Bureau of Labor Statistics Washington, D.C. 20212 

News United States 

Department 

of Labor 

Technical information: (202) 691-6567 USDL 09-0362 

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

For release: 10:00 A.M. EDT 

Media contact: 691-5902 Wednesday, April 8, 2009 

COUNTY EMPLOYMENT AND WAGES: THIRD QUARTER 2008 

From September 2007 to September 2008, employment declined in more than half of the largest U.S. 

counties, according to preliminary data released today by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Labor. Elkhart County, Ind., located about 100 miles east of Chicago, posted the largest percentage decline, with a 

loss of 10.8 percent over the year, compared with a national job decrease of 0.8 percent. Manufacturing sustained 

the largest employment losses in Elkhart. Yakima, Wash., in the south-central part of the State, experienced the 

largest over-the-year percentage increase in employment among the largest counties in the U.S., with a gain of 3.2 

percent, led by growth in agriculture. 

Rutherford County, Tenn., within the metropolitan Nashville area, had the largest over-the-year gain in 

average weekly wages in the third quarter of 2008, with an increase of 17.3 percent coming largely from 

manufacturing. The U.S. average weekly wage rose by 2.8 percent over the same time span. 

Of the 334 largest counties in the United States (as measured by 2007 annual average employment) 139 had 

over-the-year percentage change in employment below the national average (-0.8 percent) in September 2008; 

178 large counties experienced changes above the national average. (See chart 3.) The percent change in average 

weekly wages was higher than the national average (2.8 percent) in 155 of the largest U.S. counties but was below 

the national average in 168 counties. (See chart 4.) 

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 

C hart 1. Large co unties ranked by percent decline in 

 emplo yment, September 2008 

 (U.S. average = -0.8 percent)

-15

-10

-5

0

5

Elkhart, Ind. Lee, Fla. Collier, Fla. Sarasota, Fla. M arion, Fla.

P ercent

C hart 2. Large co unties ranked by percent increase in

 average weekly wages, third quarter 2008 

 (U.S. average = 2.8 percent)

0

5

10

15

20

Rutherford, Tenn. Yolo, Calif. M adison, Ill. Suffolk, N.Y. Calcasieu, La.

Percent
2 

Table A. Top 10 large counties ranked by September 2008 employment, September 2007-08 employment 

decrease, and September 2007-08 percent decrease in employment 

Employment in large counties

 

September 2008 employment Decrease in employment, Percent decrease in employment, 

(thousands) September 2007-08 September 2007-08 

 (thousands) 

 

United States 135,173.8 United States -1,056.1 United States -0.8 

 

Los Angeles, Calif. 4,141.1 Maricopa, Ariz. -67.1 Elkhart, Ind. -10.8 

Cook, Ill. 2,504.2 Los Angeles, Calif. -61.5 Lee, Fla. -8.1 

New York, N.Y. 2,363.8 Orange, Calif. -42.2 Collier, Fla. -7.4 

Harris, Texas 2,047.2 Riverside, Calif. -35.5 Sarasota, Fla. -7.1 

Maricopa, Ariz. 1,761.0 Miami-Dade, Fla. -33.1 Marion, Fla. -6.4 

Dallas, Texas 1,489.1 Cook, Ill. -33.0 Volusia, Fla. -5.9 

Orange, Calif. 1,469.5 Wayne, Mich. -31.2 Seminole, Fla. -5.8 

San Diego, Calif. 1,318.0 Hillsborough, Fla. -31.1 Macomb, Mich. -5.8 

King, Wash. 1,198.7 Broward, Fla. -31.0 Riverside, Calif. -5.6 

Miami-Dade, Fla. 993.1 San Bernardino, Calif. -25.1 Washoe, Nev. -5.4 

Palm Beach, Fla. -25.1

 

submitted by every employer subject to unemployment insurance (UI) laws. The 9.2 million employer reports 

cover 135.2 million full- and part-time workers. 

Large County Employment

In September 2008, national employment, as measured by the QCEW program, was 135.2 million, down by 

0.8 percent from September 2007. The 334 U.S. counties with 75,000 or more employees accounted for 71.2 

percent of total U.S. employment and 76.8 percent of total wages. These 334 counties had a net job decline of 

891,159 over the year, accounting for 84.4 percent of the overall U.S. employment decrease. 

Employment declined in 207 counties from September 2007 to September 2008. The largest percentage 

decline in employment was in Elkhart, Ind. (-10.8 percent). Lee, Fla., had the next largest percentage decline (-8.1 

percent), followed by the counties of Collier, Fla. (-7.4 percent), Sarasota, Fla. (-7.1 percent), and Marion, Fla. 

(-6.4 percent). The largest decline in employment levels occurred in Maricopa, Ariz. (-67,100), followed by the 

counties of Los Angeles, Calif. (-61,500), Orange, Calif. (-42,200), Riverside, Calif. (-35,500), and Miami-Dade, 

Fla. (-33,100). (See table A.) Combined employment losses in these five counties over the year totaled 239,400, 

or 23 percent of the employment decline for the U.S. as a whole. 

Employment rose in 109 of the large counties from September 2007 to September 2008. Yakima County, 

Wash., had the largest over-the-year percentage increase in employment (3.2 percent). Potter, Texas, had the next 

largest increase, 3.1 percent, followed by the counties of Montgomery, Texas (3.0 percent), Douglas, Colo. (2.9 

percent), and Cass, N.D. (2.6 percent). The largest gains in the level of employment from September 2007 to 

September 2008 were recorded in the counties of Harris, Texas (26,500), King, Wash. (17,100), New York, N.Y. 

(14,800), Travis, Texas (9,400), and Washington, D.C. (9,300). 
3 

Table B. Top 10 large counties ranked by third quarter 2008 average weekly wages, third quarter 2007-08 

growth in average weekly wages, and third quarter 2007-08 percent growth in average weekly wages 

Average weekly wage in large counties

 

Average weekly wage, Growth in average weekly Percent growth in average 

third quarter 2008 wage, third quarter 2007-08 weekly wage, third 

 quarter 2007-08 

 

United States $841 United States $23 United States 2.8 

 

New York, N.Y. $1,552 Rutherford, Tenn. $124 Rutherford, Tenn. 17.3 

Santa Clara, Calif. 1,530 Suffolk, N.Y. 77 Yolo, Calif. 9.7 

Washington, D.C. 1,391 Yolo, Calif. 73 Madison, Ill. 9.2 

San Mateo, Calif. 1,374 San Francisco, Calif. 65 Suffolk, N.Y. 8.6 

San Francisco, Calif. 1,350 Lake, Ill. 63 Calcasieu, La. 7.8 

Arlington, Va. 1,348 Solano, Calif. 61 Solano, Calif. 7.7 

Suffolk, Mass. 1,321 Madison, Ill. 61 Santa Cruz, Calif. 7.5 

Fairfield, Conn. 1,310 Wyandotte, Kan. 58 Wyandotte, Kan. 7.5 

Fairfax, Va. 1,295 Santa Cruz, Calif. 56 Polk, Fla. 7.0 

Somerset, N.J. 1,233 Hennepin, Minn. 56 Benton, Ark. 6.7 

 Lafayette, La. 6.7 

 

Large County Average Weekly Wages

The national average weekly wage in the third quarter of 2008 was $841. Average weekly wages were higher 

than the national average in 108 of the largest 334 U.S. counties. New York, N.Y., held the top position among 

the highest-paid large counties with an average weekly wage of $1,552. Santa Clara, Calif., was second with an 

average weekly wage of $1,530, followed by Washington, D.C. ($1,391), San Mateo, Calif. ($1,374), and San 

Francisco, Calif. ($1,350). (See table B.) Over the year, the national average weekly wage rose by 2.8 percent. 

Among the largest counties, Rutherford, Tenn., led the nation in growth in average weekly wages with an increase 

of 17.3 percent from the third quarter of 2007. Yolo, Calif., was second with growth of 9.7 percent, followed by 

the counties of Madison, Ill. (9.2 percent), Suffolk, N.Y. (8.6 percent), and Calcasieu, La. (7.8 percent). 

Average weekly wages are affected by the number of high-paying and low-paying jobs in an industry. The 2.8 

percent over-the-year gain in average weekly wages for the nation is partially due to large employment declines in 

the construction and manufacturing industries, which posted the largest over-the-year percent declines in 

September employment. (See table 2.) Average weekly wages for construction workers increased 5.1 percent as 

employment fell by more than 6 percent. Construction and manufacturing lost 518,400 and 499,200 jobs, 

respectively, over the year in September. Employment declines exceeded 3 percent in manufacturing as average 

weekly wages for these workers grew by 1.9 percent. (See Technical Note.) 

There were 226 counties with an average weekly wage below the national average in the third quarter of 

2008. The lowest average weekly wage was reported in Horry, S.C. ($537), followed by the counties of Cameron, 

Texas ($538), Hidalgo, Texas ($549), Webb, Texas ($559), and Yakima, Wash. ($580). (See table 1.) Twenty-one 

large counties experienced over-the-year declines in average weekly wages. Clayton, Ga., had the largest decrease 

(-14.6 percent), followed by the counties of Santa Clara, Calif. and Duval, Fla. (-3.4 percent each), Gwinnett, Ga. 

(-3.1 percent), and Rock Island, Ill. (-2.6 percent).
4 

Ten Largest U.S. Counties

Six of the 10 largest counties (based on 2007 annual average employment levels) experienced over-the-year 

perc

oups 

, 

n 

Each of the 10 largest U.S. counties saw an over-the-year increase in average weekly wages. San Diego, 

Cal

eles, 

Largest County by State

ent declines in employment in September 2008. Maricopa, Ariz., experienced the largest decline in 

employment among the 10 largest counties with a 3.7 percent decrease. Within Maricopa, eight industry gr

experienced employment declines, with construction experiencing the largest decline, -21.8 percent. Miami-Dade

Fla., had the next largest decline in employment, -3.2 percent, followed by Orange, Calif. (-2.8 percent). (See 

table 2.) King, Wash., experienced the largest percent gain in employment (1.4 percent) among the 10 largest 

counties. Within King County, the largest gains in employment were in information (5.9 percent) and educatio

and health services (5.2 percent). Harris, Texas, had the next largest increase in employment, 1.3 percent, 

followed by New York, N.Y. (0.6 percent). 

if., had the fastest growth in wages among the 10 largest counties, with a gain of 3.8 percent. Within San 

Diego County, average weekly wages increased the most in the information industry (30.4 percent). Los Ang

Calif., was second in wage growth with a gain of 3.1 percent, followed by Orange, Calif., and Harris, Texas (3.0 

percent each). The smallest wage gain occurred in New York, N.Y. (0.5 percent), followed by Maricopa, Ariz. 

(1.8 percent), and Miami-Dade, Fla. (2.2 percent). 

Table 3 shows September 2008 employment and the 2008 third quarter average weekly wage in the largest 

cou

 the 

For More Information

nty in each state, which is based on 2007 annual average employment levels. (This table includes one 

county—Laramie, Wyo.—that had an employment level below 75,000 in 2007.) The employment levels in

counties in table 3 in September 2008 ranged from approximately 4.14 million in Los Angeles County, Calif., to

44,200 in Laramie County, Wyo. The highest average weekly wage of these counties was in New York, N.Y. 

($1,552), while the lowest average weekly wage was in Yellowstone, Mont. ($688). 

The tables and charts included in this release contain data for the nation and for the 334 counties with annual 

ave

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

Fin

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

rele

rage employment levels of 75,000 or more in 2007. September 2008 employment and 2008 third-quarter 

average weekly wages for all states are provided in table 4 of this release. 

al data for all states, metropolitan statistical areas, counties, and the nation through the fourth quarter of 2007 

are available on the BLS Web site at http://www.bls.gov/cew/. Preliminary data for first and second quarter 2008 

also are available on the site. Updated data for first and second quarter 2008 and preliminary data for third quarter 

2008 will be available later in April online. Additional information about the QCEW data may be obtained by 

calling (202) 691-6567. 

ases, see http://www.bls.gov/cew/cewregional.htm. 

The County Employment and Wages release for fourth quarter 2008 is scheduled to be released on Tuesday, 

July 21, 2009. 
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 2007 North American Industry Classification System. Data for 2008 are preliminary and subject to 

revision. 

For purposes of this release, large counties are defined as having 

employment levels of 75,000 or greater. In addition, data for San 

Juan, Puerto Rico, are provided, but not used in calculating U.S. 

averages, rankings, or in the analysis in the text. Each year, these 

large counties are selected on the basis of the preliminary annual 

average of employment for the previous year. The 335 counties 

presented in this release were derived using 2007 preliminary annual averages of employment. For 2008 data, six counties have 

been added to the publication tables: Shelby, Ala., Boone, Ky., St. 

Tammany, La., Yellowstone, Mont., Warren, Ohio, and Potter, 

Texas. These counties will be included in all 2008 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 9.1 million establishments 

• Count of longitudinally-linked UI 

administrative records submitted by 

7.1 million private-sector employers 

• Sample survey: 400,000 establishments 

Coverage • UI and UCFE coverage, including 

all employers subject to state and 

federal UI laws 

• UI coverage, excluding government, 

private households, and establishments with zero employment 

Nonfarm wage and salary jobs: 

• UI coverage, excluding agriculture, private 

households, and self-employed workers 

• Other employment, including railroads, 

religious organizations, and other nonUI-covered jobs 

Publication frequency • Quarterly 

— 7 months after the end of each 

quarter 

• Quarterly 

— 8 months after the end of each 

quarter 

• Monthly 

— Usually first Friday of following 

month 

Use of UI file • Directly summarizes and publishes 

each new quarter of UI data 

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

annually realigns (benchmarks) sample 

estimates to first quarter UI levels 

Principal 

products • Provides a quarterly and annual 

universe count of establishments, 

employment, and wages at the 

county, MSA, state, and national 

levels by detailed industry 

• Provides quarterly employer dynamics 

data on establishment openings, closings, expansions, and contractions at 

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

state private-sector total level 

• Future expansions will include data 

with greater industry detail and data at 

the county and MSA level 

• Provides current monthly estimates of 

employment, hours, and earnings at the 

MSA, state, and national level by industry 

Principal uses • Major uses include: 

— Detailed locality data 

— Periodic universe counts for 

benchmarking sample survey estimates 

— Sample frame for BLS establishment surveys 

• Major uses include: 

— Business cycle analysis 

— Analysis of employer dynamics 

underlying economic expansions 

and contractions 

— Analysis of employment expansion 

and contraction by size of firm 

• Major uses include: 

— Principal national economic indicator 

— Official time series for employment 

change measures 

— Input into other major economic indicators 

Program Web 

sites • www.bls.gov/cew/ • www.bls.gov/bdm/ • www.bls.gov/ces/ 
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. The 

employment and wage data included in this release are derived from 

microdata summaries of 9.1 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 2007, UI and UCFE programs covered workers in 

135.4 million jobs. The estimated 130.3 million workers in these 

jobs (after adjustment for multiple jobholders) represented 96.2 

percent of civilian wage and salary employment. Covered workers 

received $6.018 trillion in pay, representing 94.6 percent of the 

wage and salary component of personal income and 43.6 percent of 

the gross domestic product. 

Major exclusions from UI coverage include self-employed workers, most agricultural workers on small farms, all members of the 

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

railroads, some domestic workers, most student workers at schools, 

and employees of certain small nonprofit organizations. 

State and federal UI laws change periodically. These changes 

may have an impact on the employment and wages reported by 

employers covered under the UI program. Coverage changes may 

affect the over-the-year comparisons presented in this news release. 

Concepts and methodology 

Monthly employment is based on the number of workers who 

worked during or received pay for the pay period including the 12th 

of the month. With few exceptions, all employees of covered firms 

are reported, including production and sales workers, corporation 

officials, executives, supervisory personnel, and clerical workers. 

Workers on paid vacations and part-time workers also are included. 

Average weekly wage values are calculated by dividing quarterly 

total wages by the average of the three monthly employment levels 

(all employees, as described above) and dividing the result by 13, 

for the 13 weeks in the quarter. These calculations are made using 

unrounded employment and wage values. The average wage values 

that can be calculated using rounded data from the BLS database 

may differ from the averages reported. Included in the quarterly 

wage data are non-wage cash payments such as bonuses, the cash 

value of meals and lodging when supplied, tips and other gratuities, 

and, in some states, employer contributions to certain deferred 

compensation plans such as 401(k) plans and stock options. Overthe-year comparisons of average weekly wages may reflect fluctuations in average monthly employment and/or total quarterly wages 

between the current quarter and prior year levels. 

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

part-time workers as well as the number of individuals in highpaying and low-paying occupations and the incidence of pay periods within a quarter. For instance, the average weekly wage of the 

work force could increase significantly when there is a large decline 

in the number of employees that had been receiving below-average 

wages. Wages may include payments to workers not present in the 

employment counts because they did not work during the pay period including the 12th of the month. When comparing average 

weekly wage levels between industries, states, or quarters, these 

factors should be taken into consideration. 

Federal government pay levels are subject to periodic, sometimes 

large, fluctuations due to a calendar effect that consists of some 

quarters having more pay periods than others. Most federal employees are paid on a biweekly pay schedule. As a result of this schedule, in some quarters, federal wages contain payments for six pay 

periods, while in other quarters their wages include payments for 

seven pay periods. Over-the-year comparisons of average weekly 

wages may reflect this calendar effect. Higher growth in average 

weekly wages may be attributed, in part, to a comparison of quarterly wages for the current year, which include seven pay periods, 

with year-ago wages that reflect only six pay periods. An opposite 

effect will occur when wages in the current period, which contain 

six pay periods, are compared with year-ago wages that include 

seven pay periods. The effect on over-the-year pay comparisons can 

be pronounced in federal government due to the uniform nature of 
federal payroll processing. This pattern may exist in private sector 

pay; however, because there are more pay period types (weekly, 

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

is most visible in counties with large concentrations of federal employment. 

In order to ensure the highest possible quality of data, states verify with employers and update, if necessary, the industry, location, 

and ownership classification of all establishments on a 4-year cycle. 

Changes in establishment classification codes resulting from this 

process are introduced with the data reported for the first quarter of 

the year. Changes resulting from improved employer reporting also 

are introduced in the first quarter. 

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

simply the sums of individual establishment records and reflect the 

number of establishments that exist in a county or industry at a 

point in time. Establishments can move in or out of a county or 

industry for a number of reasons—some reflecting economic 

events, others reflecting administrative changes. For example, economic change would come from a firm relocating into the county; 

administrative change would come from a company correcting its 

county designation. 

The over-the-year changes of employment and wages presented 

in this release have been adjusted to account for most of the administrative corrections made to the underlying establishment reports. 

This is done by modifying the prior-year levels used to calculate the 

over-the-year changes. Percent changes are calculated using an 

adjusted version of the final 2007 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 will also account for administrative changes caused by 

multi-unit employers who start reporting for each individual establishment rather than as a single entity. 

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

measures presented in any County Employment and Wages news 

release are valid for comparisons between the starting and ending 

points (a 12-month period) used in that particular release. Comparisons may not be valid for any time period other than the one featured in a release even if the changes were calculated using adjusted 

data. 

County definitions are assigned according to Federal Information 

Processing Standards Publications (FIPS PUBS) as issued by the 

National Institute of Standards and Technology, after approval by 

the Secretary of Commerce pursuant to Section 5131 of the Information Technology Management Reform Act of 1996 and the 

Computer Security Act of 1987, Public Law 104-106. Areas shown 

as counties include those designated as independent cities in some 

jurisdictions and, in Alaska, those designated as census areas where 

counties have not been created. County data also are presented for 

the New England states for comparative purposes even though 

townships are the more common designation used in New England 

(and New Jersey). The regions referred to in this release are defined 

as census regions. 

Additional statistics and other information 

An annual bulletin, Employment and Wages, features comprehensive information by detailed industry on establishments, employment, and wages for the nation and all states. The 2007 edition of this bulletin contains selected data produced by Business 

Employment Dynamics (BED) on job gains and losses, as well as 

selected data from the first quarter 2008 version of this news release. Tables and additional content from the 2007 Employment 

and Wages Annual Bulletin are now available online at 

http://www.bls.gov/cew/cewbultn07.htm. These tables present 

final 2007 annual averages. The tables will also be included on 

the CD which accompanies the hardcopy version of the Annual 

Bulletin. Employment and Wages Annual Averages, 2007 is expected to be available for sale as a chartbook by the end of the 

second quarter of 2009 from the United States Government Printing Office, Superintendent of Documents, P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250, telephone (866) 512-1800, outside Washington, 

D.C. Within Washington, D.C., the telephone number is (202) 

512-1800. The fax number is (202) 512-2104. 

News releases on quarterly measures of gross job flows also are 

available upon request from the Division of Administrative Statistics and Labor Turnover (Business Employment Dynamics), telephone (202) 691-6467; (http://www.bls.gov/bdm/); (e-mail: 

BDMInfo@bls.gov). 

Information in this release will be made available to sensory impaired individuals upon request. Voice phone: (202) 691-5200; 

TDD message referral phone number: 1-800-877-8339. 
Table 1. Covered 1 establishments, employment, and wages in the 335 largest counties,

third quarter 2008 2

County 3

Establishments,

third quarter

2008

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage 4

September

2008

(thousands)

Percent

change,

September

2007-08 5

Ranking by

percent

change

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

third quarter

2007-08 5

Ranking by

percent

change

United States 6 ................... 9,150.8 135,173.8 -0.8 – $841 2.8 – 

Jefferson, AL ...................... 19.0 357.9 -1.6 233 863 3.1 123

Madison, AL ....................... 9.0 183.1 2.2 13 913 2.0 221

Mobile, AL .......................... 10.1 175.4 0.5 69 715 2.9 148

Montgomery, AL ................ 6.7 138.5 0.0 110 725 4.8 33

Shelby, AL ......................... 5.0 75.7 -0.6 162 806 0.4 297

Tuscaloosa, AL .................. 4.5 87.2 0.1 101 730 4.4 43

Anchorage Borough, AK .... 8.3 152.0 2.0 15 922 3.1 123

Maricopa, AZ ..................... 103.0 1,761.0 -3.7 300 836 1.8 234

Pima, AZ ............................ 21.3 370.5 -1.5 226 747 2.2 201

Benton, AR ........................ 5.6 95.9 -0.8 179 760 6.7 10

Pulaski, AR ........................ 15.1 252.2 0.3 84 765 2.0 221

Washington, AR ................. 5.8 92.1 -1.2 205 679 2.3 192

Alameda, CA ...................... 54.3 684.0 -1.5 226 1,115 3.6 76

Butte, CA ........................... 8.0 77.0 -1.8 250 660 3.3 103

Contra Costa, CA ............... 30.1 339.9 -2.0 258 1,034 3.1 123

Fresno, CA ......................... 30.5 372.4 -0.4 145 658 2.2 201

Kern, CA ............................ 18.3 297.4 0.7 59 737 2.9 148

Los Angeles, CA ................ 428.8 4,141.1 -1.5 226 951 3.1 123

Marin, CA ........................... 12.1 109.5 0.3 84 1,029 0.7 287

Monterey, CA ..................... 12.9 182.8 -0.1 121 747 1.5 255

Orange, CA ........................ 102.5 1,469.5 -2.8 283 955 3.0 139

Placer, CA .......................... 11.0 135.0 -3.8 303 815 -0.1 308

Riverside, CA ..................... 47.1 598.5 -5.6 319 716 2.1 211

Sacramento, CA ................ 54.4 623.6 -2.5 272 952 5.1 24

San Bernardino, CA ........... 49.1 642.8 -3.8 303 740 2.2 201

San Diego, CA ................... 99.6 1,318.0 -1.2 205 921 3.8 66

San Francisco, CA ............. 52.3 575.4 0.8 50 1,350 5.1 24

San Joaquin, CA ................ 18.0 224.5 -3.1 290 744 4.1 52

San Luis Obispo, CA ......... 9.9 105.3 -2.0 258 714 3.9 62

San Mateo, CA .................. 24.2 343.8 0.1 101 1,374 3.5 82

Santa Barbara, CA ............. 14.4 189.8 0.0 110 788 1.2 264

Santa Clara, CA ................. 60.7 910.5 0.5 69 1,530 -3.4 326

Santa Cruz, CA .................. 9.1 102.1 -1.7 245 798 7.5 7

Solano, CA ......................... 10.2 126.4 -2.5 272 853 7.7 6

Sonoma, CA ...................... 18.9 193.0 -2.4 271 828 2.1 211

Stanislaus, CA ................... 14.9 177.1 -1.6 233 723 4.0 57

Tulare, CA .......................... 9.6 154.1 0.8 50 606 3.4 94

Ventura, CA ....................... 23.7 314.3 -1.6 233 858 2.4 183

Yolo, CA ............................. 5.9 104.0 -0.6 162 829 9.7 2

Adams, CO ........................ 9.4 155.8 1.0 39 792 3.1 123

Arapahoe, CO .................... 19.6 282.9 -0.3 141 1,002 4.6 40

Boulder, CO ....................... 13.1 162.3 0.9 45 1,020 3.1 123

Denver, CO ........................ 26.0 453.3 0.5 69 1,031 3.6 76

Douglas, CO ...................... 9.7 94.2 2.9 4 864 3.1 123

El Paso, CO ....................... 17.6 245.3 -1.6 233 780 2.1 211

Jefferson, CO ..................... 18.9 212.4 0.2 97 883 5.2 22

Larimer, CO ....................... 10.5 133.6 0.1 101 771 2.4 183

Weld, CO ........................... 6.1 84.4 0.0 110 731 0.6 290

Fairfield, CT ....................... 33.1 418.8 -0.5 153 1,310 0.5 293

Hartford, CT ....................... 25.6 506.7 0.3 84 1,012 0.9 275

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

third quarter 2008 2—Continued

County 3

Establishments,

third quarter

2008

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage 4

September

2008

(thousands)

Percent

change,

September

2007-08 5

Ranking by

percent

change

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

third quarter

2007-08 5

Ranking by

percent

change

New Haven, CT ................. 22.7 364.0 -1.1 200 $909 2.9 148

New London, CT ................ 7.0 131.8 0.4 76 864 1.1 266

New Castle, DE ................. 18.5 278.0 -1.5 226 981 2.6 174

Washington, DC ................. 33.8 688.2 1.4 24 1,391 1.0 270

Alachua, FL ........................ 6.8 123.2 -0.6 162 723 2.0 221

Brevard, FL ........................ 15.0 196.9 -4.2 308 793 3.5 82

Broward, FL ....................... 65.9 728.6 -4.1 307 792 2.2 201

Collier, FL .......................... 12.5 116.5 -7.4 325 749 ( 7) – 

Duval, FL ........................... 27.6 456.0 -3.4 295 797 -3.4 326

Escambia, FL ..................... 8.2 125.0 -4.9 315 667 2.9 148

Hillsborough, FL ................. 38.1 604.0 -4.9 315 807 3.5 82

Lake, FL ............................. 7.4 83.6 -4.5 312 606 1.7 244

Lee, FL ............................... 20.2 201.1 -8.1 326 706 1.0 270

Leon, FL ............................. 8.3 142.3 -2.6 277 750 4.2 46

Manatee, FL ....................... 9.4 109.6 -1.8 250 663 0.8 281

Marion, FL .......................... 8.7 98.9 -6.4 323 606 2.5 176

Miami-Dade, FL ................. 87.8 993.1 -3.2 291 842 2.2 201

Okaloosa, FL ..................... 6.2 78.4 -4.3 310 688 1.8 234

Orange, FL ......................... 36.4 680.9 -2.5 272 764 1.3 260

Palm Beach, FL ................. 51.5 519.2 -4.6 313 811 0.9 275

Pasco, FL ........................... 10.3 99.4 -2.8 283 595 1.9 230

Pinellas, FL ........................ 31.9 414.8 -4.4 311 737 3.4 94

Polk, FL .............................. 12.9 197.1 -3.3 293 699 7.0 9

Sarasota, FL ...................... 15.4 143.5 -7.1 324 709 1.0 270

Seminole, FL ...................... 14.9 171.0 -5.8 320 712 0.8 281

Volusia, FL ......................... 14.2 159.4 -5.9 322 615 2.8 156

Bibb, GA ............................ 4.7 84.8 0.8 50 669 2.0 221

Chatham, GA ..................... 7.6 134.6 -2.6 277 728 3.4 94

Clayton, GA ....................... 4.4 111.8 -2.6 277 787 -14.6 328

Cobb, GA ........................... 20.7 310.3 -2.8 283 906 3.2 110

De Kalb, GA ....................... 16.7 293.9 -1.9 255 888 1.6 250

Fulton, GA .......................... 39.1 741.7 -1.0 192 1,078 1.9 230

Gwinnett, GA ..................... 23.4 315.1 -3.6 298 842 -3.1 325

Muscogee, GA ................... 4.8 94.5 -2.7 282 676 -2.0 321

Richmond, GA ................... 4.8 101.1 0.2 97 733 3.2 110

Honolulu, HI ....................... 24.7 444.6 -1.6 233 800 1.8 234

Ada, ID ............................... 15.0 210.4 -1.5 226 746 -0.5 310

Champaign, IL ................... 4.1 93.2 0.7 59 728 3.3 103

Cook, IL ............................. 140.4 2,504.2 -1.3 212 988 2.8 156

Du Page, IL ........................ 36.0 590.9 -1.9 255 990 0.9 275

Kane, IL ............................. 12.8 208.2 -2.9 286 765 3.1 123

Lake, IL .............................. 21.1 335.8 -1.2 205 1,037 6.5 13

McHenry, IL ....................... 8.5 103.6 -1.3 212 729 1.8 234

McLean, IL ......................... 3.7 86.9 0.6 64 818 4.3 44

Madison, IL ........................ 6.0 96.6 0.3 84 723 9.2 3

Peoria, IL ........................... 4.8 105.7 1.0 39 806 4.0 57

Rock Island, IL ................... 3.5 79.9 0.4 76 823 -2.6 324

St. Clair, IL ......................... 5.5 98.4 1.2 30 694 2.8 156

Sangamon, IL .................... 5.2 129.4 -0.5 153 850 3.8 66

Will, IL ................................ 13.8 199.0 1.0 39 751 3.2 110

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

third quarter 2008 2—Continued

County 3

Establishments,

third quarter

2008

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage 4

September

2008

(thousands)

Percent

change,

September

2007-08 5

Ranking by

percent

change

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

third quarter

2007-08 5

Ranking by

percent

change

Winnebago, IL .................... 7.0 136.1 -1.4 221 $739 3.5 82

Allen, IN ............................. 9.1 183.1 -1.0 192 702 1.6 250

Elkhart, IN .......................... 5.0 112.3 -10.8 327 667 -2.2 322

Hamilton, IN ....................... 7.7 113.6 1.0 39 809 0.5 293

Lake, IN ............................. 10.3 195.9 0.1 101 771 5.0 28

Marion, IN .......................... 24.2 580.5 -0.7 174 852 2.7 161

St. Joseph, IN .................... 6.1 123.3 -2.0 258 715 5.0 28

Tippecanoe, IN .................. 3.3 77.3 -0.3 141 725 2.7 161

Vanderburgh, IN ................ 4.8 108.2 0.6 64 702 3.8 66

Linn, IA ............................... 6.3 126.4 1.9 17 826 4.7 36

Polk, IA .............................. 14.9 276.3 0.6 64 831 3.5 82

Scott, IA ............................. 5.3 90.1 0.9 45 697 2.3 192

Johnson, KS ...................... 20.6 318.1 0.1 101 867 4.0 57

Sedgwick, KS ..................... 12.2 258.0 -0.2 132 763 3.8 66

Shawnee, KS ..................... 4.8 96.8 1.1 37 710 3.5 82

Wyandotte, KS ................... 3.2 81.7 -0.2 132 830 7.5 7

Boone, KY .......................... 3.5 75.2 1.7 20 724 -1.4 316

Fayette, KY ........................ 9.1 176.2 ( 7) – 754 2.7 161

Jefferson, KY ..................... 22.3 426.4 -2.3 269 799 1.1 266

Caddo, LA .......................... 7.4 125.3 -0.7 174 717 5.8 15

Calcasieu, LA ..................... 4.9 85.8 -0.5 153 750 7.8 5

East Baton Rouge, LA ....... 14.4 261.4 -0.1 121 790 6.6 12

Jefferson, LA ...................... 14.0 195.0 -1.1 200 777 3.3 103

Lafayette, LA ...................... 8.8 135.0 -0.2 132 826 6.7 10

Orleans, LA ........................ 10.6 170.7 ( 7) – 901 1.5 255

St. Tammany, LA ............... 7.2 74.0 -0.6 162 699 4.2 46

Cumberland, ME ................ 12.0 174.0 -0.1 121 768 3.4 94

Anne Arundel, MD ............. 14.5 234.0 -0.4 145 891 1.8 234

Baltimore, MD .................... 21.5 373.0 -1.3 212 858 3.1 123

Frederick, MD .................... 6.0 94.3 -1.7 245 819 2.4 183

Harford, MD ....................... 5.6 83.5 ( 7) – 785 ( 7) – 

Howard, MD ....................... 8.7 148.4 ( 7) – 979 3.4 94

Montgomery, MD ............... 32.8 459.0 -0.4 145 1,122 2.9 148

Prince Georges, MD .......... 15.7 312.7 -1.4 221 933 3.6 76

Baltimore City, MD ............. 13.9 340.8 -1.0 192 988 5.2 22

Barnstable, MA .................. 9.2 96.9 -1.6 233 709 3.1 123

Bristol, MA ......................... 15.4 216.6 -2.0 258 751 3.9 62

Essex, MA .......................... 20.9 301.4 -0.2 132 888 0.9 275

Hampden, MA .................... 14.4 200.2 -0.4 145 785 3.2 110

Middlesex, MA ................... 47.6 825.1 0.8 50 1,200 1.8 234

Norfolk, MA ........................ 23.7 327.0 0.4 76 971 0.7 287

Plymouth, MA .................... 13.7 177.3 -1.3 212 786 3.4 94

Suffolk, MA ........................ 21.7 591.8 0.4 76 1,321 2.2 201

Worcester, MA ................... 20.6 320.8 -0.6 162 859 3.4 94

Genesee, MI ...................... 7.9 135.5 -5.1 317 738 0.3 302

Ingham, MI ......................... 6.8 159.5 -2.1 264 806 3.2 110

Kalamazoo, MI ................... 5.6 113.4 -2.3 269 784 6.4 14

Kent, MI ............................. 14.3 329.8 -3.5 296 757 3.0 139

Macomb, MI ....................... 17.7 298.8 -5.8 320 853 -2.4 323

Oakland, MI ....................... 39.2 671.0 -3.5 296 966 0.9 275

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

third quarter 2008 2—Continued

County 3

Establishments,

third quarter

2008

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage 4

September

2008

(thousands)

Percent

change,

September

2007-08 5

Ranking by

percent

change

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

third quarter

2007-08 5

Ranking by

percent

change

Ottawa, MI ......................... 5.7 109.8 -2.6 277 $730 3.0 139

Saginaw, MI ....................... 4.3 83.7 -3.7 300 703 0.1 306

Washtenaw, MI .................. 8.1 187.3 -2.5 272 944 -0.9 313

Wayne, MI .......................... 32.1 717.9 -4.2 308 942 1.4 259

Anoka, MN ......................... 7.8 114.8 -1.6 233 769 0.3 302

Dakota, MN ........................ 10.6 175.1 -1.2 205 801 3.4 94

Hennepin, MN .................... 42.2 840.7 -0.8 179 1,102 5.4 20

Olmsted, MN ...................... 3.5 90.6 -1.0 192 949 5.1 24

Ramsey, MN ...................... 15.2 335.2 -0.2 132 933 3.7 73

St. Louis, MN ..................... 5.9 98.3 0.4 76 696 3.9 62

Stearns, MN ....................... 4.5 83.0 0.3 84 679 3.2 110

Harrison, MS ...................... 4.6 86.1 -2.0 258 664 3.4 94

Hinds, MS .......................... 6.4 126.6 -0.6 162 745 4.3 44

Boone, MO ......................... 4.6 83.5 0.0 110 660 3.6 76

Clay, MO ............................ 5.1 90.2 -1.3 212 765 -1.7 319

Greene, MO ....................... 8.2 156.2 -1.6 233 653 2.5 176

Jackson, MO ...................... 18.7 370.0 -0.1 121 851 3.0 139

St. Charles, MO ................. 8.2 123.2 -2.1 264 695 0.4 297

St. Louis, MO ..................... 32.9 605.6 -1.0 192 890 1.8 234

St. Louis City, MO .............. 8.5 237.9 1.6 21 937 5.5 18

Yellowstone, MT ................ 5.8 78.5 0.7 59 688 2.4 183

Douglas, NE ....................... 16.0 321.4 0.9 45 820 4.9 31

Lancaster, NE .................... 8.1 158.2 0.3 84 687 3.2 110

Clark, NV ........................... 50.9 903.7 -2.0 258 812 2.0 221

Washoe, NV ....................... 14.6 208.5 -5.4 318 796 2.3 192

Hillsborough, NH ................ 12.4 196.5 -0.6 162 924 2.7 161

Rockingham, NH ................ 11.0 138.6 -1.8 250 796 1.7 244

Atlantic, NJ ......................... 7.1 147.0 0.0 110 740 2.2 201

Bergen, NJ ......................... 35.0 445.7 -1.3 212 1,031 2.3 192

Burlington, NJ .................... 11.6 198.9 -2.6 277 890 1.8 234

Camden, NJ ....................... 13.3 207.7 -0.5 153 858 2.8 156

Essex, NJ ........................... 21.7 357.2 -0.5 153 1,038 1.8 234

Gloucester, NJ ................... 6.4 103.9 0.4 76 763 2.7 161

Hudson, NJ ........................ 14.2 236.2 -0.8 179 1,162 4.1 52

Mercer, NJ ......................... 11.4 229.5 0.3 84 1,063 3.2 110

Middlesex, NJ .................... 22.3 399.0 -2.1 264 1,033 4.1 52

Monmouth, NJ ................... 21.1 257.2 -0.6 162 888 1.3 260

Morris, NJ .......................... 18.4 285.6 -0.7 174 1,178 2.7 161

Ocean, NJ .......................... 12.7 152.8 -0.9 189 689 1.6 250

Passaic, NJ ........................ 12.9 174.5 -1.4 221 873 2.5 176

Somerset, NJ ..................... 10.4 172.9 -0.8 179 1,233 2.6 174

Union, NJ ........................... 15.3 232.1 -1.1 200 1,057 0.4 297

Bernalillo, NM .................... 17.6 335.6 0.2 97 763 3.8 66

Albany, NY ......................... 10.0 227.7 0.0 110 878 5.3 21

Bronx, NY .......................... 16.0 227.5 2.3 9 836 ( 7) – 

Broome, NY ....................... 4.5 95.3 -0.6 162 696 4.8 33

Dutchess, NY ..................... 8.4 115.4 -1.3 212 860 1.7 244

Erie, NY ............................. 23.7 463.8 1.2 30 736 3.1 123

Kings, NY ........................... 46.4 478.2 1.4 24 735 2.1 211

Monroe, NY ........................ 18.1 381.1 0.3 84 817 1.5 255

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

third quarter 2008 2—Continued

County 3

Establishments,

third quarter

2008

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage 4

September

2008

(thousands)

Percent

change,

September

2007-08 5

Ranking by

percent

change

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

third quarter

2007-08 5

Ranking by

percent

change

Nassau, NY ........................ 52.7 601.7 -0.5 153 $915 0.2 305

New York, NY .................... 118.9 2,363.8 0.6 64 1,552 0.5 293

Oneida, NY ........................ 5.3 109.7 -0.2 132 671 3.2 110

Onondaga, NY ................... 12.8 254.3 -0.3 141 774 2.2 201

Orange, NY ........................ 10.0 132.0 -0.2 132 711 3.3 103

Queens, NY ....................... 43.7 506.9 1.2 30 836 3.0 139

Richmond, NY .................... 8.8 93.3 0.8 50 769 2.5 176

Rockland, NY ..................... 9.9 116.0 -0.1 121 918 5.8 15

Saratoga, NY ..................... 5.4 76.2 -0.8 179 708 1.7 244

Suffolk, NY ......................... 50.7 626.3 -0.4 145 969 8.6 4

Westchester, NY ................ 36.6 420.7 -0.1 121 1,086 1.6 250

Buncombe, NC .................. 8.2 115.8 -1.4 221 666 3.1 123

Catawba, NC ..................... 4.7 85.2 -3.6 298 637 0.5 293

Cumberland, NC ................ 6.3 120.8 2.3 9 654 0.3 302

Durham, NC ....................... 7.1 184.3 -0.8 179 1,115 0.9 275

Forsyth, NC ........................ 9.3 184.1 -1.0 192 764 1.2 264

Guilford, NC ....................... 14.8 278.9 -1.1 200 758 5.0 28

Mecklenburg, NC ............... 33.3 570.0 0.0 110 956 3.5 82

New Hanover, NC .............. 7.5 103.3 -3.3 293 696 3.1 123

Wake, NC .......................... 28.9 453.6 0.7 59 836 2.7 161

Cass, ND ........................... 5.9 101.1 2.6 5 723 5.1 24

Butler, OH .......................... 7.5 147.3 -1.2 205 743 -1.6 317

Cuyahoga, OH ................... 38.1 732.3 -1.7 245 853 2.4 183

Franklin, OH ....................... 30.3 678.7 -0.8 179 851 2.3 192

Hamilton, OH ..................... 24.3 515.4 -0.6 162 933 4.9 31

Lake, OH ............................ 6.8 100.5 -0.7 174 685 2.7 161

Lorain, OH ......................... 6.3 99.1 -1.4 221 710 1.3 260

Lucas, OH .......................... 10.8 212.2 -3.8 303 737 0.4 297

Mahoning, OH .................... 6.5 103.0 -1.9 255 616 3.5 82

Montgomery, OH ............... 13.0 261.1 -3.0 288 787 4.5 42

Stark, OH ........................... 9.1 160.9 -1.6 233 658 2.3 192

Summit, OH ....................... 15.1 273.9 -0.4 145 756 2.3 192

Trumbull, OH ..................... 4.7 76.3 -1.8 250 713 2.9 148

Warren, OH ........................ 4.3 76.9 -1.7 245 719 3.3 103

Oklahoma, OK ................... 24.0 427.1 1.2 30 784 4.7 36

Tulsa, OK ........................... 19.4 351.8 1.0 39 767 3.0 139

Clackamas, OR .................. 12.8 151.7 0.3 84 772 0.8 281

Jackson, OR ...................... 6.7 83.7 -2.9 286 634 1.1 266

Lane, OR ........................... 11.0 147.1 -3.0 288 684 3.5 82

Marion, OR ........................ 9.5 145.1 0.6 64 673 2.0 221

Multnomah, OR .................. 28.2 451.7 0.4 76 858 2.1 211

Washington, OR ................ 16.2 248.1 -1.6 233 985 1.9 230

Allegheny, PA .................... 35.4 686.8 -0.1 121 886 2.7 161

Berks, PA ........................... 9.3 168.3 -0.2 132 770 0.8 281

Bucks, PA .......................... 20.2 260.8 -1.8 250 819 3.9 62

Butler, PA ........................... 4.9 81.1 1.1 37 747 4.2 46

Chester, PA ....................... 15.2 244.2 0.9 45 1,024 -1.9 320

Cumberland, PA ................ 6.0 125.8 -0.9 189 774 1.7 244

Dauphin, PA ....................... 7.4 183.1 0.1 101 820 2.1 211

Delaware, PA ..................... 13.7 210.7 0.1 101 878 3.7 73

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

third quarter 2008 2—Continued

County 3

Establishments,

third quarter

2008

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage 4

September

2008

(thousands)

Percent

change,

September

2007-08 5

Ranking by

percent

change

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

third quarter

2007-08 5

Ranking by

percent

change

Erie, PA .............................. 7.4 128.5 -0.5 153 $680 3.3 103

Lackawanna, PA ................ 5.9 101.2 -1.0 192 651 3.5 82

Lancaster, PA .................... 12.5 229.4 -0.8 179 720 2.7 161

Lehigh, PA ......................... 8.8 178.9 -0.2 132 829 -0.6 312

Luzerne, PA ....................... 7.9 143.6 0.0 110 663 1.8 234

Montgomery, PA ................ 27.6 487.7 0.3 84 1,012 1.5 255

Northampton, PA ............... 6.5 99.0 -1.6 233 743 3.2 110

Philadelphia, PA ................ 31.0 634.8 0.7 59 1,021 4.6 40

Washington, PA ................. 5.4 81.3 2.3 9 739 2.4 183

Westmoreland, PA ............. 9.5 137.6 0.3 84 684 4.0 57

York, PA ............................. 9.2 178.7 0.2 97 741 1.9 230

Kent, RI .............................. 5.7 78.5 -4.7 314 732 0.7 287

Providence, RI ................... 18.1 281.9 -2.2 268 805 3.5 82

Charleston, SC .................. 12.7 212.6 -0.6 162 723 3.1 123

Greenville, SC .................... 12.9 241.1 0.8 50 728 2.2 201

Horry, SC ........................... 8.5 116.9 -3.8 303 537 0.4 297

Lexington, SC .................... 5.8 98.4 -0.6 162 652 2.2 201

Richland, SC ...................... 9.6 215.2 -1.1 200 749 2.7 161

Spartanburg, SC ................ 6.2 119.2 -3.2 291 734 4.0 57

Minnehaha, SD .................. 6.4 116.7 1.4 24 717 3.2 110

Davidson, TN ..................... 18.7 437.4 -2.1 264 861 2.4 183

Hamilton, TN ...................... 8.6 193.4 -0.5 153 718 1.0 270

Knox, TN ............................ 11.3 230.1 0.0 110 711 2.0 221

Rutherford, TN ................... 4.4 97.7 -3.7 300 840 17.3 1

Shelby, TN ......................... 20.0 500.6 -1.7 245 855 0.6 290

Williamson, TN ................... 6.0 87.1 -0.4 145 915 5.8 15

Bell, TX .............................. 4.6 103.0 1.9 17 663 2.5 176

Bexar, TX ........................... 32.5 729.1 1.2 30 734 2.1 211

Brazoria, TX ....................... 4.6 86.0 0.1 101 800 0.8 281

Brazos, TX ......................... 3.8 85.2 1.0 39 646 3.2 110

Cameron, TX ..................... 6.4 122.4 -0.1 121 538 4.1 52

Collin, TX ........................... 17.2 294.8 2.0 15 997 1.1 266

Dallas, TX .......................... 68.2 1,489.1 0.5 69 1,025 2.4 183

Denton, TX ......................... 10.6 168.8 1.4 24 738 3.1 123

El Paso, TX ........................ 13.5 271.4 1.2 30 601 0.8 281

Fort Bend, TX .................... 8.4 128.9 2.5 6 865 2.1 211

Galveston, TX .................... 5.2 95.7 0.4 76 803 3.5 82

Harris, TX ........................... 97.3 2,047.2 1.3 29 1,050 3.0 139

Hidalgo, TX ........................ 10.6 214.8 1.2 30 549 3.8 66

Jefferson, TX ..................... 5.9 123.3 -1.3 212 820 3.8 66

Lubbock, TX ....................... 6.8 124.7 1.9 17 641 4.2 46

McLennan, TX ................... 4.9 103.2 ( 7) – 685 4.1 52

Montgomery, TX ................ 8.2 125.8 3.0 3 785 5.5 18

Nueces, TX ........................ 8.1 155.0 2.5 6 728 2.5 176

Potter, TX ........................... 3.8 77.2 3.1 2 729 ( 7) – 

Smith, TX ........................... 5.3 94.4 2.4 8 743 4.2 46

Tarrant, TX ......................... 37.4 769.5 0.8 50 843 1.0 270

Travis, TX .......................... 29.0 581.5 1.6 21 924 1.3 260

Webb, TX ........................... 4.8 88.5 -0.4 145 559 2.0 221

Williamson, TX ................... 7.2 120.8 1.6 21 800 3.1 123

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

third quarter 2008 2—Continued

County 3

Establishments,

third quarter

2008

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage 4

September

2008

(thousands)

Percent

change,

September

2007-08 5

Ranking by

percent

change

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

third quarter

2007-08 5

Ranking by

percent

change

Davis, UT ........................... 7.3 103.5 -1.5 226 $659 -1.1 314

Salt Lake, UT ..................... 38.5 591.7 0.5 69 796 3.0 139

Utah, UT ............................ 13.1 175.8 -1.3 212 665 3.3 103

Weber, UT ......................... 5.7 94.4 -0.8 179 637 3.6 76

Chittenden, VT ................... 6.0 95.6 -0.3 141 838 3.2 110

Arlington, VA ...................... 7.8 156.2 0.8 50 1,348 -1.3 315

Chesterfield, VA ................. 7.6 118.9 -2.5 272 774 3.6 76

Fairfax, VA ......................... 34.0 587.0 0.3 84 1,295 4.2 46

Henrico, VA ........................ 9.7 177.2 -1.5 226 852 2.3 192

Loudoun, VA ...................... 9.1 133.3 2.3 9 1,006 -0.3 309

Prince William, VA ............. 7.3 103.3 -0.8 179 775 2.8 156

Alexandria City, VA ............ 6.2 100.9 0.9 45 1,160 2.4 183

Chesapeake City, VA ......... 5.8 99.3 -1.6 233 678 2.3 192

Newport News City, VA ..... 4.0 98.6 -1.2 205 769 2.1 211

Norfolk City, VA ................. 5.9 144.1 0.0 110 815 -1.6 317

Richmond City, VA ............. 7.5 159.0 ( 7) – 954 ( 7) – 

Virginia Beach City, VA ...... 11.7 174.7 -0.9 189 656 2.0 221

Clark, WA ........................... 12.5 134.4 0.5 69 777 3.7 73

King, WA ............................ 78.5 1,198.7 1.4 24 1,162 2.9 148

Kitsap, WA ......................... 6.8 83.8 -0.1 121 766 -0.5 310

Pierce, WA ......................... 21.1 278.4 -0.1 121 774 2.7 161

Snohomish, WA ................. 18.2 256.0 0.3 84 856 1.7 244

Spokane, WA ..................... 15.6 211.5 0.1 101 700 2.9 148

Thurston, WA ..................... 7.1 102.0 2.1 14 786 0.6 290

Whatcom, WA .................... 7.0 83.3 0.8 50 679 3.0 139

Yakima, WA ....................... 8.3 111.2 3.2 1 580 2.1 211

Kanawha, WV .................... 6.1 108.5 -0.5 153 738 4.8 33

Brown, WI .......................... 6.8 148.7 -1.0 192 754 4.7 36

Dane, WI ............................ 14.3 304.1 ( 7) – 823 ( 7) – 

Milwaukee, WI ................... 21.5 498.3 -0.1 121 839 4.7 36

Outagamie, WI ................... 5.1 104.2 0.0 110 719 1.6 250

Racine, WI ......................... 4.2 76.4 -0.7 174 756 2.7 161

Waukesha, WI ................... 13.4 233.7 -1.2 205 836 2.5 176

Winnebago, WI .................. 3.8 91.1 0.5 69 768 0.0 307

San Juan, PR ..................... 13.1 283.5 -1.2 ( 8) 569 6.0 ( 8) 

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

These 334 U.S. counties comprise 71.2 percent of the total covered workers in the U.S. 2 Data are preliminary. 3 Includes areas not officially designated as counties. See Technical Note. 4 Average weekly wages were calculated using unrounded data. 5 Percent changes were computed from quarterly employment and pay data adjusted for noneconomic county reclassifications. See Technical

Note. 6 Totals for the United States do not include data for Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands. 7 Data do not meet BLS or State agency disclosure standards. 8 This county was not included in the U.S. rankings.
Table 2. Covered 1 establishments, employment, and wages in the 10 largest counties,

third quarter 2008 2

County by NAICS supersector

Establishments,

third quarter

2008

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage 3

September

2008

(thousands)

Percent

change,

September

2007-08 4

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

third quarter

2007-08 4

United States 5 ................................................... 9,150.8 135,173.8 -0.8 $841 2.8

Private industry .............................................. 8,857.7 113,499.1 -1.1 833 2.8

Natural resources and mining .................... 126.2 2,003.6 3.6 880 7.3

Construction ............................................... 889.2 7,255.4 -6.7 922 5.1

Manufacturing ............................................ 361.0 13,345.0 -3.6 1,006 1.9

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 1,927.8 25,953.1 -1.3 719 1.7

Information ................................................. 146.3 2,973.8 -2.0 1,335 4.9

Financial activities ...................................... 866.3 7,919.9 -2.5 1,207 0.8

Professional and business services ........... 1,528.7 17,752.2 -1.4 1,045 4.6

Education and health services ................... 851.2 17,996.4 2.7 803 3.6

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 739.3 13,568.1 0.0 358 2.9

Other services ............................................ 1,205.9 4,482.9 0.9 544 2.4

Government ................................................... 293.1 21,674.7 1.0 886 3.0

Los Angeles, CA ................................................ 428.8 4,141.1 -1.5 951 3.1

Private industry .............................................. 424.8 3,581.8 -1.4 923 2.7

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.5 11.7 -2.8 1,232 9.3

Construction ............................................... 14.0 145.0 -9.5 994 5.2

Manufacturing ............................................ 14.6 432.3 -3.4 1,009 4.6

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 53.7 792.1 -2.1 775 2.1

Information ................................................. 8.7 214.8 ( 6) 1,551 ( 6) 

Financial activities ...................................... 24.1 233.8 -5.4 1,482 0.1

Professional and business services ........... 42.5 583.7 ( 6) 1,104 ( 6) 

Education and health services ................... 28.0 488.8 1.7 888 4.5

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 27.0 401.6 -0.2 536 3.3

Other services ............................................ 195.2 259.5 4.2 439 0.5

Government ................................................... 4.0 559.3 ( 6) 1,132 5.8

Cook, IL .............................................................. 140.4 2,504.2 -1.3 988 2.8

Private industry .............................................. 139.0 2,195.4 -1.5 986 2.8

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.1 1.3 -3.6 960 -9.3

Construction ............................................... 12.4 92.9 -5.9 1,284 5.9

Manufacturing ............................................ 7.0 226.3 -4.1 1,002 2.5

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 27.6 460.4 -2.3 788 1.8

Information ................................................. 2.5 56.5 -1.5 1,557 10.2

Financial activities ...................................... 15.7 206.3 -3.2 1,538 -0.8

Professional and business services ........... 28.9 434.2 -2.1 1,248 5.3

Education and health services ................... 13.9 378.9 2.9 873 3.3

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 11.7 237.8 -1.3 443 3.3

Other services ............................................ 14.5 96.6 1.5 707 2.2

Government ................................................... 1.4 308.8 0.0 1,009 2.9

New York, NY ..................................................... 118.9 2,363.8 0.6 1,552 0.5

Private industry .............................................. 118.6 1,919.7 0.7 1,673 0.4

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.0 0.2 -8.9 1,820 14.0

Construction ............................................... 2.4 37.8 4.1 1,535 5.4

Manufacturing ............................................ 3.0 35.4 -5.8 1,183 -2.6

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 22.1 248.9 0.4 1,127 0.4

Information ................................................. 4.6 135.9 0.0 1,982 4.2

Financial activities ...................................... 19.1 372.9 -2.1 2,985 -2.2

Professional and business services ........... 25.6 491.8 1.4 1,799 2.3

Education and health services ................... 8.8 283.4 0.6 1,059 4.7

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 11.7 218.9 3.9 748 3.2

Other services ............................................ 18.0 89.1 2.1 919 4.1

Government ................................................... 0.3 444.1 0.1 1,027 1.4

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

third quarter 2008 2—Continued

County by NAICS supersector

Establishments,

third quarter

2008

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage 3

September

2008

(thousands)

Percent

change,

September

2007-08 4

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

third quarter

2007-08 4

Harris, TX ........................................................... 97.3 2,047.2 1.3 $1,050 3.0

Private industry .............................................. 96.7 1,796.9 1.1 1,061 2.9

Natural resources and mining .................... 1.6 84.8 7.9 2,585 ( 6) 

Construction ............................................... 6.7 157.2 ( 6) 1,005 ( 6) 

Manufacturing ............................................ 4.6 187.3 2.8 1,272 -1.1

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 22.4 428.3 1.0 919 2.1

Information ................................................. 1.4 31.9 -2.4 1,285 2.1

Financial activities ...................................... 10.6 118.2 ( 6) 1,287 2.6

Professional and business services ........... 19.4 336.5 ( 6) 1,233 4.8

Education and health services ................... 10.3 218.7 1.6 865 4.3

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 7.5 174.2 -1.2 385 5.2

Other services ............................................ 11.7 58.5 0.2 598 1.2

Government ................................................... 0.5 250.3 2.7 973 5.1

Maricopa, AZ ...................................................... 103.0 1,761.0 -3.7 836 1.8

Private industry .............................................. 102.3 1,535.7 -4.5 825 1.9

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.5 8.5 0.9 840 16.5

Construction ............................................... 11.0 130.8 -21.8 878 5.1

Manufacturing ............................................ 3.6 125.0 -5.6 1,137 2.1

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 22.8 361.4 -3.9 770 -0.3

Information ................................................. 1.7 29.8 -2.0 1,083 5.5

Financial activities ...................................... 12.9 142.4 -4.0 1,004 -1.8

Professional and business services ........... 22.9 293.9 -6.4 863 4.2

Education and health services ................... 10.1 216.2 7.8 906 2.7

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 7.4 176.8 -1.7 394 1.8

Other services ............................................ 7.3 49.2 -2.3 584 3.4

Government ................................................... 0.7 225.3 2.3 915 0.9

Orange, CA ........................................................ 102.5 1,469.5 -2.8 955 3.0

Private industry .............................................. 101.1 1,327.1 -3.0 947 2.4

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.2 4.5 -10.7 681 7.1

Construction ............................................... 6.9 90.0 -13.4 1,094 6.0

Manufacturing ............................................ 5.3 171.4 -3.2 1,133 3.5

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 17.3 270.0 -4.0 880 1.7

Information ................................................. 1.3 29.4 -1.2 1,552 15.6

Financial activities ...................................... 10.8 112.3 -9.0 1,346 -1.0

Professional and business services ........... 19.0 266.8 -4.2 1,071 4.5

Education and health services ................... 10.0 148.9 3.9 899 3.7

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 7.1 177.8 1.3 420 2.2

Other services ............................................ 17.5 49.4 2.6 551 -1.6

Government ................................................... 1.4 142.3 -1.2 1,033 9.2

Dallas, TX ........................................................... 68.2 1,489.1 0.5 1,025 2.4

Private industry .............................................. 67.6 1,321.8 0.3 1,034 2.3

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.6 8.3 14.7 4,831 61.8

Construction ............................................... 4.4 84.7 0.3 922 2.6

Manufacturing ............................................ 3.1 132.9 -4.0 1,148 -1.0

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 15.1 304.7 0.1 953 0.3

Information ................................................. 1.7 47.6 -3.2 1,445 5.8

Financial activities ...................................... 8.9 143.9 0.4 1,311 -3.7

Professional and business services ........... 14.8 279.1 0.7 1,153 2.6

Education and health services ................... 6.7 150.7 3.1 938 4.1

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 5.4 129.7 1.5 461 4.5

Other services ............................................ 6.5 39.1 -0.5 634 4.1

Government ................................................... 0.5 167.3 2.0 952 3.6

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

third quarter 2008 2—Continued

County by NAICS supersector

Establishments,

third quarter

2008

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage 3

September

2008

(thousands)

Percent

change,

September

2007-08 4

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

third quarter

2007-08 4

San Diego, CA ................................................... 99.6 1,318.0 -1.2 $921 3.8

Private industry .............................................. 98.3 1,099.8 -1.5 904 4.1

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.8 11.4 -3.6 564 1.6

Construction ............................................... 7.1 76.2 -12.9 988 4.2

Manufacturing ............................................ 3.1 102.1 -0.4 1,198 3.3

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 14.2 214.5 -3.2 733 -0.8

Information ................................................. 1.3 39.1 3.6 2,244 30.4

Financial activities ...................................... 9.6 75.2 -5.2 1,090 -2.2

Professional and business services ........... 16.2 215.9 -2.2 1,131 4.6

Education and health services ................... 8.1 135.5 3.8 869 4.3

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 6.9 165.8 0.0 419 2.9

Other services ............................................ 26.1 58.2 1.6 489 1.5

Government ................................................... 1.3 218.2 0.4 1,014 2.7

King, WA ............................................................ 78.5 1,198.7 1.4 1,162 2.9

Private industry .............................................. 78.0 1,045.7 1.3 1,176 2.7

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.4 3.2 0.8 1,288 12.1

Construction ............................................... 6.9 72.3 -2.9 1,083 4.9

Manufacturing ............................................ 2.5 112.0 -0.8 1,259 0.6

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 15.2 220.2 0.3 921 3.5

Information ................................................. 1.8 80.9 5.9 3,364 8.3

Financial activities ...................................... 7.1 74.6 -0.9 1,368 6.0

Professional and business services ........... 13.9 193.2 1.3 1,243 -6.3

Education and health services ................... 6.6 126.5 5.2 863 3.0

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 6.2 115.7 1.9 447 0.9

Other services ............................................ 17.5 47.2 4.2 601 4.7

Government ................................................... 0.5 153.0 2.1 1,064 4.9

Miami-Dade, FL .................................................. 87.8 993.1 -3.2 842 2.2

Private industry .............................................. 87.5 842.7 -3.5 805 1.5

Natural resources and mining .................... 0.5 7.7 -9.6 474 -2.3

Construction ............................................... 6.6 44.2 -20.3 844 2.9

Manufacturing ............................................ 2.6 42.8 -10.2 745 3.5

Trade, transportation, and utilities .............. 23.5 248.8 -2.1 746 -0.4

Information ................................................. 1.5 19.0 -7.5 1,227 2.8

Financial activities ...................................... 10.4 68.0 -5.6 1,156 0.3

Professional and business services ........... 18.1 129.8 -4.4 1,011 4.6

Education and health services ................... 9.4 144.2 2.8 822 1.7

Leisure and hospitality ............................... 6.0 100.6 -2.0 481 4.3

Other services ............................................ 7.6 35.9 -0.5 523 1.4

Government ................................................... 0.4 150.4 -1.4 1,058 4.9

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

Technical Note. 5 Totals for the United States do not include data for Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands. 6 Data do not meet BLS or State agency disclosure standards.
Table 3. Covered 1 establishments, employment, and wages in the largest county by

state, third quarter 2008 2

County 3

Establishments,

third quarter

2008

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage 4

September

2008

(thousands)

Percent

change,

September

2007-08 5

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

third quarter

2007-08 5

United States 6 ......................... 9,150.8 135,173.8 -0.8 $841 2.8

Jefferson, AL ............................ 19.0 357.9 -1.6 863 3.1

Anchorage Borough, AK ........... 8.3 152.0 2.0 922 3.1

Maricopa, AZ ............................ 103.0 1,761.0 -3.7 836 1.8

Pulaski, AR ............................... 15.1 252.2 0.3 765 2.0

Los Angeles, CA ....................... 428.8 4,141.1 -1.5 951 3.1

Denver, CO .............................. 26.0 453.3 0.5 1,031 3.6

Hartford, CT .............................. 25.6 506.7 0.3 1,012 0.9

New Castle, DE ........................ 18.5 278.0 -1.5 981 2.6

Washington, DC ....................... 33.8 688.2 1.4 1,391 1.0

Miami-Dade, FL ........................ 87.8 993.1 -3.2 842 2.2

Fulton, GA ................................ 39.1 741.7 -1.0 1,078 1.9

Honolulu, HI .............................. 24.7 444.6 -1.6 800 1.8

Ada, ID ..................................... 15.0 210.4 -1.5 746 -0.5

Cook, IL .................................... 140.4 2,504.2 -1.3 988 2.8

Marion, IN ................................. 24.2 580.5 -0.7 852 2.7

Polk, IA ..................................... 14.9 276.3 0.6 831 3.5

Johnson, KS ............................. 20.6 318.1 0.1 867 4.0

Jefferson, KY ............................ 22.3 426.4 -2.3 799 1.1

East Baton Rouge, LA .............. 14.4 261.4 -0.1 790 6.6

Cumberland, ME ...................... 12.0 174.0 -0.1 768 3.4

Montgomery, MD ...................... 32.8 459.0 -0.4 1,122 2.9

Middlesex, MA .......................... 47.6 825.1 0.8 1,200 1.8

Wayne, MI ................................ 32.1 717.9 -4.2 942 1.4

Hennepin, MN .......................... 42.2 840.7 -0.8 1,102 5.4

Hinds, MS ................................. 6.4 126.6 -0.6 745 4.3

St. Louis, MO ............................ 32.9 605.6 -1.0 890 1.8

Yellowstone, MT ....................... 5.8 78.5 0.7 688 2.4

Douglas, NE ............................. 16.0 321.4 0.9 820 4.9

Clark, NV .................................. 50.9 903.7 -2.0 812 2.0

Hillsborough, NH ...................... 12.4 196.5 -0.6 924 2.7

Bergen, NJ ............................... 35.0 445.7 -1.3 1,031 2.3

Bernalillo, NM ........................... 17.6 335.6 0.2 763 3.8

New York, NY ........................... 118.9 2,363.8 0.6 1,552 0.5

Mecklenburg, NC ...................... 33.3 570.0 0.0 956 3.5

Cass, ND .................................. 5.9 101.1 2.6 723 5.1

Cuyahoga, OH .......................... 38.1 732.3 -1.7 853 2.4

Oklahoma, OK .......................... 24.0 427.1 1.2 784 4.7

Multnomah, OR ........................ 28.2 451.7 0.4 858 2.1

Allegheny, PA ........................... 35.4 686.8 -0.1 886 2.7

Providence, RI .......................... 18.1 281.9 -2.2 805 3.5

Greenville, SC .......................... 12.9 241.1 0.8 728 2.2

Minnehaha, SD ......................... 6.4 116.7 1.4 717 3.2

Shelby, TN ................................ 20.0 500.6 -1.7 855 0.6

Harris, TX ................................. 97.3 2,047.2 1.3 1,050 3.0

Salt Lake, UT ............................ 38.5 591.7 0.5 796 3.0

Chittenden, VT ......................... 6.0 95.6 -0.3 838 3.2

Fairfax, VA ................................ 34.0 587.0 0.3 1,295 4.2

King, WA .................................. 78.5 1,198.7 1.4 1,162 2.9

Kanawha, WV ........................... 6.1 108.5 -0.5 738 4.8

Milwaukee, WI .......................... 21.5 498.3 -0.1 839 4.7

See footnotes at end of table.
Table 3. Covered 1 establishments, employment, and wages in the largest county by

state, third quarter 2008 2—Continued

County 3

Establishments,

third quarter

2008

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage 4

September

2008

(thousands)

Percent

change,

September

2007-08 5

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

third quarter

2007-08 5

Laramie, WY ............................. 3.2 44.2 0.9 $718 3.9

San Juan, PR ........................... 13.1 283.5 -1.2 569 6.0

St. Thomas, VI .......................... 1.8 23.6 1.4 651 2.2

 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 Average weekly wages were calculated using unrounded data. 5 Percent changes were computed from quarterly employment and pay data adjusted for noneconomic county

reclassifications. See Technical Note. 6 Totals for the United States do not include data for Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands.
Table 4. Covered 1 establishments, employment, and wages by state, 

third quarter 2008 2

State

Establishments,

third quarter

2008

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage 3

September

2008

(thousands)

Percent

change,

September

2007-08

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

third quarter

2007-08

United States 4 ................... 9,150.8 135,173.8 -0.8 $841 2.8

Alabama ............................. 121.8 1,936.4 -1.2 730 3.3

Alaska ................................ 21.6 332.1 1.4 872 3.7

Arizona ............................... 164.1 2,570.1 -3.0 798 2.0

Arkansas ............................ 86.1 1,185.0 -0.1 649 3.0

California ............................ 1,344.6 15,527.1 -1.4 959 2.9

Colorado ............................ 180.4 2,322.7 0.4 877 3.8

Connecticut ........................ 113.5 1,692.5 -0.3 1,032 1.0

Delaware ............................ 29.5 420.6 -1.1 879 2.1

District of Columbia ............ 33.8 688.2 1.4 1,391 1.0

Florida ................................ 625.2 7,546.4 -4.1 756 2.2

Georgia .............................. 276.6 4,018.6 -1.6 794 1.5

Hawaii ................................ 39.1 613.0 -2.1 774 1.8

Idaho .................................. 57.0 665.7 -1.4 643 1.3

Illinois ................................. 369.7 5,872.8 -0.7 891 2.9

Indiana ............................... 160.5 2,897.6 -1.4 718 2.3

Iowa ................................... 94.6 1,499.0 0.2 696 4.2

Kansas ............................... 86.7 1,368.9 0.0 711 4.6

Kentucky ............................ 110.4 1,795.3 -1.0 692 2.4

Louisiana ........................... 124.1 1,877.4 -0.2 756 5.6

Maine ................................. 50.7 610.8 -0.6 683 3.5

Maryland ............................ 163.9 2,543.4 -0.8 920 3.1

Massachusetts ................... 213.9 3,265.7 0.0 1,025 2.3

Michigan ............................ 259.0 4,093.9 -3.0 820 1.5

Minnesota .......................... 171.6 2,699.6 -0.5 862 4.7

Mississippi ......................... 70.8 1,128.3 -1.3 631 4.0

Missouri ............................. 175.4 2,736.1 -0.4 739 2.8

Montana ............................. 43.3 446.4 0.1 628 3.1

Nebraska ........................... 60.0 925.7 0.2 694 4.2

Nevada .............................. 77.5 1,253.0 -2.7 809 2.1

New Hampshire ................. 49.8 634.6 -0.5 822 2.8

New Jersey ........................ 277.8 3,952.9 -0.7 990 2.5

New Mexico ....................... 54.7 835.2 0.7 712 3.5

New York ........................... 586.1 8,633.8 0.5 1,030 2.2

North Carolina .................... 259.4 4,064.2 -1.0 741 3.1

North Dakota ...................... 25.8 357.0 2.8 665 6.9

Ohio ................................... 295.5 5,251.1 -1.5 766 2.8

Oklahoma .......................... 100.9 1,562.8 1.2 698 4.5

Oregon ............................... 132.5 1,734.1 -1.0 766 2.1

Pennsylvania ..................... 343.5 5,679.0 0.0 822 2.5

Rhode Island ...................... 35.9 476.0 -2.0 778 2.5

South Carolina ................... 119.6 1,874.6 -1.5 683 2.9

South Dakota ..................... 30.6 401.3 1.0 623 4.2

Tennessee ......................... 143.5 2,730.4 -1.5 745 2.8

Texas ................................. 563.6 10,438.3 1.4 850 2.9

Utah ................................... 87.3 1,229.3 -0.1 717 2.9

Vermont ............................. 25.1 304.2 -0.5 722 3.3

Virginia ............................... 232.7 3,676.1 -0.3 877 2.3

Washington ........................ 225.5 3,007.5 1.0 903 3.0

West Virginia ...................... 48.9 716.4 0.6 661 5.9

Wisconsin .......................... 161.6 2,788.7 -0.6 730 3.4

See footnotes at end of table.
Table 4. Covered 1 establishments, employment, and wages by state, 

third quarter 2008 2—Continued

State

Establishments,

third quarter

2008

(thousands)

Employment Average weekly wage 3

September

2008

(thousands)

Percent

change,

September

2007-08

Average

weekly

wage

Percent

change,

third quarter

2007-08

Wyoming ............................ 25.2 294.0 3.3 $781 6.4

Puerto Rico ........................ 55.6 992.8 -1.6 477 5.5

Virgin Islands ..................... 3.5 44.9 -0.9 709 4.3

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

Employees (UCFE) programs. 2 Data are preliminary. 3 Average weekly wages were calculated using unrounded data. 4 Totals for the United States do not include data for Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands.
Largest U.S. Counties

-0.7% to 3.2%

-10.8% to -0.8%

 NOTE: The following counties had fewer than 75,000 employees in 

2007 but are included because they are the largest county in their state

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

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics 

 April 2009

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

September 2007-08 (U.S. average = -0.8 percent)
Largest U.S. Counties

2.9% to 17.3%

-14.6% to 2.8%

 NOTE: The following counties had fewer than 75,000 employees in 

2007 but are included because they are the largest county in their state

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

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics 

 April 2009

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

or more employees, third quarter 2007-08 (U.S. average = 2.8 percent)