ..................... 3.6 43.2 -4.0 772 -3.4

 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.
Largest Counties

U.S. average or lower

Higher than U.S. average

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics 

 June 2012

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

December 2010-11 (U.S. average = 1.4 percent)
Largest Counties

U.S. average or lower

Higher than U.S. average

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics 

 June 2012

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

employees, fourth quarter 2010-11 (U.S. average = -1.7 percent)