For release 10:00 a.m. (EST), Thursday, December 18, 2014 USDL-14-2250 

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

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

COUNTY EMPLOYMENT AND WAGES

Second Quarter 2014 

From June 2013 to June 2014, employment increased in 305 of the 339 largest U.S. counties, the U.S. 

Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Weld, Colo., had the largest increase, with a gain of 8.9 

percent over the year, compared with national job growth of 2.0 percent. Within Weld, the largest 

employment increase occurred in natural resources and mining, which gained 2,636 jobs over the year 

(27.3 percent). Atlantic, N.J., had the largest over-the-year decrease in employment among the largest 

counties in the U.S. with a loss of 1.6 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 increased 2.1 percent over the year, growing to $940 in the second 

quarter of 2014. Midland, Texas, had the largest over-the-year increase in average weekly wages with a 

gain of 9.0 percent. Within Midland, an average weekly wage gain of $142, or 7.5 percent, in natural 

resources and mining made the largest contribution to the county’s increase in average weekly wages. 

Williamson, Texas, experienced the largest decrease in average weekly wages with a loss of 2.7 percent 

over the year. 

Chart 1. Large counties ranked by percent increase in 

employment, June 2013-14 

(U.S. average = 2.0 percent) 

Chart 2. Large counties ranked by percent increase in 

average weekly wages, second quarter 2013-14 

(U.S. average = 2.1 percent) 

 

0

2

4

6

8

10

Weld,

Colo.

Benton,

Ark.

Lee,

Fla.

Sarasota,

Fla.

Midland,

Texas

Percent

0

2

4

6

8

10

Midland,

Texas

Douglas,

Colo.

Hillsborough,

N.H.

Collier,

Fla.

San Mateo,

Calif.

Percent
- 2 - 

 

Table A. Large counties ranked by June 2014 employment, June 2013-14 employment 

increase, and June 2013-14 percent increase in employment 

 

Employment in large counties 

 

June 2014 employment Increase in employment, Percent increase in employment, 

(thousands) June 2013-14 June 2013-14 

 (thousands) 

 

United States 137,776.4 United States 2,674.6 United States 2.0

 

Los Angeles, Calif. 4,155.9 Los Angeles, Calif. 71.7 Weld, Colo. 8.9

Cook, Ill. 2,499.5 Harris, Texas 71.3 Benton, Ark. 6.8

New York, N.Y. 2,492.5 New York, N.Y. 65.8 Lee, Fla. 6.3

Harris, Texas 2,258.0 Dallas, Texas 52.0 Sarasota, Fla. 5.8

Maricopa, Ariz. 1,717.1 Cook, Ill. 43.9 Midland, Texas 5.5

Dallas, Texas 1,544.6 King, Wash. 42.7 Clark, Wash. 5.3

Orange, Calif. 1,477.2 Santa Clara, Calif. 37.8 Charleston, S.C. 5.2

San Diego, Calif. 1,338.5 Maricopa, Ariz. 36.9 Montgomery, Texas 5.1

King, Wash. 1,248.1 Clark, Nev. 33.1 Mecklenburg, N.C. 4.9

Miami-Dade, Fla. 1,026.2 Mecklenburg, N.C. 28.3 Lexington, S.C. 4.9

Large County Employment 

In June 2014, national employment was 137.8 million (as measured by the QCEW program). Over the 

year, employment increased 2.0 percent, or 2.7 million. The 339 U.S. counties with 75,000 or more jobs 

accounted for 71.8 percent of total U.S. employment and 76.9 percent of total wages. These 339 

counties had a net job growth of 2.0 million over the year, accounting for 73.6 percent of the overall 

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

Weld, Colo., had the largest percentage increase in employment (8.9 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.; Dallas, Texas; and Cook, Ill. These counties had a combined over-theyear employment gain of 304,700 jobs, which was 11.4 percent of the overall job increase for the U.S. 

(See table A.) 

Employment declined in 29 of the largest counties from June 2013 to June 2014. Atlantic, N.J., had the 

largest over-the-year percentage decrease in employment (-1.6 percent). Within Atlantic, leisure and 

hospitality had the largest decrease in employment, with a loss of 2,817 jobs (-5.7 percent). Passaic, 

N.J., had the second largest percentage decrease in employment, followed by McLean, Ill.; Arlington, 

Va.; and Burlington, N.J. (See table 1.) 

 
- 3 - 

Table B. Large counties ranked by second quarter 2014 average weekly wages, second quarter 2013-14 

increase in average weekly wages, and second quarter 2013-14 percent increase in average weekly wages 

 

Average weekly wage in large counties 

 

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

second quarter 2014 wage, second quarter 2013-14 weekly wage, second 

 quarter 2013-14 

 

United States $940 United States $19 United States 2.1

 

Santa Clara, Calif. $1,886 San Mateo, Calif. $107 Midland, Texas 9.0

San Mateo, Calif. 1,740 Midland, Texas 105 Douglas, Colo. 8.8

New York, N.Y. 1,732 Douglas, Colo. 89 Hillsborough, N.H. 7.4

San Francisco, Calif. 1,593 San Francisco, Calif. 76 Collier, Fla. 6.8

Washington, D.C. 1,569 Santa Clara, Calif. 76 San Mateo, Calif. 6.6

Arlington, Va. 1,516 Hillsborough, N.H. 73 Calcasieu, La. 6.4

Suffolk, Mass. 1,463 Washington, Ore. 61 Newport News City, Va. 6.2

Fairfax, Va. 1,457 Collier, Fla. 54 Weld, Colo. 5.8

Fairfield, Conn. 1,455 Newport News City, Va. 54 Washington, Ore. 5.5

Middlesex, Mass. 1,386 Suffolk, Mass. 52 Ingham, Mich. 5.4

Large County Average Weekly Wages 

Average weekly wages for the nation increased to $940, a 2.1 percent increase, during the year ending in 

the second quarter of 2014. Among the 339 largest counties, 312 had over-the-year increases in average 

weekly wages. (See chart 4.) Midland, Texas, had the largest wage increase among the largest U.S. 

counties (9.0 percent). 

Of the 339 largest counties, 22 experienced over-the-year decreases in average weekly wages. 

Williamson, Texas, had the largest percentage decrease in average weekly wages, with a loss of 2.7 

percent. Within Williamson, manufacturing had the largest impact on the county’s average weekly wage 

decrease. Within this industry, average weekly wages declined by $168 (-9.5 percent) over the year. 

Westchester, N.Y., had the second largest percentage decrease in average weekly wages, followed by 

Lake, Ind.; Bibb, Ga.; Washington, D.C.; and Chittenden, Vt. (See table 1.) The decline in average 

weekly wages in Washington, D.C., was largely due to a pay period effect in federal government wages. 

For more information see the concepts and methodology section of the Technical Note. 

Ten Largest U.S. Counties 

All of the 10 largest counties had over-the-year percentage increases in employment in June 2014. 

Dallas, Texas, and King, Wash., had the largest gain (3.5 percent). Within Dallas, professional and 

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

groups with a gain of 15,108 jobs, or 5.1 percent. Trade, transportation, and utilities had the largest 

employment level increase among all private industry groups within King, with a gain of 11,204 jobs, or 

5.1 percent. Cook, Ill., Orange, Calif., and Los Angeles, Calif., tied for the smallest percentage increase 

in employment (1.8 percent) among the 10 largest counties. (See table 2.) 

Average weekly wages increased over the year in all of the 10 largest U.S. counties. Harris, Texas, 

experienced the largest percentage gain in average weekly wages (3.4 percent). Within Harris, natural 
- 4 - 

resources and mining had the largest impact on the county’s average weekly wage growth. Within this 

industry, average weekly wages increased by $154, or 5.0 percent, over the year. San Diego, Calif., and 

Maricopa, Ariz., tied for the smallest increase in average weekly wages (1.2 percent) among the 10 

largest counties. 

For More Information

The tables and charts included in this release contain data for the nation and for the 339 U.S. counties 

with annual average employment levels of 75,000 or more in 2013. June 2014 employment and 2014 

second 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 9.4 million employer reports cover 137.8 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 

second quarter of 2014 will be available electronically 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 third quarter 2014 is scheduled to be released on 

Thursday, March 19, 2015. 
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 2014 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 340 counties presented in 

this release were derived using 2013 preliminary annual averages of 

employment. For 2014 data, five counties have been added to the 

publication tables: Shelby, Ala.; Osceola, Fla.; Black Hawk, Iowa; 

Washington, Minn.; and Cleveland, Okla. These counties will be included in all 2014 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 9.4 million establishments in first quarter of 2014 

 Count of longitudinally-linked UI administrative records submitted by 

7.5 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 9.2 million employer 

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

2013. 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 2013, UI and 

UCFE programs covered workers in 134.0 million jobs. The estimated 

128.7 million workers in these jobs (after adjustment for multiple jobholders) represented 95.8 percent of civilian wage and salary employment. Covered workers received $6.673 trillion in pay, representing 

93.7 percent of the wage and salary component of personal income 

and 39.8 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 2013 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 2013 edition of this 

publication, which was published in September 2014, contains selected data produced by Business Employment Dynamics (BED) on 

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

2014 version of this news release. Tables and additional content from 

Employment and Wages Annual Averages 2013 are now available 

online at http://www.bls.gov/cew/cewbultn13.htm. The 2014 edition 

of Employment and Wages Annual Averages Online will be available 

in September 2015. 

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 340 largest counties,

second quarter 2014

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

second quarter

2014

(thousands)

June

2014

(thousands)

Percent

change,

June

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

Second

quarter

2014

Percent

change,

second quarter

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

United States4.............................. 9,360.5 137,776.4 2.0 - $940 2.1 -

Jefferson, AL................................ 17.7 340.7 0.2 297 931 1.6 195

Madison, AL................................. 9.0 182.7 -0.3 321 1,047 1.7 177

Mobile, AL.................................... 9.6 166.8 1.0 244 809 0.7 276

Montgomery, AL........................... 6.3 129.7 -0.2 317 798 1.8 167

Shelby, AL.................................... 5.1 78.9 1.8 152 878 2.0 143

Tuscaloosa, AL............................. 4.3 88.0 2.8 78 800 0.4 295

Anchorage Borough, AK............... 8.3 155.1 -0.1 311 1,056 4.9 14

Maricopa, AZ................................ 92.9 1,717.1 2.2 124 931 1.2 239

Pima, AZ....................................... 18.7 347.0 0.5 281 815 0.5 285

Benton, AR................................... 5.7 105.8 6.8 2 894 -0.8 331

Pulaski, AR................................... 14.3 242.7 0.5 281 856 1.2 239

Washington, AR........................... 5.7 97.0 2.3 115 758 0.8 269

Alameda, CA................................ 56.8 701.9 2.8 78 1,190 1.4 219

Contra Costa, CA......................... 29.6 343.2 2.9 73 1,139 1.7 177

Fresno, CA................................... 30.7 364.5 1.4 194 719 1.7 177

Kern, CA....................................... 17.1 311.8 0.5 281 820 1.9 156

Los Angeles, CA........................... 438.6 4,155.9 1.8 152 1,024 2.9 67

Marin, CA..................................... 12.0 112.0 2.3 115 1,171 3.3 41

Monterey, CA............................... 12.8 197.0 1.7 167 790 1.7 177

Orange, CA.................................. 107.2 1,477.2 1.8 152 1,033 1.5 205

Placer, CA.................................... 11.3 143.2 3.3 57 918 2.2 123

Riverside, CA............................... 52.7 626.9 4.0 34 763 0.3 306

Sacramento, CA........................... 52.1 617.8 3.3 57 1,027 1.1 249

San Bernardino, CA..................... 50.6 651.4 3.8 42 802 1.5 205

San Diego, CA.............................. 99.9 1,338.5 2.1 129 1,044 1.2 239

San Francisco, CA....................... 57.0 638.5 4.3 25 1,593 5.0 13

San Joaquin, CA.......................... 16.6 219.5 1.9 141 770 1.6 195

San Luis Obispo, CA.................... 9.7 112.5 3.4 54 770 1.7 177

San Mateo, CA............................. 25.8 372.6 4.7 13 1,740 6.6 5

Santa Barbara, CA....................... 14.5 195.1 2.4 108 888 0.6 281

Santa Clara, CA........................... 65.5 978.4 4.0 34 1,886 4.2 20

Santa Cruz, CA............................ 9.1 103.6 2.5 102 830 3.4 36

Solano, CA................................... 10.2 128.3 1.8 152 966 3.3 41

Sonoma, CA................................. 18.8 193.2 4.5 17 854 1.4 219

Stanislaus, CA.............................. 14.2 175.2 2.6 98 767 1.5 205

Tulare, CA.................................... 9.1 153.8 -0.2 317 652 2.5 100

Ventura, CA.................................. 24.8 316.1 1.7 167 950 0.2 308

Yolo, CA....................................... 6.0 96.3 3.8 42 962 2.1 135

Adams, CO................................... 9.2 184.9 4.8 11 916 3.4 36

Arapahoe, CO.............................. 19.3 307.7 2.7 87 1,074 1.1 249

Boulder, CO.................................. 13.3 169.9 2.9 73 1,103 2.6 86

Denver, CO.................................. 27.2 459.8 4.2 30 1,126 2.9 67

Douglas, CO................................. 10.1 109.3 3.7 45 1,100 8.8 2

El Paso, CO.................................. 16.9 251.4 2.3 115 849 1.9 156

Jefferson, CO............................... 17.9 224.7 2.5 102 957 2.4 104

Larimer, CO.................................. 10.4 144.5 3.3 57 828 5.2 11

Weld, CO...................................... 6.1 98.6 8.9 1 840 5.8 8

Fairfield, CT................................. 33.8 425.6 1.1 235 1,455 1.5 205

Hartford, CT.................................. 26.3 506.6 0.6 273 1,159 3.6 32

New Haven, CT............................ 23.0 362.6 0.3 295 986 1.8 167

 See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 340 largest counties,

second quarter 2014 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

second quarter

2014

(thousands)

June

2014

(thousands)

Percent

change,

June

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

Second

quarter

2014

Percent

change,

second quarter

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

New London, CT.......................... 7.0 123.8 -0.4 324 $960 2.2 123

New Castle, DE............................ 18.0 277.8 2.5 102 1,098 0.7 276

Washington, DC........................... 35.9 732.6 1.8 152 1,569 -1.1 334

Alachua, FL.................................. 6.7 118.6 1.7 167 816 2.1 135

Brevard, FL................................... 14.8 189.7 1.6 177 834 -0.4 327

Broward, FL.................................. 65.7 733.1 3.1 64 873 1.2 239

Collier, FL..................................... 12.6 120.4 4.3 25 853 6.8 4

Duval, FL..................................... 27.5 454.2 1.7 167 896 1.9 156

Escambia, FL............................... 8.1 123.2 2.0 135 742 1.2 239

Hillsborough, FL........................... 39.4 609.4 2.8 78 899 1.9 156

Lake, FL....................................... 7.6 81.8 2.7 87 645 2.1 135

Lee, FL......................................... 19.8 217.4 6.3 3 750 1.4 219

Leon, FL....................................... 8.3 139.5 2.7 87 782 1.8 167

Manatee, FL................................. 9.9 105.6 2.2 124 736 2.4 104

Marion, FL.................................... 8.0 93.0 2.0 135 677 1.7 177

Miami-Dade, FL............................ 93.4 1,026.2 2.5 102 913 3.3 41

Okaloosa, FL................................ 6.2 78.3 0.2 297 776 1.3 226

Orange, FL................................... 38.3 725.7 3.4 54 828 2.6 86

Osceola, FL.................................. 6.0 78.8 4.3 25 665 2.9 67

Palm Beach, FL............................ 52.0 537.2 3.6 50 910 1.9 156

Pasco, FL..................................... 10.2 98.3 3.7 45 701 2.6 86

Pinellas, FL................................... 31.4 396.7 1.6 177 844 3.7 29

Polk, FL........................................ 12.6 191.5 2.3 115 723 1.5 205

Sarasota, FL................................ 14.9 148.9 5.8 4 787 1.5 205

Seminole, FL................................ 14.1 166.2 3.9 39 793 1.1 249

Volusia, FL................................... 13.6 151.5 1.9 141 694 3.0 58

Bibb, GA....................................... 4.6 81.8 2.3 115 733 -1.3 336

Chatham, GA................................ 8.2 141.2 3.2 62 798 3.9 24

Clayton, GA.................................. 4.3 114.0 3.8 42 895 2.6 86

Cobb, GA...................................... 22.5 325.8 4.3 25 994 1.0 257

De Kalb, GA................................. 18.7 282.4 2.7 87 968 0.9 264

Fulton, GA.................................... 44.1 763.2 3.0 70 1,222 1.4 219

Gwinnett, GA................................ 25.1 326.7 4.4 22 912 1.0 257

Muscogee, GA.............................. 4.8 94.9 0.5 281 742 1.6 195

Richmond, GA.............................. 4.7 101.5 1.3 214 799 2.8 79

Honolulu, HI.................................. 24.9 456.6 0.9 250 877 2.6 86

Ada, ID......................................... 13.9 211.8 2.4 108 818 3.2 49

Champaign, IL.............................. 4.5 89.3 1.4 194 817 2.9 67

Cook, IL........................................ 156.6 2,499.5 1.8 152 1,085 1.7 177

Du Page, IL.................................. 38.8 608.8 1.0 244 1,074 1.5 205

Kane, IL........................................ 14.0 207.4 1.4 194 809 1.4 219

Lake, IL........................................ 23.1 340.2 0.6 273 1,226 1.7 177

McHenry, IL.................................. 9.0 97.3 1.6 177 769 0.5 285

McLean, IL.................................... 3.9 84.3 -1.4 336 947 -1.0 333

Madison, IL................................... 6.2 97.2 1.8 152 760 1.5 205

Peoria, IL...................................... 4.8 101.6 -0.6 328 890 1.9 156

St. Clair, IL.................................... 5.7 91.6 -0.8 331 745 0.8 269

Sangamon, IL............................... 5.4 130.2 2.2 124 959 1.7 177

Will, IL.......................................... 16.2 217.9 1.2 222 835 2.3 115

Winnebago, IL.............................. 6.9 128.2 1.5 185 797 0.9 264

 See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 340 largest counties,

second quarter 2014 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

second quarter

2014

(thousands)

June

2014

(thousands)

Percent

change,

June

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

Second

quarter

2014

Percent

change,

second quarter

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

Allen, IN........................................ 8.8 179.5 2.2 124 $748 0.4 295

Elkhart, IN..................................... 4.7 122.9 4.2 30 797 4.0 22

Hamilton, IN.................................. 8.8 127.9 4.5 17 875 1.5 205

Lake, IN........................................ 10.2 188.5 -0.8 331 834 -1.4 337

Marion, IN..................................... 23.6 578.3 1.1 235 927 0.5 285

St. Joseph, IN............................... 5.8 118.4 3.3 57 759 0.9 264

Tippecanoe, IN............................. 3.3 80.0 1.4 194 798 1.7 177

Vanderburgh, IN........................... 4.8 105.8 1.4 194 757 0.4 295

Black Hawk, IA.......................... 3.8 76.1 0.3 295 780 2.8 79

Johnson, IA.................................. 4.0 80.9 1.1 235 874 3.3 41

Linn, IA......................................... 6.5 130.4 1.2 222 894 1.6 195

Polk, IA........................................ 16.3 290.3 3.0 70 920 2.4 104

Scott, IA........................................ 5.5 91.5 1.2 222 766 2.0 143

Johnson, KS................................. 21.4 331.4 2.8 78 976 3.0 58

Sedgwick, KS............................... 12.3 245.5 1.2 222 836 -0.8 331

Shawnee, KS................................ 4.8 97.3 2.5 102 791 0.6 281

Wyandotte, KS............................. 3.3 88.0 4.4 22 872 4.3 19

Boone, KY................................... 4.1 79.3 2.4 108 846 1.8 167

Fayette, KY................................... 10.3 184.7 2.4 108 835 1.8 167

Jefferson, KY................................ 24.3 442.5 2.4 108 926 2.7 84

Caddo, LA.................................... 7.4 114.9 -0.2 317 774 3.2 49

Calcasieu, LA............................... 5.0 87.7 1.7 167 827 6.4 6

East Baton Rouge, LA.................. 14.9 264.1 1.4 194 895 1.2 239

Jefferson, LA................................ 13.7 194.8 1.4 194 837 1.7 177

Lafayette, LA................................ 9.3 140.5 -0.1 311 930 2.9 67

Orleans, LA.................................. 11.7 186.7 4.6 16 912 0.3 306

St. Tammany, LA.......................... 7.7 82.8 2.7 87 789 2.3 115

Cumberland, ME.......................... 12.6 177.8 1.4 194 843 2.1 135

Anne Arundel, MD........................ 14.6 257.0 0.9 250 996 0.5 285

Baltimore, MD............................... 21.2 368.3 0.5 281 941 2.1 135

Frederick, MD............................... 6.3 96.4 -0.4 324 899 1.5 205

Harford, MD.................................. 5.6 89.1 -0.7 330 939 0.5 285

Howard, MD................................. 9.5 164.0 0.1 302 1,118 0.4 295

Montgomery, MD.......................... 32.9 462.7 1.2 222 1,244 0.0 313

Prince Georges, MD..................... 15.6 308.0 1.2 222 998 1.5 205

Baltimore City, MD....................... 13.8 333.5 0.8 261 1,068 1.6 195

Barnstable, MA............................. 9.0 103.5 0.9 250 789 2.9 67

Bristol, MA.................................... 16.3 222.3 1.1 235 856 2.0 143

Essex, MA.................................... 22.5 320.0 1.8 152 1,007 2.9 67

Hampden, MA.............................. 16.3 202.5 0.6 273 856 2.8 79

Middlesex, MA.............................. 50.7 861.8 1.5 185 1,386 1.1 249

Norfolk, MA................................... 23.7 343.0 1.7 167 1,077 0.7 276

Plymouth, MA............................... 14.2 185.9 0.6 273 911 2.6 86

Suffolk, MA................................... 25.0 619.5 1.5 185 1,463 3.7 29

Worcester, MA.............................. 22.2 332.1 1.0 244 946 2.4 104

Genesee, MI................................. 7.1 134.7 1.3 214 768 2.3 115

Ingham, MI................................... 6.1 150.4 0.2 297 901 5.4 10

Kalamazoo, MI............................. 5.1 114.2 1.5 185 849 1.8 167

Kent, MI....................................... 13.9 362.4 3.7 45 823 2.0 143

Macomb, MI.................................. 17.2 311.3 1.3 214 947 1.7 177

 See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 340 largest counties,

second quarter 2014 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

second quarter

2014

(thousands)

June

2014

(thousands)

Percent

change,

June

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

Second

quarter

2014

Percent

change,

second quarter

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

Oakland, MI.................................. 38.1 701.9 1.4 194 $1,048 2.8 79

Ottawa, MI.................................... 5.5 117.1 4.0 34 787 2.6 86

Saginaw, MI.................................. 4.1 84.0 0.1 302 748 2.2 123

Washtenaw, MI............................. 8.1 195.8 1.2 222 997 2.4 104

Wayne, MI.................................... 30.5 699.2 0.9 250 1,031 3.3 41

Anoka, MN.................................... 6.8 118.0 0.9 250 905 3.0 58

Dakota, MN.................................. 9.5 181.9 1.3 214 924 2.9 67

Hennepin, MN.............................. 40.2 879.2 1.7 167 1,151 1.0 257

Olmsted, MN................................ 3.3 93.4 -0.6 328 1,065 1.2 239

Ramsey, MN................................. 13.1 325.6 0.9 250 1,067 3.8 27

St. Louis, MN................................ 5.2 98.3 0.9 250 757 0.9 264

Stearns, MN................................. 4.2 84.3 2.1 129 775 3.5 35

Washington, MN........................... 5.2 78.4 0.7 267 784 2.0 143

Harrison, MS................................ 4.4 84.0 0.8 261 685 1.2 239

Hinds, MS..................................... 5.9 118.9 -0.9 333 826 1.7 177

Boone, MO................................... 4.7 90.0 1.2 222 733 1.8 167

Clay, MO...................................... 5.2 94.4 3.0 70 837 0.6 281

Greene, MO.................................. 8.2 158.9 2.3 115 715 0.8 269

Jackson, MO................................ 19.7 354.3 0.7 267 925 0.5 285

St. Charles, MO............................ 8.6 135.5 2.1 129 781 3.3 41

St. Louis, MO................................ 33.7 587.4 1.4 194 992 2.2 123

St. Louis City, MO........................ 10.8 222.7 1.0 244 992 2.1 135

Yellowstone, MT........................... 6.3 79.8 1.6 177 802 -0.2 323

Douglas, NE................................. 18.6 327.9 1.8 152 853 2.9 67

Lancaster, NE............................... 10.1 163.4 1.8 152 758 2.0 143

Clark, NV..................................... 51.4 877.4 3.9 39 825 0.5 285

Washoe, NV................................. 13.9 195.5 2.9 73 827 1.3 226

Hillsborough, NH.......................... 12.1 193.9 0.8 261 1,059 7.4 3

Rockingham, NH.......................... 10.6 144.3 1.9 141 944 4.0 22

Atlantic, NJ................................... 6.6 137.0 -1.6 339 794 1.0 257

Bergen, NJ................................... 32.8 445.7 1.4 194 1,147 2.0 143

Burlington, NJ............................... 11.0 201.2 -1.1 335 988 0.5 285

Camden, NJ................................. 11.9 200.7 1.6 177 909 0.4 295

Essex, NJ.................................... 20.4 334.7 -0.3 321 1,124 -0.2 323

Gloucester, NJ.............................. 6.1 100.8 1.1 235 828 2.3 115

Hudson, NJ................................... 14.2 237.9 0.4 289 1,276 2.1 135

Mercer, NJ.................................... 11.0 236.0 0.2 297 1,186 0.4 295

Middlesex, NJ.............................. 21.9 395.8 1.1 235 1,115 1.5 205

Monmouth, NJ.............................. 20.0 257.4 1.4 194 943 1.3 226

Morris, NJ..................................... 17.0 285.2 0.6 273 1,343 1.2 239

Ocean, NJ.................................... 12.6 166.9 3.2 62 759 -0.1 318

Passaic, NJ.................................. 12.2 167.5 -1.5 338 943 1.8 167

Somerset, NJ............................... 10.0 183.5 1.4 194 1,379 0.4 295

Union, NJ..................................... 14.3 223.0 -0.4 324 1,209 -0.4 327

Bernalillo, NM............................... 18.0 313.7 0.7 267 816 2.0 143

Albany, NY................................... 10.3 227.3 0.4 289 985 3.1 54

Bronx, NY..................................... 17.6 251.6 1.4 194 889 0.2 308

Broome, NY.................................. 4.6 89.2 0.1 302 756 1.1 249

Dutchess, NY............................... 8.4 110.6 0.0 306 969 0.7 276

Erie, NY........................................ 24.5 462.7 0.7 267 826 2.2 123

 See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 340 largest counties,

second quarter 2014 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

second quarter

2014

(thousands)

June

2014

(thousands)

Percent

change,

June

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

Second

quarter

2014

Percent

change,

second quarter

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

Kings, NY..................................... 56.9 566.7 4.7 13 $759 1.5 205

Monroe, NY.................................. 18.5 381.2 0.4 289 889 2.2 123

Nassau, NY.................................. 53.3 618.4 1.5 185 1,061 1.6 195

New York, NY............................... 126.6 2,492.5 2.7 87 1,732 3.0 58

Oneida, NY................................... 5.3 104.0 -0.1 311 760 2.2 123

Onondaga, NY.............................. 13.0 243.7 -0.1 311 866 1.3 226

Orange, NY.................................. 10.1 138.9 1.2 222 825 -0.2 323

Queens, NY.................................. 49.6 553.6 3.1 64 884 3.2 49

Richmond, NY.............................. 9.4 99.1 2.9 73 797 0.9 264

Rockland, NY............................... 10.2 118.3 2.8 78 1,003 1.7 177

Saratoga, NY................................ 5.8 83.2 -0.2 317 868 1.3 226

Suffolk, NY................................... 51.9 656.2 0.4 289 1,014 1.7 177

Westchester, NY.......................... 36.3 421.1 1.2 222 1,215 -1.6 338

Buncombe, NC............................. 8.2 119.0 2.2 124 702 1.7 177

Catawba, NC................................ 4.2 81.7 1.1 235 713 2.9 67

Cumberland, NC........................... 6.2 118.2 -0.9 333 746 -0.4 327

Durham, NC................................. 7.6 189.4 1.9 141 1,208 0.5 285

Forsyth, NC.................................. 9.0 178.3 2.1 129 837 0.0 313

Guilford, NC.................................. 14.1 267.3 0.9 250 809 -0.2 323

Mecklenburg, NC.......................... 33.6 606.6 4.9 9 1,040 1.3 226

New Hanover, NC........................ 7.4 102.9 3.4 54 752 1.8 167

Wake, NC..................................... 30.4 494.8 4.2 30 933 0.4 295

Cass, ND...................................... 6.6 115.2 4.5 17 832 2.8 79

Butler, OH..................................... 7.5 143.0 2.3 115 819 1.9 156

Cuyahoga, OH.............................. 35.4 715.5 0.0 306 954 2.4 104

Delaware, OH............................... 4.6 83.7 0.0 306 915 0.8 269

Franklin, OH................................. 30.0 705.5 2.7 87 945 1.3 226

Hamilton, OH................................ 23.1 504.5 1.5 185 1,011 1.3 226

Lake, OH...................................... 6.3 96.4 0.6 273 781 3.9 24

Lorain, OH.................................... 6.0 98.0 0.6 273 775 1.7 177

Lucas, OH.................................... 10.0 206.1 1.3 214 819 2.6 86

Mahoning, OH.............................. 5.9 98.5 1.0 244 664 2.2 123

Montgomery, OH.......................... 11.9 247.5 1.4 194 816 1.9 156

Stark, OH..................................... 8.7 160.2 1.6 177 713 1.1 249

Summit, OH................................. 14.0 262.0 1.4 194 828 1.3 226

Warren, OH................................. 4.4 86.4 1.3 214 816 1.7 177

Cleveland, OK.............................. 5.2 78.4 2.1 129 716 1.8 167

Oklahoma, OK.............................. 26.2 442.4 1.0 244 891 1.9 156

Tulsa, OK..................................... 21.3 342.9 1.6 177 894 3.6 32

Clackamas, OR............................ 13.2 148.0 1.3 214 884 2.6 86

Jackson, OR................................ 6.7 80.4 2.0 135 707 -0.1 318

Lane, OR...................................... 11.1 143.1 1.5 185 742 1.0 257

Marion, OR................................... 9.6 143.0 3.1 64 764 2.3 115

Multnomah, OR............................ 30.9 467.3 3.1 64 965 2.4 104

Washington, OR........................... 17.1 265.3 2.3 115 1,165 5.5 9

Allegheny, PA............................... 35.3 695.1 0.0 306 1,002 0.1 311

Berks, PA..................................... 8.9 167.8 2.0 135 872 3.0 58

Bucks, PA..................................... 19.7 257.1 1.2 222 903 1.2 239

Butler, PA..................................... 5.0 85.8 0.0 306 866 -0.1 318

Chester, PA.................................. 15.2 244.4 1.8 152 1,231 1.6 195

 See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 340 largest counties,

second quarter 2014 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

second quarter

2014

(thousands)

June

2014

(thousands)

Percent

change,

June

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

Second

quarter

2014

Percent

change,

second quarter

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

Cumberland, PA........................... 6.2 128.3 1.2 222 $910 3.8 27

Dauphin, PA................................ 7.3 178.8 0.5 281 920 1.3 226

Delaware, PA............................... 13.9 219.0 1.7 167 989 1.6 195

Erie, PA........................................ 7.2 126.4 0.7 267 731 -0.1 318

Lackawanna, PA.......................... 5.9 97.9 0.7 267 715 2.6 86

Lancaster, PA............................... 12.9 229.1 1.9 141 777 2.6 86

Lehigh, PA.................................... 8.6 183.9 1.7 167 943 3.1 54

Luzerne, PA.................................. 7.6 141.7 0.6 273 744 2.9 67

Montgomery, PA........................... 27.4 478.9 0.8 261 1,163 1.4 219

Northampton, PA.......................... 6.6 107.1 1.9 141 818 2.0 143

Philadelphia, PA........................... 35.1 638.2 0.8 261 1,105 0.4 295

Washington, PA............................ 5.3 88.7 1.3 214 934 4.5 17

Westmoreland, PA....................... 9.3 134.8 0.2 297 763 3.2 49

York, PA....................................... 9.0 174.6 1.1 235 811 1.1 249

Providence, RI.............................. 17.4 279.2 1.7 167 928 2.2 123

Charleston, SC............................. 12.4 232.3 5.2 7 822 3.4 36

Greenville, SC.............................. 12.6 250.5 4.5 17 820 2.2 123

Horry, SC..................................... 7.9 124.9 3.1 64 548 2.0 143

Lexington, SC............................... 5.8 107.7 4.9 9 720 0.8 269

Richland, SC................................ 9.1 208.8 2.8 78 823 2.6 86

Spartanburg, SC........................... 5.8 123.4 2.6 98 835 3.0 58

York, SC....................................... 4.9 82.8 4.5 17 769 4.5 17

Minnehaha, SD............................. 6.8 122.9 2.4 108 796 3.2 49

Davidson, TN................................ 19.5 452.7 2.3 115 951 2.6 86

Hamilton, TN................................ 8.8 187.1 0.9 250 844 2.4 104

Knox, TN...................................... 11.2 222.6 1.9 141 823 3.3 41

Rutherford, TN.............................. 4.7 111.5 4.2 30 840 3.6 32

Shelby, TN.................................... 19.5 477.2 0.4 289 949 0.4 295

Williamson, TN............................. 7.0 107.9 4.0 34 1,057 0.0 313

Bell, TX......................................... 4.9 111.9 1.4 194 774 2.5 100

Bexar, TX..................................... 36.7 794.7 2.6 98 834 2.7 84

Brazoria, TX................................. 5.2 98.7 2.7 87 959 4.7 15

Brazos, TX.................................... 4.2 92.3 3.7 45 722 3.1 54

Cameron, TX................................ 6.3 134.9 1.9 141 585 2.1 135

Collin, TX...................................... 21.0 347.4 4.4 22 1,101 2.0 143

Dallas, TX..................................... 70.8 1,544.6 3.5 52 1,122 1.5 205

Denton, TX.................................. 12.4 206.5 4.7 13 846 2.3 115

El Paso, TX.................................. 14.3 285.1 1.2 222 673 2.3 115

Fort Bend, TX............................... 11.0 163.6 4.8 11 945 1.0 257

Galveston, TX............................... 5.7 103.3 2.6 98 832 2.6 86

Gregg, TX..................................... 4.2 78.5 1.5 185 863 2.9 67

Harris, TX..................................... 107.8 2,258.0 3.3 57 1,231 3.4 36

Hidalgo, TX................................... 11.8 240.2 2.5 102 608 3.1 54

Jefferson, TX................................ 5.8 124.0 2.4 108 965 3.7 29

Lubbock, TX................................. 7.2 130.8 1.8 152 726 3.3 41

McLennan, TX.............................. 5.0 103.6 0.4 289 769 2.4 104

Midland, TX.................................. 5.3 91.1 5.5 5 1,269 9.0 1

Montgomery, TX........................... 9.9 157.4 5.1 8 958 4.6 16

Nueces, TX.................................. 8.1 163.5 2.8 78 843 3.9 24

Potter, TX..................................... 4.0 78.2 1.1 235 741 0.8 269

 See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 340 largest counties,

second quarter 2014 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

second quarter

2014

(thousands)

June

2014

(thousands)

Percent

change,

June

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

Second

quarter

2014

Percent

change,

second quarter

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

Smith, TX..................................... 5.9 97.6 1.5 185 $791 2.5 100

Tarrant, TX................................... 39.7 827.5 2.0 135 952 5.1 12

Travis, TX..................................... 34.9 657.8 3.9 39 1,051 3.4 36

Webb, TX..................................... 5.0 94.4 2.7 87 647 0.0 313

Williamson, TX............................. 8.8 146.5 3.6 50 876 -2.7 339

Davis, UT..................................... 7.7 114.9 2.8 78 742 0.5 285

Salt Lake, UT................................ 40.2 625.2 2.7 87 887 1.4 219

Utah, UT....................................... 13.7 195.1 4.0 34 755 3.0 58

Weber, UT.................................... 5.6 95.7 2.0 135 720 3.0 58

Chittenden, VT............................. 6.3 100.7 1.4 194 933 -1.1 334

Arlington, VA................................ 8.8 165.4 -1.4 336 1,516 -0.6 330

Chesterfield, VA........................... 8.1 125.7 1.9 141 823 0.2 308

Fairfax, VA.................................... 35.1 588.4 -0.3 321 1,457 0.7 276

Henrico, VA.................................. 10.4 181.0 1.8 152 904 0.0 313

Loudoun, VA................................ 10.6 151.9 1.9 141 1,090 0.4 295

Prince William, VA........................ 8.3 122.4 1.8 152 822 0.1 311

Alexandria City, VA...................... 6.3 95.8 0.1 302 1,321 -0.1 318

Chesapeake City, VA................... 5.7 96.4 -0.1 311 751 1.3 226

Newport News City, VA................ 3.7 98.9 0.9 250 928 6.2 7

Norfolk City, VA........................... 5.6 139.8 3.1 64 904 2.3 115

Richmond City, VA....................... 7.1 148.6 0.8 261 1,010 2.5 100

Virginia Beach City, VA................ 11.3 177.0 1.4 194 732 0.8 269

Benton, WA.................................. 5.7 86.8 4.3 25 939 0.6 281

Clark, WA..................................... 13.9 141.9 5.3 6 858 2.0 143

King, WA...................................... 84.1 1,248.1 3.5 52 1,235 2.4 104

Kitsap, WA.................................... 6.7 83.4 2.8 78 843 1.9 156

Pierce, WA................................... 21.7 279.7 2.9 73 858 1.1 249

Snohomish, WA............................ 20.1 270.5 2.1 129 1,012 1.9 156

Spokane, WA............................... 15.6 207.9 1.8 152 796 2.2 123

Thurston, WA............................... 7.8 104.0 3.7 45 846 1.3 226

Whatcom, WA.............................. 7.1 85.6 2.7 87 768 1.6 195

Yakima, WA................................. 8.1 116.3 1.9 141 638 1.6 195

Kanawha, WV............................... 6.0 104.9 -0.1 311 830 1.3 226

Brown, WI..................................... 6.4 152.1 0.9 250 813 1.0 257

Dane, WI...................................... 14.1 317.4 1.4 194 952 3.0 58

Milwaukee, WI.............................. 24.7 479.2 0.5 281 909 2.2 123

Outagamie, WI............................. 5.0 105.9 1.6 177 779 2.4 104

Waukesha, WI.............................. 12.3 235.4 0.5 281 925 2.0 143

Winnebago, WI............................. 3.6 90.5 -0.5 327 875 4.2 20

San Juan, PR............................... 11.3 252.6 -1.3 (5) 599 0.2 (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 339 U.S. counties comprise 71.8 percent of the total covered workers in the U.S.
Table 2. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 10 largest counties,

second quarter 2014

Employment Average weekly wage 1

County by NAICS supersector

Establishments,

second quarter

2014

(thousands)

June

2014

(thousands)

Percent

change,

June

2013-142

Second

quarter

2014

Percent

change,

second quarter

2013-142

United States3................................................................. 9,360.5 137,776.4 2.0 $940 2.1

 Private industry............................................................. 9,065.9 116,600.4 2.3 930 2.3

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 135.8 2,180.7 1.5 1,072 4.8

 Construction............................................................... 753.6 6,268.9 4.7 1,012 2.7

 Manufacturing............................................................ 338.3 12,225.7 1.2 1,158 2.8

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 1,912.4 26,104.1 2.1 799 2.4

 Information................................................................. 150.3 2,740.5 0.4 1,603 5.0

 Financial activities...................................................... 832.4 7,713.2 0.8 1,394 2.5

 Professional and business services........................... 1,672.4 19,151.8 3.0 1,203 1.5

 Education and health services................................... 1,472.7 20,457.9 1.6 859 1.9

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 794.5 15,222.3 2.7 389 2.6

 Other services............................................................ 811.6 4,309.6 2.1 637 2.4

 Government.................................................................. 294.6 21,175.9 0.4 995 1.5

Los Angeles, CA.............................................................. 438.6 4,155.9 1.8 1,024 2.9

 Private industry............................................................. 432.8 3,614.8 1.9 992 3.0

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.5 10.0 -2.0 1,404 -3.2

 Construction............................................................... 13.4 119.5 1.9 1,060 0.2

 Manufacturing............................................................ 12.6 364.0 -1.0 1,110 2.4

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 53.6 781.7 2.2 858 2.6

 Information................................................................. 9.6 188.0 -3.5 1,871 10.7

 Financial activities...................................................... 24.3 207.9 -0.7 1,595 7.3

 Professional and business services........................... 47.5 601.6 2.0 1,244 2.7

 Education and health services................................... 201.4 711.5 1.6 798 2.3

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 30.6 467.4 4.3 556 1.6

 Other services............................................................ 27.8 147.3 3.4 645 1.7

 Government.................................................................. 5.8 541.1 0.9 1,240 3.1

New York, NY.................................................................. 126.6 2,492.5 2.7 1,732 3.0

 Private industry............................................................. 126.2 2,059.6 3.1 1,859 2.9

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.0 0.2 -1.9 2,118 -13.7

 Construction............................................................... 2.2 34.5 2.6 1,691 2.2

 Manufacturing............................................................ 2.2 25.4 -1.2 1,236 3.1

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 20.7 260.0 1.0 1,311 2.5

 Information................................................................. 4.7 148.3 0.5 2,434 9.1

 Financial activities...................................................... 19.2 363.3 3.0 3,418 2.8

 Professional and business services........................... 26.5 523.8 3.3 2,082 2.4

 Education and health services................................... 9.6 318.2 3.2 1,185 1.8

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 13.5 280.6 5.1 793 4.2

 Other services............................................................ 19.7 98.4 2.7 1,074 1.4

 Government.................................................................. 0.4 432.9 1.0 1,136 3.2

Cook, IL........................................................................... 156.6 2,499.5 1.8 1,085 1.7

 Private industry............................................................. 155.2 2,200.1 2.1 1,068 2.0

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.1 0.9 7.3 1,087 7.2

 Construction............................................................... 12.9 70.1 5.8 1,312 1.6

 Manufacturing............................................................ 6.7 187.0 0.0 1,121 4.1

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 31.0 455.3 2.1 875 2.7

 Information................................................................. 2.8 55.0 0.3 1,649 3.5

 Financial activities...................................................... 16.0 186.3 0.3 1,876 2.9

 Professional and business services........................... 33.4 455.4 3.1 1,368 2.2

 Education and health services................................... 16.4 422.0 1.7 893 0.4

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 14.1 264.6 2.5 475 -0.6

 Other services............................................................ 17.6 99.4 3.7 808 1.3

 Government.................................................................. 1.3 299.4 -0.7 1,207 -0.3

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

second quarter 2014 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 1

County by NAICS supersector

Establishments,

second quarter

2014

(thousands)

June

2014

(thousands)

Percent

change,

June

2013-142

Second

quarter

2014

Percent

change,

second quarter

2013-142

Harris, TX........................................................................ 107.8 2,258.0 3.3 $1,231 3.4

 Private industry............................................................. 107.3 1,997.0 3.3 1,258 3.5

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 1.8 93.3 5.4 3,224 5.0

 Construction............................................................... 6.8 154.5 6.0 1,272 5.6

 Manufacturing............................................................ 4.6 196.2 2.9 1,508 5.9

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 24.3 465.2 3.2 1,101 4.2

 Information................................................................. 1.2 28.5 -1.4 1,396 2.3

 Financial activities...................................................... 11.1 118.3 2.0 1,503 5.2

 Professional and business services........................... 21.7 394.4 2.3 1,528 0.7

 Education and health services................................... 14.8 266.9 2.4 928 1.1

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 9.1 214.8 5.8 419 4.8

 Other services............................................................ 11.6 64.2 2.9 746 5.5

 Government.................................................................. 0.6 261.1 2.6 1,025 1.8

Maricopa, AZ.................................................................... 92.9 1,717.1 2.2 931 1.2

 Private industry............................................................. 92.2 1,538.7 2.3 915 1.2

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.5 8.4 3.3 816 -4.4

 Construction............................................................... 7.3 93.5 0.4 944 0.0

 Manufacturing............................................................ 3.2 114.4 0.6 1,364 2.9

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 20.0 345.8 2.5 836 1.0

 Information................................................................. 1.5 33.8 6.6 1,232 6.8

 Financial activities...................................................... 10.9 152.0 2.6 1,152 -1.1

 Professional and business services........................... 21.7 294.1 0.7 1,003 2.6

 Education and health services................................... 10.7 254.8 2.3 948 0.7

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 7.3 190.6 3.6 437 3.6

 Other services............................................................ 6.3 47.6 1.8 654 -0.6

 Government.................................................................. 0.7 178.5 1.4 1,053 1.4

Dallas, TX........................................................................ 70.8 1,544.6 3.5 1,122 1.5

 Private industry............................................................. 70.3 1,379.7 3.7 1,131 1.7

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.6 9.9 2.8 3,831 -8.4

 Construction............................................................... 4.0 77.2 8.2 1,070 4.5

 Manufacturing............................................................ 2.7 107.5 -1.3 1,331 1.3

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 15.4 309.7 4.6 1,008 0.8

 Information................................................................. 1.4 49.5 3.1 1,697 -4.1

 Financial activities...................................................... 8.5 149.9 1.7 1,532 3.7

 Professional and business services........................... 15.9 308.7 5.1 1,293 4.3

 Education and health services................................... 8.7 178.6 2.5 979 1.2

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 6.1 147.3 4.3 451 1.3

 Other services............................................................ 6.8 41.0 2.6 723 1.3

 Government.................................................................. 0.5 164.9 1.8 1,048 0.1

Orange, CA...................................................................... 107.2 1,477.2 1.8 1,033 1.5

 Private industry............................................................. 105.9 1,330.8 1.8 1,021 1.6

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.2 3.4 0.7 804 16.4

 Construction............................................................... 6.5 80.9 3.3 1,144 2.2

 Manufacturing............................................................ 4.9 157.6 -0.4 1,275 2.0

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 16.7 253.4 1.8 949 2.0

 Information................................................................. 1.3 23.7 -4.3 1,574 8.6

 Financial activities...................................................... 10.6 113.9 0.7 1,518 -2.3

 Professional and business services........................... 20.7 271.8 1.4 1,221 4.2

 Education and health services................................... 26.7 183.5 2.1 889 0.7

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 7.9 194.8 3.0 438 0.7

 Other services............................................................ 6.8 43.0 2.1 647 2.4

 Government.................................................................. 1.3 146.4 1.2 1,141 0.5

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

second quarter 2014 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 1

County by NAICS supersector

Establishments,

second quarter

2014

(thousands)

June

2014

(thousands)

Percent

change,

June

2013-142

Second

quarter

2014

Percent

change,

second quarter

2013-142

San Diego, CA................................................................ 99.9 1,338.5 2.1 $1,044 1.2

 Private industry............................................................. 98.5 1,117.3 2.4 1,025 1.0

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.7 10.6 -3.9 692 5.3

 Construction............................................................... 6.4 63.2 3.3 1,060 0.9

 Manufacturing............................................................ 3.0 96.4 1.4 1,428 -1.9

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 14.2 211.6 1.5 795 0.8

 Information................................................................. 1.2 24.3 -1.6 1,620 6.8

 Financial activities...................................................... 9.3 70.0 -2.2 1,308 0.2

 Professional and business services........................... 18.1 226.8 2.4 1,603 2.6

 Education and health services................................... 27.5 181.8 3.0 891 1.9

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 7.7 179.7 3.8 432 2.4

 Other services............................................................ 7.3 48.7 4.2 559 0.5

 Government.................................................................. 1.4 221.2 0.6 1,136 1.9

King, WA......................................................................... 84.1 1,248.1 3.5 1,235 2.4

 Private industry............................................................. 83.6 1,086.5 3.9 1,239 2.4

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.4 2.7 -8.2 1,233 -10.2

 Construction............................................................... 6.0 57.5 9.6 1,171 1.4

 Manufacturing............................................................ 2.3 105.8 0.1 1,508 1.5

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 14.8 232.5 5.1 1,109 3.6

 Information................................................................. 2.0 85.9 4.1 2,435 4.5

 Financial activities...................................................... 6.4 65.9 1.8 1,441 -0.4

 Professional and business services........................... 15.7 205.5 3.8 1,501 2.0

 Education and health services................................... 20.9 160.8 4.0 920 1.3

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 6.8 128.0 3.7 496 9.0

 Other services............................................................ 8.4 41.9 5.1 796 1.4

 Government.................................................................. 0.5 161.6 1.1 1,207 2.3

Miami-Dade, FL............................................................... 93.4 1,026.2 2.5 913 3.3

 Private industry............................................................. 93.0 904.8 3.0 875 3.8

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.5 7.4 2.6 556 2.8

 Construction............................................................... 5.3 35.9 11.2 863 3.7

 Manufacturing............................................................ 2.7 37.3 2.1 854 3.6

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 27.2 267.5 2.4 831 4.5

 Information................................................................. 1.5 18.3 4.4 1,462 0.6

 Financial activities...................................................... 9.8 71.0 4.4 1,380 5.7

 Professional and business services........................... 19.7 139.6 3.1 1,050 2.4

 Education and health services................................... 10.0 160.5 0.9 894 3.0

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 7.1 128.3 2.8 512 4.7

 Other services............................................................ 8.1 37.9 4.2 582 3.2

 Government.................................................................. 0.3 121.4 -0.7 1,169 1.2

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 2013 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,

second quarter 2014

Employment Average weekly wage 1

State

Establishments,

second quarter

2014

(thousands)

June

2014

(thousands)

Percent

change,

June

2013-14

Second

quarter

2014

Percent

change,

second quarter

2013-14

United States2.......................................... 9,360.5 137,776.4 2.0 $940 2.1

Alabama.................................................... 117.7 1,872.9 0.7 806 1.6

Alaska........................................................ 21.9 344.9 0.5 1,014 4.6

Arizona...................................................... 146.0 2,486.0 1.9 888 1.3

Arkansas................................................... 87.1 1,168.1 1.5 745 1.5

California................................................... 1,371.9 15,905.6 2.8 1,072 2.4

Colorado.................................................... 178.8 2,439.3 3.4 960 2.9

Connecticut............................................... 113.9 1,676.6 0.6 1,155 2.5

Delaware................................................... 29.6 429.0 2.5 976 1.2

District of Columbia................................... 35.9 732.6 1.0 1,569 -0.5

Florida....................................................... 636.0 7,628.6 3.1 839 2.1

Georgia...................................................... 281.5 4,036.3 3.1 882 1.7

Hawaii........................................................ 38.9 624.6 1.1 845 2.7

Idaho......................................................... 54.4 659.2 2.5 697 2.2

Illinois........................................................ 413.4 5,836.9 1.5 988 1.9

Indiana....................................................... 159.0 2,916.9 1.8 784 1.2

Iowa........................................................... 99.5 1,547.8 1.6 780 3.0

Kansas...................................................... 85.5 1,372.8 1.7 797 2.3

Kentucky.................................................... 120.6 1,820.8 1.7 798 2.0

Louisiana................................................... 129.3 1,921.6 1.4 843 2.4

Maine......................................................... 49.1 610.4 0.8 746 2.1

Maryland.................................................... 166.6 2,594.4 0.9 1,020 1.6

Massachusetts.......................................... 228.3 3,407.0 1.4 1,158 2.4

Michigan.................................................... 236.2 4,164.7 2.3 897 2.3

Minnesota.................................................. 163.6 2,782.0 1.3 947 1.9

Mississippi................................................. 70.9 1,101.1 0.5 705 2.0

Missouri..................................................... 183.5 2,703.2 1.3 818 1.9

Montana.................................................... 43.9 453.4 1.1 734 2.4

Nebraska................................................... 71.3 956.2 1.4 756 2.7

Nevada...................................................... 75.8 1,210.1 3.4 833 0.6

New Hampshire......................................... 49.8 637.2 1.2 955 4.3

New Jersey............................................... 264.9 3,944.8 0.8 1,097 1.2

New Mexico............................................... 56.6 801.0 0.6 794 1.7

New York.................................................. 624.8 8,965.2 1.8 1,146 2.4

North Carolina........................................... 259.6 4,080.7 2.4 818 1.2

North Dakota............................................. 31.5 453.0 4.4 936 5.5

Ohio........................................................... 288.3 5,233.8 1.4 846 2.1

Oklahoma.................................................. 106.9 1,578.0 1.0 816 2.6

Oregon...................................................... 136.2 1,748.4 2.4 874 2.9

Pennsylvania............................................. 351.2 5,719.8 1.0 933 1.6

Rhode Island............................................. 35.8 472.9 1.6 898 2.0

South Carolina.......................................... 116.1 1,916.4 2.7 765 2.5

South Dakota............................................ 31.9 422.9 1.4 712 3.3

Tennessee................................................. 145.3 2,755.7 1.8 836 2.0

Texas......................................................... 618.3 11,402.8 3.0 973 3.1

Utah........................................................... 89.9 1,297.5 2.9 796 1.7

Vermont..................................................... 24.4 307.0 1.0 813 0.7

Virginia...................................................... 242.9 3,710.8 0.7 976 0.8

Washington............................................... 236.4 3,109.6 3.2 990 2.1

West Virginia............................................. 49.8 711.3 -0.3 792 1.4

Wisconsin.................................................. 164.4 2,809.1 1.3 816 2.0

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

second quarter 2014 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 1

State

Establishments,

second quarter

2014

(thousands)

June

2014

(thousands)

Percent

change,

June

2013-14

Second

quarter

2014

Percent

change,

second quarter

2013-14

Wyoming................................................... 25.5 295.3 1.6 $871 3.1

Puerto Rico............................................... 48.6 897.0 -2.0 504 0.6

Virgin Islands............................................ 3.4 37.8 -2.2 728 2.8

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

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

June 2013-14 (U.S. average = 2.0 percent)
Largest Counties

Higher than U.S. average

U.S. average or lower

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

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

or more employees, second quarter 2013-14 (U.S. average = 2.1 percent)