Technical information: (202) 691-6567

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

Media contact: 691-5902

USDL 04-2211

For release: 10:00 A.M. EDT

Tuesday, October 26, 2004

COUNTY EMPLOYMENT AND WAGES: FIRST QUARTER 2004

In March 2004, Prince William County, Va., had the largest over-the-year percentage increase in

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

Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor. Prince William County experienced an overthe-year employment gain of 8.0 percent, compared with national job growth of 0.8 percent. New York

County, N.Y., had the largest over-the-year gain in average weekly wages in the first quarter of 2004, with

an increase of 13.6 percent. The U.S. average weekly wage increased by 3.8 percent over the same time

span.

Of the 317 largest counties in the United States, 161 had over-the-year percentage growth in employment above the national average in March 2004, and 144 experienced changes below the national average.

(See chart 1.) Average weekly wages grew faster than the national average in 103 of the largest U.S.

counties, while the percent change in average weekly wages was below the national average in 203 counties.

(See chart 2.)

The employment and average weekly wage data by county are compiled under the Quarterly Census of

Employment and Wages (QCEW) program, also known as the ES-202 program. The data are derived from

reports submitted by every employer subject to unemployment insurance (UI) laws. The 8.4 million employer

reports cover 127.8 million full- and part-time workers. The attached tables and charts contain data for the

nation and for the 317 U.S. counties with employment levels of 75,000 or more in 2003. In addition, data

for San Juan, Puerto Rico, are provided, but not used in calculating U.S. averages, or in the analysis in the

text. (See Technical Note.) March 2004 employment and 2004 first-quarter average weekly wages for all

states are provided in table 4 of this release. Data for all states, MSAs, counties, and the nation through the

fourth quarter of 2003 are available on the BLS Web site at http://www.bls.gov/cew/. Preliminary data for

the first quarter of 2004 and revised data for 2003 will be available in October on the BLS Web site.

Large County Employment

The national employment total in March 2004 was 127.8 million, which was 0.8 percent higher than in

March 2003. The 317 U.S. counties with 75,000 or more employees accounted for 70.6 percent of total

U.S. covered employment and 77.4 percent of total wages. These 317 counties had a net job gain of

680,700 over the year, comprising 64 percent of the U.S. net over-the-year employment increase from

March 2003. The largest gains in employment from March 2003 to March 2004 were recorded in the

counties of Orange, Calif. (49,900), Clark, Nev. (40,000), Maricopa, Ariz. (39,500), Los Angeles, Calif.

(29,500), and Riverside, Calif. (29,000). (See table A.)
2

Los Angeles, Calif. 4,054.6 Orange, Calif. 49.9 Prince William, Va. 8.0

Cook, Ill. 2,474.0 Clark, Nev. 40.0 Rutherford, Tenn. 7.3

New York, N.Y. 2,203.0 Maricopa, Ariz. 39.5 Marion, Fla. 6.4

Harris, Texas 1,823.3 Los Angeles, Calif. 29.5 Placer, Calif. 6.3

Maricopa, Ariz. 1,611.2 Riverside, Calif. 29.0 Lee, Fla. 5.8

Orange, Calif. 1,454.3 San Bernardino, Calif. 27.8 Collin, Texas 5.5

Dallas, Texas 1,418.2 Fairfax, Va. 21.7 Loudoun, Va. 5.5

San Diego, Calif. 1,264.0 Hillsborough, Fla. 21.4 Clark, Nev. 5.4

King, Wash. 1,075.7 Orange, Fla. 18.4 Riverside, Calif. 5.4

Miami-Dade, Fla. 982.9 San Diego, Calif. 16.4 Pasco, Fla. 5.2

Employment in large counties

March 2004 employment

 (thousands)

 Net change in employment,

 March 2003-04

 (thousands)

Percent change in employment,

 March 2003-04

U.S. 127,778.5 U.S. 1,064.1 U.S. 0.8

Employment increased in 222 counties from March 2003 to March 2004. Prince William County, Va.,

had the largest over-the-year percentage increase in employment (8.0 percent). Rutherford County, Tenn.,

had the next largest increase, 7.3 percent, followed by the counties of Marion, Fla. (6.4 percent), Placer,

Calif. (6.3 percent), and Lee, Fla. (5.8 percent). (See table 1.)

Employment declined in 80 counties from March 2003 to March 2004. The largest percentage decline

in employment was in Trumbull County, Ohio (-3.2 percent), followed by the counties of St. Louis City, Mo.

(-2.9 percent), Oakland, Mich. (-2.5 percent), Wayne, Mich. (-2.4 percent), and San Mateo, Calif. (-1.9

percent). The largest absolute declines in employment occurred in Wayne County, Mich. (-19,600), followed by the counties of Oakland, Mich. (-18,200), Cook, Ill. (-12,600), Middlesex, Mass. (-9,600), and

Alameda, Calif. (-9,100).

Large County Average Weekly Wages

The national average weekly wage in the first quarter of 2004 was $758, which was 3.8 percent higher

than in the first quarter of 2003. Average weekly wages were higher than the national average in 107 of the

largest 317 U.S. counties. New York County, N.Y., held the top position among the highest-paid large

counties with an average weekly wage of $1,913. Fairfield County, Conn., was second with an average

weekly wage of $1,492, followed by Suffolk, Mass. ($1,405), Santa Clara, Calif. ($1,338), and Somerset,

N.J. ($1,322). (See table B.)

New York County, N.Y., also led the nation in growth in average weekly wages, with an increase of

13.6 percent from the first quarter of 2003. Suffolk County, Mass., was second with 12.6 percent growth,

followed by the counties of San Mateo, Calif. (10.8 percent), Olmsted, Minn. (10.4 percent), and Loudoun,

Va. (10.1 percent).

There were 210 counties with an average weekly wage below the national average in the first quarter of

2004. The lowest average weekly wages were reported in Cameron County, Texas ($445), followed by the

Table A. Top 10 counties ranked by March 2004 employment, March 2003-04 employment change,

and March 2003-04 percent change in employment
3

New York, N.Y. $1,913 New York, N.Y. $229 New York, N.Y. 13.6

Fairfield, Conn. 1,492 Suffolk, Mass. 157 Suffolk, Mass. 12.6

Suffolk, Mass. 1,405 San Mateo, Calif. 117 San Mateo, Calif. 10.8

Santa Clara, Calif. 1,338 Fairfield, Conn. 114 Olmsted, Minn. 10.4

Somerset, N.J. 1,322 Santa Clara, Calif. 100 Loudoun, Va. 10.1

San Francisco, Calif. 1,312 Arlington, Va. 99 Washington, Ore. 9.7

Arlington, Va. 1,240 Loudoun, Va. 90 Arlington, Va. 8.7

Washington, D.C. 1,221 Hudson, N.J. 89 Hudson, N.J. 8.6

San Mateo, Calif. 1,203 Washington, D.C. 82 Fairfield, Conn. 8.3

Fairfax, Va. 1,156 Olmsted, Minn. 79 Santa Clara, Calif. 8.1

Washington, Ore. 79

U.S. $758 U.S. $28 U.S. 3.8

Average weekly wage in large counties

 Average weekly wage,

 first quarter 2004

Percent change in average

 weekly wage, first

 quarter 2003-04

 Change in average weekly

 wage, first quarter 2003-04

Table B. Top 10 counties ranked by first quarter 2004 average weekly wages, first quarter

2003-04 change in average weekly wages, and first quarter 2003-04 percent change in average

weekly wages

counties of Hidalgo, Texas ($451), Webb, Texas ($473), Horry, S.C. ($484), and Yakima, Wash. ($505).

(See table 1.)

Eleven counties experienced over-the-year declines in average weekly wages. Trumbull County, Ohio,

had the largest decrease, -3.0 percent, followed by the counties of Williamson, Texas (-1.6 percent),

Chester, Penn. (-1.4 percent), Snohomish, Wash. (-1.3 percent), and Broome, N.Y. (-0.8 percent).

Ten Largest U.S. Counties

Of the 10 largest U.S. counties (based on 2003 employment levels), 6 reported increases in employment,

while declines occurred in 4 from March 2003 to March 2004. Orange County, Calif., experienced the

fastest growth in employment among the largest counties, with a 3.5 percent increase. The largest employment increases were in financial activities (10.3 percent) and professional and business services (9.2 percent).

Orange County showed employment gains in every industry group except natural resources and mining,

manufacturing, information, and government. (See table 2.) Maricopa County, Ariz., had the next largest

increase in employment, 2.5 percent, followed by San Diego, Calif. (1.3 percent). The largest decrease in

employment for the 10 largest counties was in Dallas County, Texas, with a 0.6 percent decline. The next

largest declines in employment were recorded in Cook County, Ill. (-0.5 percent), and Harris County, Texas

(-0.2 percent).

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

County, N.Y., had the fastest growth in wages among the top 10 counties, growing at a 13.6 percent rate.

New York County’s fastest growing supersectors were financial activities, where the average weekly wage

rose by 27.4 percent, and manufacturing, with a 9.5 percent increase. Dallas County, Texas, was second

in wage growth, increasing by 6.3 percent, followed by Cook County, Ill., and Miami-Dade County, Fla.,

where average wages increased by 5.2 percent each. King County, Wash., experienced the smallest
4

increase in average weekly wages among the largest 10 counties, rising by only 2.2 percent, primarily due

to wage decreases in the information supersector. This was followed by Orange County, Calif., with an

increase in average weekly wages of 3.8 percent and by two other California counties, Los Angeles and

San Diego (3.9 percent each).

Largest County by State

Table 3 shows March 2004 employment and the 2004 first-quarter average weekly wage in the largest

county in each state. This table includes two counties that have employment levels below 75,000 (Yellowstone, Mont., and Laramie, Wyo.). The employment levels in these counties in March 2004 ranged from

approximately 4.1 million in Los Angeles County, Calif., to 39,100 in Laramie County, Wyo. The highest

average weekly wage of these counties was in New York, N.Y. ($1,913), while the lowest average weekly

wage was in Yellowstone County, Mont. ($568).
Technical Note

These data are the product of a federal-state cooperative

program, the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages

(QCEW) program, also known as the ES-202 program. The data

are derived from summaries of employment and total pay of

workers covered by state and federal unemployment insurance

(UI) legislation and provided by State Workforce Agencies

(SWAs). The summaries are a result of the administration of

state unemployment insurance programs that require most

employers to pay quarterly taxes based on the employment and

wages of workers covered by UI. Data for 2004 are preliminary

and subject to revision.

For purposes of this release, large counties are defined as

having employment levels of 75,000 or greater. Each year, these

large counties are selected on the basis of the preliminary

annual average of employment for the previous year. The 318

counties discussed in this release were derived using 2003

preliminary annual averages of employment. These counties

will be included in all 2004 quarterly releases. The counties in

table 2 are selected and sorted each year based on the annual

average employment from the preceding year.

The preliminary QCEW data presented in this release may

differ from data released by the individual states. These

potential differences result from the states’ continuing receipt

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

Source Count of UI administrative records Count of longitudinally-linked UI Sample survey: 400,000 employers

submitted by 8.4 million employers administrative records submitted by

6.4 million private-sector employers

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

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

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

Other employment, including railroads, religious organizations, and

other non-UI-covered jobs

Publication Quarterly Quarterly Monthly

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

quarter quarter month

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

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

 data summarizes gross job gains sample estimates to first quarter

 and losses

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

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

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

state, and national levels by Future expansions will include

detailed industry data at the county, MSA, and

state level by industry and size

of establishment

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

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

- Periodic universe counts for - Analysis of employer dynamics indicator

benchmarking sample survey underlying economic expansions - Official time series for

estimates and contractions employment change measures

- Sample frame for BLS - Future: Employment expansion - Input into other major economic

establishment surveys and contraction by size of estab- indicators

lishment

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

Web sites

•

•

•

•

 •

•

•

• •

•

•

• •

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

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

 QCEW BED CES

•

UI levels
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 over-the-quarter

employment change. It is important to understand program

differences and the intended uses of the program products.

(See table on the previous page.) Additional information on

each program can be obtained from the program Web sites

shown in the table on the previous page.

Coverage

Employment and wage data for workers covered by state UI

laws and for federal civilian workers covered by the Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees (UCFE)

program are compiled from quarterly contribution reports

submitted to the SWAs by employers. In addition to the

quarterly contribution reports, employers who operate multiple

establishments within a state complete a questionnaire, called

the “Multiple Worksite Report,” which provides detailed

information on the location and industry of each of their

establishments. The employment and wage data included in

this release are derived from microdata summaries of more than

8 million employer reports of employment and wages submitted

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

employment rather than place of residence.

UI and UCFE coverage is broad and basically comparable

from state to state. In 2003, UI and UCFE programs covered

workers in 127.8 million jobs. The estimated 122.9 million

workers in these jobs (after adjustment for multiple jobholders)

represented 96.6 percent of civilian wage and salary employment. Covered workers received $4.826 trillion in pay,

representing 94.6 percent of the wage and salary component of

personal income and 43.9 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. Effective January 1, 2004, the

Washington Employment Security Department no longer

includes as covered wages an employee’s income attributable

to the transfer of shares of stock to the employee. This change

in wage coverage pertains to all establishments in Washington

State and contributes significantly to over-the-year changes in

wages in the state in 2004.

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.

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

to part-time workers as well as the number of individuals in

high-paying and low-paying occupations. When comparing

average weekly wage levels between industries and/or states,

these factors should be taken into consideration. Percent

changes are calculated using an adjusted version of the final

2003 quarterly data as the base data. Final data for 2003 may

differ from preliminary data published earlier.

In order to insure 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.

These changes in classifications are partially adjusted for in

order to improve the measure of economic change over time,

as presented in this release. Some changes in classification

reflect economic events, while other changes are simply the

result of corrections and other noneconomic events. Changes

of an economic nature (such as a firm moving from one county

to another or changing its primary economic activity) are not

adjusted for in the over-the-year change, because these

changes are due to an actual event. But to the extent possible,

changes that are not economic in nature (such as a correction

to a previously reported location or industry classification) are

adjusted for in the measures of change presented in this release.

The adjustment is made by reassigning year-ago data

for establishments with noneconomic changes into the

classification shown in the current data. The year-ago to-
tals are then recreated reflecting this reassignment process.

The adjusted year-ago data are then used to calculate the

over-the-year change. The adjusted year-ago data differ

to some extent from the data available on the BLS Web

site. This process results in a more accurate presentation of

change in local economic activity than what would result

from the simple comparison of current and year-ago data points.

County definitions are assigned according to Federal

Information Processing Standards Publications (FIPS PUBS)

as issued by the National Institute of Standards and

Technology, after approval by the Secretary of Commerce

pursuant to Section 5131 of the Information Technology

Management Reform Act of 1996 and the Computer Security

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

include those designated as independent cities in some

jurisdictions and, in Alaska, those designated as census areas

where counties have not been created. County data also are

presented for the New England states for comparative purposes

even though townships are the more common designation used

in New England (and New Jersey). The regions referred to in

this release are defined as census regions.

Additional statistics and other information

An annual bulletin, Employment and Wages, features

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

states. Employment and Wages Annual Averages, 2002 is

available for sale from the BLS Publications Sales Center, P.O.

Box 2145, Chicago, Illinois 60690, telephone 312-353-1880. The

2002 bulletin is now available in a portable document format

(PDF) on the BLS Web site at http://www.bls.gov/cew/

cewbultn02.htm. The 2003 annual bulletin will be published in

late 2004. BLS also will make this bulletin available in a PDF

format on the BLS Web site.

News releases on quarterly measures of gross job flows also

are available upon request from the Division of Administrative

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

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

Information in this release will be made available to sensory

impaired individuals upon request. Voice phone: 202-691-5200;

TDD message referral phone number: 1-800-877-8339.
Table 1. Covered1 establishments, employment, and wages in the 318 largest counties,

first quarter 20042

County3

Establishments,

first quarter

2004

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage5

March

2004

(thousands)

Percent

change,

March

2003-044

Ranking by

percent

change

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

first quarter

2003-044

Ranking by

percent

change

United States6 .................... 8,367.2 127,778.5 0.8 - $758 3.8 - 

Jefferson, AL ...................... 18.4 368.7 0.2 212 766 3.2 140

Madison, AL ....................... 7.8 161.4 2.1 77 760 0.1 302

Mobile, AL .......................... 9.6 160.0 -1.6 307 592 1.9 240

Montgomery, AL ................ 6.5 130.7 1.5 103 618 2.8 170

Tuscaloosa, AL .................. 4.1 77.2 -0.4 252 587 0.7 290

Anchorage Borough, AK .... 7.8 138.1 1.0 145 780 4.8 66

Maricopa, AZ ..................... 80.9 1,611.2 2.5 67 733 5.0 53

Pima, AZ ............................ 17.6 335.2 1.8 90 626 1.8 248

Benton, AR ........................ 4.3 83.2 3.4 36 775 3.2 140

Pulaski, AR ........................ 13.2 239.2 1.0 145 669 5.0 53

Washington, AR ................. 5.0 85.1 3.1 46 566 4.2 86

Alameda, CA ...................... 48.9 678.0 -1.3 293 979 5.0 53

Contra Costa, CA ............... 28.3 337.9 -0.3 248 972 6.0 34

Fresno, CA ......................... 29.6 316.5 2.0 80 591 1.5 267

Kern, CA ............................ 16.2 241.4 3.2 40 649 2.5 192

Los Angeles, CA ................ 364.7 4,054.6 0.7 172 846 3.9 97

Marin, CA ........................... 12.0 107.8 0.0 224 985 5.0 53

Monterey, CA ..................... 12.2 156.6 -0.4 252 679 2.1 225

Orange, CA ........................ 90.8 1,454.3 3.5 31 872 3.8 105

Placer, CA .......................... 9.5 130.3 6.3 4 721 3.6 116

Riverside, CA ..................... 38.4 563.4 5.4 8 645 4.4 78

Sacramento, CA ................ 47.1 602.0 1.0 145 833 1.7 253

San Bernardino, CA ........... 42.3 600.1 4.9 12 645 2.5 192

San Diego, CA ................... 87.0 1,264.0 1.3 119 806 3.9 97

San Francisco, CA ............. 44.0 518.4 -1.4 302 1,312 6.1 32

San Joaquin, CA ................ 16.1 212.1 0.7 172 643 3.4 127

San Luis Obispo, CA ......... 8.8 99.6 0.3 201 607 1.5 267

San Mateo, CA .................. 23.3 328.2 -1.9 311 1,203 10.8 3

Santa Barbara, CA ............. 13.4 179.1 1.4 110 706 3.1 147

Santa Clara, CA ................. 52.8 846.5 -1.1 287 1,338 8.1 10

Santa Cruz, CA .................. 8.5 91.9 0.7 172 735 3.8 105

Solano, CA ......................... 9.6 125.1 0.2 212 716 6.7 21

Sonoma, CA ...................... 17.4 189.8 1.2 124 706 0.6 291

Stanislaus, CA ................... 13.4 164.2 1.4 110 624 1.6 259

Tulare, CA .......................... 8.9 130.3 1.1 133 524 3.6 116

Ventura, CA ....................... 20.9 308.6 1.7 93 824 6.6 24

Yolo, CA ............................. 5.1 94.5 0.4 197 674 3.7 114

Adams, CO ........................ 8.5 138.5 -0.8 272 710 4.9 61

Arapahoe, CO .................... 18.6 264.6 -0.7 268 928 1.2 282

Boulder, CO ....................... 11.6 149.0 0.3 201 923 6.0 34

Denver, CO ........................ 24.0 418.0 -1.1 287 948 7.7 12

El Paso, CO ....................... 15.7 231.3 0.8 163 687 1.9 240

Jefferson, CO ..................... 17.7 199.7 0.1 221 770 2.3 206

Larimer, CO ....................... 9.1 118.9 2.0 80 661 2.8 170

Fairfield, CT ....................... 31.8 407.1 0.1 221 1,492 8.3 9

Hartford, CT ....................... 24.2 474.1 -0.1 236 1,006 7.5 13

New Haven, CT ................. 21.9 357.2 0.3 201 807 3.5 121

New London, CT ................ 6.6 125.6 -0.5 256 792 5.2 49

New Castle, DE ................. 18.6 277.3 1.9 87 957 2.2 215

Washington, DC ................. 30.2 654.7 0.8 163 1,221 7.2 15

See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered1 establishments, employment, and wages in the 318 largest counties,

first quarter 20042 — Continued

County3

Establishments,

first quarter

2004

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage5

March

2004

(thousands)

Percent

change,

March

2003-044

Ranking by

percent

change

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

first quarter

2003-044

Ranking by

percent

change

Alachua, FL ........................ 5.9 123.6 2.3 75 $550 3.8 105

Brevard, FL ........................ 12.6 194.6 4.8 13 705 6.5 25

Broward, FL ....................... 57.9 693.7 0.8 163 707 5.8 39

Collier, FL .......................... 10.5 126.3 3.3 38 636 5.0 53

Duval, FL ........................... 22.8 433.8 1.4 110 745 3.9 97

Escambia, FL ..................... 7.4 126.0 3.6 29 571 2.1 225

Hillsborough, FL ................. 31.7 612.8 3.6 29 721 4.9 61

Lee, FL ............................... 15.2 198.9 5.8 5 613 4.8 66

Leon, FL ............................. 7.4 144.8 1.8 90 616 4.1 89

Manatee, FL ....................... 7.1 118.6 5.1 11 559 1.8 248

Marion, FL .......................... 6.5 91.0 6.4 3 530 2.9 161

Miami-Dade, FL ................. 81.6 982.9 0.9 154 729 5.2 49

Okaloosa, FL ..................... 5.3 78.2 -1.7 310 575 6.1 32

Orange, FL ......................... 30.1 621.1 3.1 46 688 5.0 53

Palm Beach, FL ................. 43.6 524.3 2.0 80 728 2.2 215

Pasco, FL ........................... 7.5 84.5 5.2 10 510 3.9 97

Pinellas, FL ........................ 28.7 437.3 3.5 31 641 2.7 176

Polk, FL .............................. 10.6 193.7 2.8 58 567 2.2 215

Sarasota, FL ...................... 13.2 155.8 4.8 13 606 4.8 66

Seminole, FL ...................... 12.2 150.3 3.2 40 656 3.1 147

Volusia, FL ......................... 12.0 156.7 4.1 20 530 2.3 206

Bibb, GA ............................ 4.8 87.1 3.0 54 614 2.3 206

Chatham, GA ..................... 7.1 126.9 2.5 67 622 2.5 192

Clayton, GA ....................... 4.4 106.7 (7) - 784 1.6 259

Cobb, GA ........................... 20.0 299.9 1.4 110 821 1.7 253

De Kalb, GA ....................... 17.1 288.8 -0.8 272 828 1.3 276

Fulton, GA .......................... 37.4 722.0 0.6 180 1,043 2.5 192

Gwinnett, GA ..................... 21.4 303.4 3.3 38 791 0.4 294

Muscogee, GA ................... 4.8 97.1 0.8 163 598 1.5 267

Richmond, GA ................... 4.8 104.5 1.5 103 609 1.5 267

Honolulu, HI ....................... 24.6 422.7 1.2 124 681 3.2 140

Ada, ID ............................... 12.9 183.5 2.4 72 656 1.1 285

Champaign, IL ................... 3.9 89.2 0.1 221 618 2.3 206

Cook, IL ............................. 126.5 2,474.0 -0.5 256 953 5.2 49

Du Page, IL ........................ 32.4 561.0 -0.5 256 888 3.6 116

Kane, IL ............................. 10.9 193.2 0.3 201 678 2.6 184

Lake, IL .............................. 18.9 311.3 0.0 224 932 3.2 140

McHenry, IL ....................... 7.4 92.0 3.1 46 652 2.7 176

McLean, IL ......................... 3.3 83.3 -1.3 293 733 3.5 121

Madison, IL ........................ 5.6 93.7 0.2 212 618 4.9 61

Peoria, IL ........................... 4.5 96.1 1.3 119 714 6.7 21

Rock Island, IL ................... 3.4 76.1 -1.3 293 676 2.6 184

St. Clair, IL ......................... 5.0 91.7 0.2 212 581 3.6 116

Sangamon, IL .................... 5.1 128.6 (7) - 727 (7) - 

Will, IL ................................ 10.7 154.1 3.4 36 683 1.5 267

Winnebago, IL .................... 6.6 133.9 0.3 201 643 0.6 291

Allen, IN ............................. 8.8 176.2 -0.1 236 660 0.3 297

Elkhart, IN .......................... 4.9 119.1 4.6 16 625 1.3 276

Hamilton, IN ....................... 6.2 84.6 3.0 54 812 4.0 94

Lake, IN ............................. 9.9 188.3 -1.1 287 659 3.8 105

See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered1 establishments, employment, and wages in the 318 largest counties,

first quarter 20042 — Continued

County3

Establishments,

first quarter

2004

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage5

March

2004

(thousands)

Percent

change,

March

2003-044

Ranking by

percent

change

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

first quarter

2003-044

Ranking by

percent

change

Marion, IN .......................... 23.8 567.9 0.2 212 $810 5.6 43

St. Joseph, IN .................... 6.0 121.7 0.2 212 633 1.6 259

Vanderburgh, IN ................ 4.8 107.0 -0.9 277 632 2.8 170

Linn, IA ............................... 6.0 114.3 0.4 197 709 4.3 82

Polk, IA .............................. 14.0 255.4 2.0 80 781 4.7 70

Scott, IA ............................. 5.1 83.1 0.3 201 596 3.3 137

Johnson, KS ...................... 18.4 289.0 1.3 119 816 3.0 153

Sedgwick, KS ..................... 11.6 237.3 -1.0 280 677 2.0 231

Shawnee, KS ..................... 4.7 95.3 -1.3 293 625 3.0 153

Fayette, KY ........................ 8.7 164.2 0.9 154 699 4.2 86

Jefferson, KY ..................... 21.4 411.0 -0.5 256 750 5.6 43

Caddo, LA .......................... 6.9 118.6 1.0 145 607 3.8 105

Calcasieu, LA ..................... 4.6 81.8 -1.0 280 618 6.9 16

East Baton Rouge, LA ....... 12.9 246.4 3.2 40 636 2.6 184

Jefferson, LA ...................... 13.8 212.6 0.0 224 604 3.4 127

Lafayette, LA ...................... 7.5 118.3 -0.5 256 625 1.5 267

Orleans, LA ........................ 12.4 250.0 0.5 187 724 6.3 29

Cumberland, ME ................ 11.4 165.0 1.7 93 696 5.0 53

Anne Arundel, MD ............. 13.3 211.7 3.5 31 775 5.3 47

Baltimore, MD .................... 20.4 360.5 1.2 124 787 6.9 16

Frederick, MD .................... 5.4 88.9 4.2 18 743 6.8 19

Howard, MD ....................... 7.8 137.1 0.9 154 850 3.3 137

Montgomery, MD ............... 31.0 446.5 0.5 187 1,014 7.8 11

Prince Georges, MD .......... 14.7 310.5 2.0 80 787 2.7 176

Baltimore City, MD ............. 13.9 353.4 -1.4 302 885 6.9 16

Barnstable, MA .................. 9.1 83.5 1.5 103 652 3.0 153

Bristol, MA ......................... 15.0 215.6 0.7 172 648 1.3 276

Essex, MA .......................... 20.5 289.1 -1.4 302 790 1.8 248

Hampden, MA .................... 13.8 196.2 0.0 224 708 2.2 215

Middlesex, MA ................... 47.6 772.2 -1.2 292 1,072 6.8 19

Norfolk, MA ........................ 21.7 312.7 -0.8 272 916 3.2 140

Plymouth, MA .................... 13.4 166.7 0.9 154 704 2.0 231

Suffolk, MA ........................ 22.2 552.4 -1.4 302 1,405 12.6 2

Worcester, MA ................... 20.1 311.9 0.0 224 748 2.3 206

Genesee, MI ...................... 8.6 152.7 -0.4 252 716 -0.3 309

Ingham, MI ......................... 7.0 166.0 -1.3 293 718 -0.7 311

Kalamazoo, MI ................... 5.5 114.3 -0.2 241 742 4.1 89

Kent, MI ............................. 14.5 328.3 0.7 172 682 0.0 304

Macomb, MI ....................... 18.1 317.6 0.5 187 828 -0.6 310

Oakland, MI ....................... 41.5 702.8 -2.5 313 923 0.2 300

Ottawa, MI ......................... 5.7 108.3 0.5 187 654 2.3 206

Saginaw, MI ....................... 4.6 88.1 -1.1 287 677 (7) - 

Washtenaw, MI .................. 8.2 193.0 -0.2 241 868 4.7 70

Wayne, MI .......................... 35.2 785.5 -2.4 312 893 2.9 161

Anoka, MN ......................... 7.4 108.7 1.2 124 710 2.9 161

Dakota, MN ........................ 9.6 163.1 1.1 133 752 2.2 215

Hennepin, MN .................... 40.6 806.7 -0.7 268 983 6.5 25

Olmsted, MN ...................... 3.3 85.9 1.4 110 837 10.4 4

Ramsey, MN ...................... 14.9 319.5 -0.9 277 881 5.9 36

St. Louis, MN ..................... 5.7 90.9 -1.3 293 637 3.7 114

See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered1 establishments, employment, and wages in the 318 largest counties,

first quarter 20042 — Continued

County3

Establishments,

first quarter

2004

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage5

March

2004

(thousands)

Percent

change,

March

2003-044

Ranking by

percent

change

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

first quarter

2003-044

Ranking by

percent

change

Stearns, MN ....................... 4.2 75.8 1.1 133 $579 2.8 170

Harrison, MS ...................... 4.5 88.7 0.6 180 538 0.2 300

Hinds, MS .......................... 6.5 129.9 0.3 201 646 2.9 161

Boone, MO ......................... 4.2 76.4 0.8 163 566 3.9 97

Clay, MO ............................ 4.9 84.9 -1.0 280 682 2.7 176

Greene, MO ....................... 8.0 144.1 0.3 201 560 2.8 170

Jackson, MO ...................... 18.7 360.0 -1.0 280 764 2.3 206

St. Charles, MO ................. 7.2 109.5 3.8 26 642 1.7 253

St. Louis, MO ..................... 33.8 609.2 -1.3 293 813 3.8 105

St. Louis City, MO .............. 8.3 223.0 -2.9 314 905 4.9 61

Douglas, NE ....................... 14.6 303.1 -0.3 248 712 2.6 184

Lancaster, NE .................... 7.4 148.6 1.3 119 609 3.0 153

Clark, NV ........................... 37.9 784.0 5.4 8 693 5.8 39

Washoe, NV ....................... 12.5 198.2 3.1 46 693 2.8 170

Hillsborough, NH ................ 12.2 191.6 2.1 77 806 2.9 161

Rockingham, NH ................ 10.6 130.2 2.7 64 762 4.7 70

Atlantic, NJ ......................... 6.5 139.6 0.8 163 667 2.1 225

Bergen, NJ ......................... 34.1 444.9 0.8 163 966 3.0 153

Burlington, NJ .................... 11.1 195.9 1.5 103 798 2.7 176

Camden, NJ ....................... 13.3 204.8 2.8 58 764 1.5 267

Essex, NJ ........................... 21.3 358.1 0.2 212 1,036 5.4 46

Gloucester, NJ ................... 6.0 97.1 3.7 28 674 3.9 97

Hudson, NJ ........................ 13.8 231.5 -1.3 293 1,121 8.6 8

Mercer, NJ ......................... 10.6 212.1 1.1 133 987 1.9 240

Middlesex, NJ .................... 20.5 390.5 1.4 110 1,019 3.5 121

Monmouth, NJ ................... 19.8 247.9 3.2 40 824 1.7 253

Morris, NJ .......................... 17.6 277.3 0.9 154 1,145 3.4 127

Ocean, NJ .......................... 11.4 139.3 3.2 40 638 1.3 276

Passaic, NJ ........................ 12.4 176.6 2.3 75 794 1.9 240

Somerset, NJ ..................... 9.9 166.4 -1.6 307 1,322 1.9 240

Union, NJ ........................... 15.0 236.8 0.0 224 964 3.2 140

Bernalillo, NM .................... 16.8 310.6 1.4 110 644 2.4 201

Albany, NY ......................... 9.5 226.6 0.6 180 778 2.2 215

Bronx, NY .......................... 15.3 211.8 -1.6 307 686 1.9 240

Broome, NY ....................... 4.4 93.9 -1.0 280 589 -0.8 312

Dutchess, NY ..................... 7.7 115.8 1.2 124 769 1.9 240

Erie, NY ............................. 23.2 453.1 1.1 133 671 2.1 225

Kings, NY ........................... 41.7 441.6 0.5 187 665 5.6 43

Monroe, NY ........................ 17.6 375.8 -0.5 256 755 3.6 116

Nassau, NY ........................ 50.3 593.3 1.1 133 831 4.4 78

New York, NY .................... 112.3 2,203.0 -0.1 236 1,913 13.6 1

Oneida, NY ........................ 5.3 106.5 -0.2 241 581 2.7 176

Onondaga, NY ................... 12.6 243.7 0.4 197 693 1.2 282

Orange, NY ........................ 9.1 124.5 1.4 110 623 3.0 153

Queens, NY ....................... 39.8 468.4 -0.5 256 749 3.0 153

Richmond, NY .................... 8.0 87.2 0.5 187 659 4.9 61

Rockland, NY ..................... 9.2 109.8 1.0 145 800 4.0 94

Suffolk, NY ......................... 47.2 587.9 1.0 145 783 2.5 192

Westchester, NY ................ 35.0 403.6 0.6 180 1,065 7.4 14

Buncombe, NC .................. 6.8 104.3 1.2 124 562 1.4 274

See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered1 establishments, employment, and wages in the 318 largest counties,

first quarter 20042 — Continued

County3

Establishments,

first quarter

2004

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage5

March

2004

(thousands)

Percent

change,

March

2003-044

Ranking by

percent

change

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

first quarter

2003-044

Ranking by

percent

change

Catawba, NC ..................... 4.3 86.8 -0.7 268 $560 1.6 259

Cumberland, NC ................ 5.6 109.8 1.1 133 547 1.1 285

Durham, NC ....................... 6.1 166.9 1.5 103 1,052 6.4 28

Forsyth, NC ........................ 8.3 173.5 0.2 212 732 2.4 201

Guilford, NC ....................... 13.6 264.3 0.0 224 676 1.3 276

Mecklenburg, NC ............... 27.1 498.6 -0.2 241 991 5.7 42

New Hanover, NC .............. 6.3 88.4 2.4 72 587 3.5 121

Wake, NC .......................... 23.0 383.4 2.7 64 760 2.7 176

Cass, ND ........................... 5.3 85.5 3.0 54 605 3.8 105

Butler, OH .......................... 6.9 132.4 3.9 24 653 0.5 293

Cuyahoga, OH ................... 38.5 746.2 -0.6 264 790 3.1 147

Franklin, OH ....................... 29.6 672.9 -0.2 241 762 2.7 176

Hamilton, OH ..................... 24.8 534.0 -0.8 272 830 3.5 121

Lake, OH ............................ 6.7 97.0 1.1 133 630 -0.2 307

Lorain, OH ......................... 6.3 100.2 1.2 124 639 3.4 127

Lucas, OH .......................... 11.0 223.1 -0.4 252 680 -0.1 306

Mahoning, OH .................... 6.5 103.3 0.4 197 564 2.4 201

Montgomery, OH ............... 13.3 281.3 -1.1 287 705 1.6 259

Stark, OH ........................... 9.1 163.6 -0.7 268 593 1.0 288

Summit, OH ....................... 14.8 260.2 0.5 187 713 1.4 274

Trumbull, OH ..................... 4.9 83.1 -3.2 315 654 -3.0 316

Oklahoma, OK ................... 21.7 398.9 0.5 187 645 4.2 86

Tulsa, OK ........................... 18.3 317.2 -1.0 280 676 4.3 82

Clackamas, OR .................. 11.6 134.9 2.8 58 684 4.1 89

Jackson, OR ...................... 6.2 77.2 3.2 40 555 2.2 215

Lane, OR ........................... 10.5 137.6 1.1 133 573 2.3 206

Marion, OR ........................ 8.5 125.1 1.6 99 588 2.4 201

Multnomah, OR .................. 25.7 414.8 0.0 224 764 2.1 225

Washington, OR ................ 14.5 218.7 -0.1 236 890 9.7 6

Allegheny, PA .................... 37.0 684.7 -0.1 236 804 4.6 75

Berks, PA ........................... 9.0 159.9 1.9 87 651 -0.2 307

Bucks, PA .......................... 19.9 250.0 1.7 93 715 3.2 140

Chester, PA ....................... 14.8 220.3 1.6 99 938 -1.4 314

Cumberland, PA ................ 5.7 125.0 1.2 124 704 2.2 215

Dauphin, PA ....................... 7.0 171.9 0.7 172 759 4.1 89

Delaware, PA ..................... 13.9 209.1 0.9 154 808 4.8 66

Erie, PA .............................. 7.2 123.7 1.0 145 578 2.5 192

Lackawanna, PA ................ 5.8 97.3 1.5 103 567 0.4 294

Lancaster, PA .................... 11.7 221.4 2.0 80 633 0.3 297

Lehigh, PA ......................... 8.4 170.2 1.7 93 741 2.9 161

Luzerne, PA ....................... 8.1 139.2 0.5 187 595 3.1 147

Montgomery, PA ................ 27.7 473.8 0.0 224 1,004 6.7 21

Northampton, PA ............... 6.2 91.4 1.5 103 646 2.9 161

Philadelphia, PA ................ 28.3 629.6 (7) - 891 5.9 36

Westmoreland, PA ............. 9.5 132.4 2.6 66 580 1.6 259

York, PA ............................. 8.7 166.2 3.1 46 668 1.8 248

Kent, RI .............................. 5.5 79.5 2.5 67 678 5.9 36

Providence, RI ................... 17.5 281.2 -0.6 264 755 1.2 282

Charleston, SC .................. 11.3 189.4 2.5 67 608 2.0 231

Greenville, SC .................... 11.8 224.3 -0.9 277 670 0.1 302

See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered1 establishments, employment, and wages in the 318 largest counties,

first quarter 20042 — Continued

County3

Establishments,

first quarter

2004

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage5

March

2004

(thousands)

Percent

change,

March

2003-044

Ranking by

percent

change

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

first quarter

2003-044

Ranking by

percent

change

Horry, SC ........................... 7.5 100.4 3.1 46 $484 0.8 289

Lexington, SC .................... 5.3 85.0 0.8 163 550 3.4 127

Richland, SC ...................... 9.1 203.9 0.0 224 632 2.1 225

Spartanburg, SC ................ 6.0 109.7 -0.3 248 629 1.3 276

Minnehaha, SD .................. 5.9 106.3 1.1 133 612 2.9 161

Davidson, TN ..................... 17.9 425.1 0.7 172 746 3.5 121

Hamilton, TN ...................... 8.3 188.9 0.9 154 626 2.5 192

Knox, TN ............................ 10.3 213.4 2.5 67 632 3.4 127

Rutherford, TN ................... 3.6 87.7 7.3 2 651 2.0 231

Shelby, TN ......................... 19.9 491.9 -0.2 241 757 3.4 127

Bell, TX .............................. 4.2 90.1 1.8 90 542 0.4 294

Bexar, TX ........................... 29.5 656.7 0.6 180 670 5.0 53

Brazoria, TX ....................... 4.1 75.7 -0.5 256 749 6.5 25

Brazos, TX ......................... 3.5 78.0 1.0 145 520 3.4 127

Cameron, TX ..................... 6.1 116.1 0.6 180 445 1.6 259

Collin, TX ........................... 12.5 202.8 5.5 6 844 4.3 82

Dallas, TX .......................... 67.7 1,418.2 -0.6 264 947 6.3 29

Denton, TX ......................... 8.4 131.8 3.1 46 621 2.0 231

El Paso, TX ........................ 12.5 251.7 0.2 212 514 2.4 201

Fort Bend, TX .................... 6.3 99.3 2.0 80 773 4.3 82

Galveston, TX .................... 4.8 87.5 -1.0 280 652 2.0 231

Harris, TX ........................... 89.4 1,823.3 -0.2 241 898 4.4 78

Hidalgo, TX ........................ 9.3 187.6 3.9 24 451 1.6 259

Jefferson, TX ..................... 5.9 117.4 1.0 145 672 4.7 70

Lubbock, TX ....................... 6.4 114.8 -0.8 272 549 2.0 231

McLennan, TX ................... 4.7 98.3 1.7 93 571 1.8 248

Montgomery, TX ................ 6.3 89.8 4.7 15 641 3.1 147

Nueces, TX ........................ 8.0 143.6 0.9 154 601 2.6 184

Potter, TX ........................... 3.9 77.4 2.9 57 562 3.1 147

Smith, TX ........................... 4.9 85.5 1.3 119 622 5.2 49

Tarrant, TX ......................... 33.7 689.6 0.3 201 770 3.9 97

Travis, TX .......................... 24.8 509.6 1.2 124 836 2.6 184

Webb, TX ........................... 4.3 78.0 3.1 46 473 1.7 253

Williamson, TX ................... 5.0 84.4 3.5 31 795 -1.6 315

Davis, UT ........................... 6.1 90.0 3.5 31 603 1.9 240

Salt Lake, UT ..................... 33.3 512.5 1.1 133 671 3.4 127

Utah, UT ............................ 10.6 145.4 4.1 20 544 0.0 304

Weber, UT ......................... 5.2 86.8 1.6 99 537 2.5 192

Chittenden, VT ................... 5.7 92.7 1.1 133 730 1.7 253

Arlington, VA ...................... 6.9 151.6 2.8 58 1,240 8.7 7

Chesterfield, VA ................. 6.6 111.5 2.8 58 667 4.1 89

Fairfax, VA ......................... 29.7 533.9 4.2 18 1,156 5.3 47

Henrico, VA ........................ 8.2 164.3 0.0 224 824 4.7 70

Loudoun, VA ...................... 6.2 109.8 5.5 6 979 10.1 5

Prince William, VA ............. 5.8 92.9 8.0 1 637 2.2 215

Alexandria City, VA ............ 5.7 91.6 0.5 187 924 3.0 153

Chesapeake City, VA ......... 4.8 91.6 4.1 20 571 4.0 94

Newport News City, VA ..... 3.7 96.5 2.1 77 652 2.0 231

Norfolk City, VA ................. 5.6 144.6 0.6 180 720 3.4 127

Richmond City, VA ............. 6.9 157.5 -0.3 248 905 3.9 97

See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered1 establishments, employment, and wages in the 318 largest counties,

first quarter 20042 — Continued

County3

Establishments,

first quarter

2004

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage5

March

2004

(thousands)

Percent

change,

March

2003-044

Ranking by

percent

change

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

first quarter

2003-044

Ranking by

percent

change

Virginia Beach City, VA ...... 10.6 167.2 3.8 26 $566 2.5 192

Clark, WA ........................... 10.0 117.6 4.0 23 663 2.6 184

King, WA ............................ 75.2 1,075.7 0.3 201 940 2.2 215

Kitsap, WA ......................... 6.0 79.1 4.3 17 686 3.8 105

Pierce, WA ......................... 19.0 244.7 1.9 87 667 4.4 78

Snohomish, WA ................. 15.6 207.5 0.8 163 736 -1.3 313

Spokane, WA ..................... 14.1 189.1 0.9 154 598 2.6 184

Thurston, WA ..................... 6.1 90.7 1.6 99 661 2.3 206

Yakima, WA ....................... 8.0 88.0 0.3 201 505 3.3 137

Kanawha, WV .................... 6.2 107.3 -0.6 264 646 1.1 285

Brown, WI .......................... 6.8 143.2 2.4 72 661 2.0 231

Dane, WI ............................ 13.8 283.9 1.4 110 728 4.6 75

Milwaukee, WI ................... 22.3 491.1 -1.3 293 770 4.6 75

Outagamie, WI ................... 5.0 97.3 2.8 58 660 3.8 105

Racine, WI ......................... 4.3 74.3 0.0 224 672 2.9 161

Waukesha, WI ................... 13.4 220.6 0.7 172 739 0.3 297

Winnebago, WI .................. 4.0 84.7 -1.4 302 744 5.8 39

San Juan, PR ..................... 12.9 322.8 1.7 93 487 6.3 29

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

These 317 U.S. counties comprise 70.6 percent of the total covered workers in the U.S. 2 Data are preliminary. 3 Includes areas not officially designated as counties. See Technical Note. 4 Percent changes were computed from quarterly employment and pay data adjusted for noneconomic county reclassifications. See Technical

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

first quarter 20042

County by NAICS supersector

Establishments,

first quarter

2004

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage4

March

2004

(thousands)

Percent

change,

March

2003-043

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

first quarter

2003-043

United States5 .................................................... 8,367.2 127,778.5 0.8 $758 3.8

Private industry .............................................. 8,095.7 106,575.5 1.0 758 4.1

Natural resources and mining .................... 123.0 1,557.3 2.0 720 6.7

Construction ............................................... 811.5 6,506.1 3.5 732 1.4

Manufacturing ............................................ 373.7 14,177.7 -2.9 916 3.7

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 1,858.2 24,814.5 0.6 647 2.2

Information ................................................. 145.0 3,120.6 -2.8 1,231 6.9

Financial activities ...................................... 778.9 7,818.2 0.9 1,413 11.7

Professional and business services ........... 1,335.2 15,994.0 2.4 907 4.9

Education and health services ................... 740.9 16,005.0 2.1 656 3.0

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 675.1 12,031.7 2.6 311 2.6

Other services ............................................ 1,081.5 4,261.8 0.4 468 2.2

Government ................................................... 271.5 21,203.0 0.0 758 2.6

Los Angeles, CA ................................................ 364.7 4,054.6 0.7 846 3.9

Private industry .............................................. 360.9 3,466.8 1.2 825 4.0

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.6 11.4 -0.9 1,388 47.3

Construction ............................................... 13.0 133.7 2.5 796 1.4

Manufacturing ............................................ 17.7 485.6 -5.1 854 4.3

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 54.5 760.6 0.3 689 1.3

Information ................................................. 9.3 213.9 0.4 1,456 4.6

Financial activities ...................................... 23.3 236.6 1.3 1,479 15.3

Professional and business services ........... 41.2 573.1 4.0 944 1.5

Education and health services ................... 27.1 460.3 2.9 718 3.9

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 26.2 367.2 4.2 475 5.1

Other services ............................................ 147.6 223.8 4.7 391 -3.9

Government ................................................... 3.8 587.8 -2.1 968 4.2

Cook, IL .............................................................. 126.5 2,474.0 -0.5 953 5.2

Private industry .............................................. 125.2 2,152.9 -0.3 961 5.4

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.1 1.2 -9.8 949 7.6

Construction ............................................... 10.4 88.2 0.2 1,082 3.3

Manufacturing ............................................ 7.6 256.8 -4.0 915 2.8

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 26.5 470.7 -0.3 725 1.1

Information ................................................. 2.5 63.1 -4.6 1,418 9.4

Financial activities ...................................... 13.9 215.0 -0.1 2,099 15.6

Professional and business services ........... 25.9 396.0 -0.6 1,196 5.8

Education and health services ................... 12.3 351.2 2.0 699 1.6

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 10.5 211.0 2.9 355 1.1

Other services ............................................ 12.7 94.4 -1.1 620 0.8

Government ................................................... 1.2 321.1 -2.2 895 3.1

New York, NY ..................................................... 112.3 2,203.0 -0.1 1,913 13.6

Private industry .............................................. 112.1 1,756.7 0.0 2,154 15.6

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.0 0.1 1.0 1,639 -6.1

Construction ............................................... 2.1 28.1 -3.2 1,293 -1.4

Manufacturing ............................................ 3.4 46.3 -3.3 1,155 9.5

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 21.9 228.5 -0.3 1,045 3.3

Information ................................................. 4.3 126.3 -5.2 2,130 8.1

Financial activities ...................................... 16.8 346.4 -0.8 5,680 27.4

Professional and business services ........... 22.4 432.0 1.6 1,799 7.3

Education and health services ................... 7.9 273.3 0.9 855 2.5

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 10.1 184.6 1.6 676 7.0

Other services ............................................ 16.1 81.3 -1.3 809 6.3

Government ................................................... 0.2 446.3 -0.5 970 -1.6

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

first quarter 20042 — Continued

County by NAICS supersector

Establishments,

first quarter

2004

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage4

March

2004

(thousands)

Percent

change,

March

2003-043

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

first quarter

2003-043

Harris, TX ........................................................... 89.4 1,823.3 -0.2 $898 4.4

Private industry .............................................. 89.0 1,576.9 -0.5 920 4.9

Natural resources and mining .................... 1.2 62.4 2.8 2,516 12.7

Construction ............................................... 6.4 134.8 -5.8 832 3.7

Manufacturing ............................................ 4.6 162.4 -2.5 1,133 4.2

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 21.1 385.5 -0.7 847 3.7

Information ................................................. 1.4 33.5 -4.1 1,123 2.6

Financial activities ...................................... 9.7 113.0 2.3 1,269 6.3

Professional and business services ........... 17.2 280.0 -0.5 961 4.2

Education and health services ................... 8.9 187.9 1.9 730 3.3

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 6.6 157.6 1.6 326 4.2

Other services ............................................ 10.4 56.2 -1.7 521 3.2

Government ................................................... 0.4 246.4 1.2 754 0.5

Maricopa, AZ ...................................................... 80.9 1,611.2 2.5 733 5.0

Private industry .............................................. 80.4 1,393.1 2.8 737 5.6

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.5 9.4 4.3 540 0.7

Construction ............................................... 8.4 131.7 7.2 712 1.6

Manufacturing ............................................ 3.2 127.6 -1.5 1,074 7.1

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 18.5 324.4 2.8 721 5.4

Information ................................................. 1.6 35.7 -5.5 909 8.1

Financial activities ...................................... 9.6 132.5 0.0 988 5.7

Professional and business services ........... 17.8 259.2 2.9 740 8.3

Education and health services ................... 7.7 163.3 6.1 739 6.6

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 5.6 160.2 2.8 353 4.7

Other services ............................................ 5.7 45.3 1.5 480 2.8

Government ................................................... 0.5 218.0 0.6 705 1.6

Dallas, TX ........................................................... 67.7 1,418.2 -0.6 947 6.3

Private industry .............................................. 67.2 1,261.5 -0.6 967 6.9

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.5 6.2 1.1 2,308 4.7

Construction ............................................... 4.4 73.3 -0.2 795 4.9

Manufacturing ............................................ 3.4 143.6 -1.7 1,096 8.3

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 15.6 305.7 -1.6 905 4.7

Information ................................................. 1.8 61.7 -6.1 1,466 11.7

Financial activities ...................................... 8.6 138.4 0.7 1,409 10.9

Professional and business services ........... 13.9 236.1 0.9 1,016 6.2

Education and health services ................... 6.1 128.8 0.9 815 4.0

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 5.1 123.8 -0.3 457 6.0

Other services ............................................ 6.7 41.6 -3.5 557 1.8

Government ................................................... 0.4 156.7 -0.4 790 1.5

Orange, CA ........................................................ 90.8 1,454.3 3.5 872 3.8

Private industry .............................................. 89.4 1,303.6 4.2 860 4.6

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.2 7.8 -12.9 535 15.1

Construction ............................................... 6.5 87.5 5.7 882 2.2

Manufacturing ............................................ 6.0 183.1 -1.8 1,015 8.0

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 17.4 261.7 1.3 820 3.9

Information ................................................. 1.5 34.2 -3.4 1,286 7.0

Financial activities ...................................... 10.0 133.6 10.3 1,448 7.9

Professional and business services ........... 18.0 258.1 9.2 872 -0.2

Education and health services ................... 9.3 129.1 4.9 744 6.1

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 6.8 162.1 5.5 346 0.9

Other services ............................................ 13.4 46.1 4.4 501 3.1

Government ................................................... 1.4 150.6 -2.1 983 -0.1

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

first quarter 20042 — Continued

County by NAICS supersector

Establishments,

first quarter

2004

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage4

March

2004

(thousands)

Percent

change,

March

2003-043

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

first quarter

2003-043

San Diego, CA ................................................... 87.0 1,264.0 1.3 $806 3.9

Private industry .............................................. 85.6 1,044.7 2.2 791 4.9

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.9 11.6 3.3 472 6.1

Construction ............................................... 6.5 82.6 8.8 800 2.8

Manufacturing ............................................ 3.6 104.1 -2.9 1,082 8.9

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 14.3 208.5 3.0 649 0.8

Information ................................................. 1.4 36.1 -4.1 1,738 32.1

Financial activities ...................................... 9.0 81.3 4.8 1,167 4.9

Professional and business services ........... 15.4 208.9 3.8 936 1.3

Education and health services ................... 7.6 120.4 1.2 695 5.1

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 6.6 139.7 0.2 346 3.3

Other services ............................................ 20.1 51.3 2.3 425 -0.7

Government ................................................... 1.4 219.3 -2.8 875 0.2

King, WA ............................................................ 75.2 1,075.7 0.3 940 2.2

Private industry .............................................. 74.6 922.2 0.3 953 1.9

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.4 3.2 -3.9 1,221 5.2

Construction ............................................... 6.1 54.0 4.3 871 0.3

Manufacturing ............................................ 2.6 101.5 -4.1 1,131 -3.2

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 14.6 212.1 -0.2 817 4.2

Information ................................................. 1.5 64.9 -3.8 1,977 -6.3

Financial activities ...................................... 6.1 76.1 0.7 1,309 10.6

Professional and business services ........... 11.8 155.2 2.7 1,127 8.1

Education and health services ................... 5.9 109.6 2.4 689 3.0

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 5.4 99.4 3.8 395 1.8

Other services ............................................ 20.1 46.2 -5.8 466 6.2

Government ................................................... 0.6 153.4 0.1 863 3.7

Miami-Dade, FL .................................................. 81.6 982.9 0.9 729 5.2

Private industry .............................................. 81.3 829.7 0.9 713 5.3

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.5 11.3 -1.4 362 4.6

Construction ............................................... 5.0 40.9 3.2 717 1.7

Manufacturing ............................................ 2.8 50.9 -4.2 666 6.1

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 23.7 238.8 -0.7 671 1.5

Information ................................................. 1.7 27.1 -2.2 1,048 2.3

Financial activities ...................................... 8.6 66.2 2.4 1,173 9.8

Professional and business services ........... 16.2 134.4 2.5 832 6.8

Education and health services ................... 8.0 123.9 1.8 724 7.7

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 5.4 97.7 2.7 402 9.2

Other services ............................................ 7.7 35.2 0.1 430 2.1

Government ................................................... 0.3 153.1 0.4 816 4.9

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

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

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

by state, first quarter 20042

County3

Establishments,

first quarter

2004

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage5

March

2004

(thousands)

Percent

change,

March

2003-044

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

first quarter

2003-044

United States6 .................... 8,367.2 127,778.5 0.8 $758 3.8

Jefferson, AL ...................... 18.4 368.7 0.2 766 3.2

Anchorage Borough, AK .... 7.8 138.1 1.0 780 4.8

Maricopa, AZ ..................... 80.9 1,611.2 2.5 733 5.0

Pulaski, AR ........................ 13.2 239.2 1.0 669 5.0

Los Angeles, CA ................ 364.7 4,054.6 0.7 846 3.9

Denver, CO ........................ 24.0 418.0 -1.1 948 7.7

Hartford, CT ....................... 24.2 474.1 -0.1 1,006 7.5

New Castle, DE ................. 18.6 277.3 1.9 957 2.2

Washington, DC ................. 30.2 654.7 0.8 1,221 7.2

Miami-Dade, FL ................. 81.6 982.9 0.9 729 5.2

Fulton, GA .......................... 37.4 722.0 0.6 1,043 2.5

Honolulu, HI ....................... 24.6 422.7 1.2 681 3.2

Ada, ID ............................... 12.9 183.5 2.4 656 1.1

Cook, IL ............................. 126.5 2,474.0 -0.5 953 5.2

Marion, IN .......................... 23.8 567.9 0.2 810 5.6

Polk, IA .............................. 14.0 255.4 2.0 781 4.7

Johnson, KS ...................... 18.4 289.0 1.3 816 3.0

Jefferson, KY ..................... 21.4 411.0 -0.5 750 5.6

Orleans, LA ........................ 12.4 250.0 0.5 724 6.3

Cumberland, ME ................ 11.4 165.0 1.7 696 5.0

Montgomery, MD ............... 31.0 446.5 0.5 1,014 7.8

Middlesex, MA ................... 47.6 772.2 -1.2 1,072 6.8

Wayne, MI .......................... 35.2 785.5 -2.4 893 2.9

Hennepin, MN .................... 40.6 806.7 -0.7 983 6.5

Hinds, MS .......................... 6.5 129.9 0.3 646 2.9

St. Louis, MO ..................... 33.8 609.2 -1.3 813 3.8

Yellowstone, MT ................ 5.7 68.6 2.8 568 6.6

Douglas, NE ....................... 14.6 303.1 -0.3 712 2.6

Clark, NV ........................... 37.9 784.0 5.4 693 5.8

Hillsborough, NH ................ 12.2 191.6 2.1 806 2.9

Bergen, NJ ......................... 34.1 444.9 0.8 966 3.0

Bernalillo, NM .................... 16.8 310.6 1.4 644 2.4

New York, NY .................... 112.3 2,203.0 -0.1 1,913 13.6

Mecklenburg, NC ............... 27.1 498.6 -0.2 991 5.7

Cass, ND ........................... 5.3 85.5 3.0 605 3.8

Cuyahoga, OH ................... 38.5 746.2 -0.6 790 3.1

Oklahoma, OK ................... 21.7 398.9 0.5 645 4.2

Multnomah, OR .................. 25.7 414.8 0.0 764 2.1

Allegheny, PA .................... 37.0 684.7 -0.1 804 4.6

Providence, RI ................... 17.5 281.2 -0.6 755 1.2

Greenville, SC .................... 11.8 224.3 -0.9 670 0.1

Minnehaha, SD .................. 5.9 106.3 1.1 612 2.9

Shelby, TN ......................... 19.9 491.9 -0.2 757 3.4

Harris, TX ........................... 89.4 1,823.3 -0.2 898 4.4

Salt Lake, UT ..................... 33.3 512.5 1.1 671 3.4

Chittenden, VT ................... 5.7 92.7 1.1 730 1.7

Fairfax, VA ......................... 29.7 533.9 4.2 1,156 5.3

King, WA ............................ 75.2 1,075.7 0.3 940 2.2

Kanawha, WV .................... 6.2 107.3 -0.6 646 1.1

Milwaukee, WI ................... 22.3 491.1 -1.3 770 4.6

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

by state, first quarter 20042 — Continued

County3

Establishments,

first quarter

2004

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage5

March

2004

(thousands)

Percent

change,

March

2003-044

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

first quarter

2003-044

Laramie, WY ...................... 2.8 39.1 2.8 $586 4.5

San Juan, PR ..................... 12.9 322.8 1.7 487 6.3

St. Thomas, VI ................... 1.7 23.2 -0.7 559 -1.1

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

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

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

first quarter 20042

State

Establishments,

first quarter

2004

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage3

March

2004

(thousands)

Percent

change,

March

2003-04

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

first quarter

2003-04

United States4 .................... 8,367.2 127,778.5 0.8 $758 3.8

Alabama ............................. 113.0 1,835.1 0.9 626 2.3

Alaska ................................ 20.0 285.1 1.0 732 3.5

Arizona ............................... 127.4 2,340.1 2.5 682 4.3

Arkansas ............................ 75.7 1,128.5 1.4 563 3.3

California ............................ 1,214.0 14,873.5 1.1 854 4.4

Colorado ............................ 160.4 2,109.0 0.5 772 3.9

Connecticut ........................ 109.3 1,614.6 0.1 1,042 6.4

Delaware ............................ 28.1 401.2 2.2 844 2.4

District of Columbia ............ 30.2 654.7 0.8 1,221 7.2

Florida ................................ 518.9 7,478.3 2.4 657 4.3

Georgia .............................. 249.2 3,831.5 1.8 728 1.8

Hawaii ................................ 37.8 578.7 1.7 656 3.1

Idaho .................................. 48.3 570.2 1.8 552 2.2

Illinois ................................. 326.3 5,614.6 -0.4 823 4.0

Indiana ............................... 153.4 2,806.2 0.6 661 3.0

Iowa ................................... 91.3 1,391.8 0.9 606 3.9

Kansas ............................... 81.4 1,280.5 0.2 621 2.3

Kentucky ............................ 105.8 1,711.9 0.8 623 3.1

Louisiana ........................... 115.0 1,862.1 0.9 602 3.6

Maine ................................. 47.8 575.9 1.0 605 2.9

Maryland ............................ 151.7 2,431.7 1.3 816 5.3

Massachusetts ................... 207.6 3,084.8 -0.6 954 6.0

Michigan ............................ 254.5 4,235.3 -0.8 771 1.2

Minnesota .......................... 157.3 2,526.8 -0.2 777 5.0

Mississippi ......................... 65.9 1,100.0 0.9 533 2.1

Missouri ............................. 167.4 2,601.4 0.0 665 2.6

Montana ............................. 42.1 392.2 2.0 515 4.7

Nebraska ........................... 54.8 866.9 0.6 595 2.8

Nevada .............................. 62.1 1,112.9 4.7 695 5.0

New Hampshire ................. 46.6 602.2 1.7 725 3.7

New Jersey ........................ 265.1 3,843.8 1.1 945 3.3

New Mexico ....................... 50.8 749.6 1.8 584 3.4

New York ........................... 552.9 8,186.5 0.2 1,056 8.0

North Carolina .................... 228.1 3,721.9 0.7 670 2.9

North Dakota ...................... 24.0 312.2 1.6 541 4.2

Ohio ................................... 291.4 5,211.6 0.1 691 1.6

Oklahoma .......................... 92.6 1,413.1 0.2 582 3.4

Oregon ............................... 120.9 1,560.1 1.1 675 3.5

Pennsylvania ..................... 333.3 5,439.2 0.4 736 3.2

Rhode Island ...................... 34.9 463.7 0.6 728 2.1

South Carolina ................... 108.0 1,768.3 0.3 596 1.9

South Dakota ..................... 28.1 358.0 1.0 531 3.3

Tennessee ......................... 129.3 2,622.3 1.6 651 3.0

Texas ................................. 506.8 9,244.0 0.6 737 3.9

Utah ................................... 73.8 1,051.7 2.4 599 2.4

Vermont ............................. 24.1 294.7 1.0 615 2.7

Virginia ............................... 204.9 3,443.9 2.3 772 4.6

Washington ........................ 206.5 2,633.1 1.3 757 2.0

West Virginia ...................... 47.6 675.9 1.2 569 1.4

Wisconsin .......................... 158.8 2,647.8 0.5 657 3.0

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

first quarter 20042 — Continued

State

Establishments,

first quarter

2004

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage3

March

2004

(thousands)

Percent

change,

March

2003-04

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

first quarter

2003-04

Wyoming ............................ 22.1 239.3 3.4 $583 4.1

Puerto Rico ........................ 50.5 1,036.8 1.5 422 5.0

Virgin Islands ..................... 3.1 42.8 1.3 576 -1.9

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

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

March 200304 (U.S. Average = 0.8%)

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

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

or territory: Laramie, Wyo., Yellowstone, Mont., and St. Thomas, V.I.

So

Oc
Chart 2. Percent change in average weekly wage in counties with 75

or more, first quarter 200304 (U.S. Average = 3.8%)

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

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

or territory: Laramie, Wyo., Yellowstone, Mont., and St. Thomas, V.I.

So

Oc