For release 10:00 a.m. (EDT), Wednesday, June 17, 2015 USDL-15-1163 

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

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

COUNTY EMPLOYMENT AND WAGES

Fourth Quarter 2014 

From December 2013 to December 2014, employment increased in 319 of the 339 largest U.S. counties

(counties with 75,000 or more jobs in 2013), the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Weld, 

Colo., and Midland, Texas, had the largest percentage increases, with gains of 8.0 percent each over the 

year, compared with national job growth of 2.2 percent. Within Weld, the largest employment increase 

occurred in natural resources and mining, which gained 2,074 jobs over the year (19.6 percent). Within 

Midland, the largest employment increase also occurred in natural resources and mining, which gained 

3,135 jobs over the year (14.9 percent). Atlantic, N.J., had the largest over-the-year percentage decrease 

in employment among the largest counties in the U.S. with a loss of 5.0 percent. County employment 

and wage data are compiled under the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) program, 

which produces detailed information on county employment and wages within 6 months after the end of 

each quarter. 

The U.S. average weekly wage increased 3.5 percent over the year, growing to $1,035 in the fourth

quarter of 2014. Benton, Ark., had the largest over-the-year percentage increase in average weekly 

wages with a gain of 9.9 percent. Within Benton, an average weekly wage gain of $209, or 16.2 percent, 

in professional and business services made the largest contribution to the county’s increase in average 

weekly wages. San Mateo, Calif., experienced the largest percentage decrease in average weekly wages 

with a loss of 20.4 percent over the year. 

Chart 1. Large counties ranked by percent increase in 

employment, December 2013-14 

(U.S. average = 2.2 percent) 

Chart 2. Large counties ranked by percent increase in 

average weekly wages, fourth quarter 2013-14 

(U.S. average = 3.5 percent)

0

2

4

6

8

10

Weld,

Colo.

Midland,

Texas

Adams,

Colo.

Lee,

Fla.

Williamson,

Tenn.

Percent

0

2

4

6

8

10

Benton,

Ark.

Washington,

Pa.

Midland,

Texas

Brazoria,

Texas

Douglas,

Colo.

Percent
 

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

increase, and December 2013-14 percent increase in employment 

Employment in large counties

December 2014 employment Increase in employment, Percent increase in employment, 

(thousands) December 2013-14 December 2013-14

(thousands)

United States 139,204.8 United States 3,033.7 United States 2.2

Los Angeles, Calif. 4,243.8 Harris, Texas 87.4 Weld, Colo. 8.0

New York, N.Y. 2,568.3 Los Angeles, Calif. 68.3 Midland, Texas 8.0

Cook, Ill. 2,512.5 New York, N.Y. 66.8 Adams, Colo. 6.4

Harris, Texas 2,312.2 Dallas, Texas 64.8 Lee, Fla. 6.2

Maricopa, Ariz. 1,821.9 Maricopa, Ariz. 48.4 Williamson, Tenn. 6.1

Dallas, Texas 1,591.0 Clark, Nev. 41.0 Utah, Utah 5.8

Orange, Calif. 1,506.0 King, Wash. 40.4 Denton, Texas 5.7

San Diego, Calif. 1,359.7 Cook, Ill. 39.3 Montgomery, Texas 5.7

King, Wash. 1,262.8 Orange, Calif. 38.1 Benton, Ark. 5.5

Miami-Dade, Fla. 1,082.5 Miami-Dade, Fla. 35.0 Fort Bend, Texas 5.5

Large County Employment 

In December 2014, national employment was 139.2 million (as measured by the QCEW program). Over 

the year, employment increased 2.2 percent, or 3.0 million. The 339 U.S. counties with 75,000 or more 

jobs accounted for 72.1 percent of total U.S. employment and 77.4 percent of total wages. These 339 

counties had a net job growth of 2.2 million over the year, accounting for 73.4 percent of the overall 

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

Weld, Colo., and Midland, Texas, had the largest percentage increases in employment (8.0 percent each) 

among the largest U.S. counties. The five counties with the largest increases in employment levels were 

Harris, Texas; Los Angeles, Calif.; New York, N.Y.; Dallas, Texas; and Maricopa, Ariz. These counties 

had a combined over-the-year employment gain of 335,700 jobs, which was 11.1 percent of the overall 

job increase for the U.S. (See table A.)

Employment declined in 17 of the largest counties from December 2013 to December 2014. Atlantic, 

N.J., had the largest over-the-year percentage decrease in employment (-5.0 percent). Within Atlantic, 

leisure and hospitality had the largest decrease in employment, with a loss of 7,333 jobs (-16.8 percent). 

Norfolk City, Va., had the second largest percentage decrease in employment, followed by McLean, Ill.; 

Peoria, Ill.; and Lake, Ill. (See table 1.)

- 2 - 
Table B. Large counties ranked by fourth quarter 2014 average weekly wages, fourth quarter 2013-14

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

Average weekly wage in large counties

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

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

quarter 2013-14

United States $1,035 United States $35 United States 3.5

San Mateo, Calif. $2,166 Santa Clara, Calif. $134 Benton, Ark. 9.9

New York, N.Y. 2,138 Midland, Texas 118 Washington, Pa. 9.2

Santa Clara, Calif. 2,114 Suffolk, Mass. 108 Midland, Texas 9.0

Suffolk, Mass. 1,856 Douglas, Colo. 100 Brazoria, Texas 8.9

San Francisco, Calif. 1,850 New York, N.Y. 91 Douglas, Colo. 8.8

Washington, D.C. 1,696 Washington, Pa. 91 Clayton, Ga. 7.6

Fairfield, Conn. 1,674 Benton, Ark. 90 Jefferson, Texas 7.6

Arlington, Va. 1,613 San Francisco, Calif. 87 Rockingham, N.H. 7.4

Fairfax, Va. 1,584 Brazoria, Texas 86 Yolo, Calif. 7.1

Somerset, N.J. 1,543 King, Wash. 81 Vanderburgh, Ind. 7.0

Atlantic, N.J. 7.0

Hamilton, Tenn. 7.0

Nueces, Texas 7.0

Large County Average Weekly Wages 

Average weekly wages for the nation increased to $1,035, a 3.5 percent increase, during the year ending 

in the fourth quarter of 2014. Among the 339 largest counties, 332 had over-the-year increases in 

average weekly wages. (See chart 4.) Benton, Ark., had the largest percentage wage increase among the 

largest U.S. counties (9.9 percent). 

Of the 339 largest counties, 7 experienced over-the-year decreases in average weekly wages. San Mateo, 

Calif., had the largest percentage decrease in average weekly wages, with a loss of 20.4 percent. Within 

San Mateo, information had the largest impact on the county’s average weekly wage decrease. Within 

this industry, average weekly wages declined by $8,606 (-60.1 percent) over the year. This decline in 

average weekly wages is partially due to wages returning to normal after higher levels in 2012 and 2013. 

Olmsted, Minn., had the second largest percentage decrease in average weekly wages, followed by 

Morris, N.J.; Rockland, N.Y.; Camden, N.J.; and Butler, Pa. (See table 1.) 

Ten Largest U.S. Counties 

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

Dallas, Texas, had the largest gain (4.2 percent). Within Dallas, trade, transportation, and utilities had 

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

17,303 jobs, or 5.5 percent. Cook, Ill., and Los Angeles, Calif., had the smallest percentage increases in 

employment (1.6 percent each) among the 10 largest counties. (See table 2.)

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

experienced the largest percentage gain in average weekly wages (6.2 percent). Within King, 

- 3 - 
information had the largest impact on the county’s average weekly wage growth. Within this industry, 

average weekly wages increased by $421, or 16.5 percent, over the year. Maricopa, Ariz., had the 

smallest percentage increase in average weekly wages (2.2 percent) among the 10 largest counties. 

For More Information

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

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

2014 fourth quarter average weekly wages for all states are provided in table 3 of this release.

The employment and wage data by county are compiled under the QCEW program, also known as the 

ES-202 program. The data are derived from reports submitted by every employer subject to 

unemployment insurance (UI) laws. The 9.5 million employer reports cover 139.2 million full- and parttime workers. The QCEW program provides a quarterly and annual universe count of establishments, 

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

fourth quarter of 2014 will be available electronically later at www.bls.gov/cew/. For additional 

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

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

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

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

The County Employment and Wages release for first quarter 2015 is scheduled to be released on

Thursday, September 17, 2015. 

- 4 - 
Technical Note

These data are the product of a federal-state cooperative program, 

the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) program, 

also known as the ES-202 program. The data are derived from summaries of employment and total pay of workers covered by state and 

federal unemployment insurance (UI) legislation and provided by 

State Workforce Agencies (SWAs). The summaries are a result of 

the administration of state unemployment insurance programs that 

require most employers to pay quarterly taxes based on the employment and wages of workers covered by UI. QCEW data in this release are based on the 2012 North American Industry Classification 

System. Data for 2014 are preliminary and subject to revision.

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

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

Juan, Puerto Rico, are provided, but not used in calculating U.S. averages, rankings, or in the analysis in the text. Each year, these large 

counties are selected on the basis of the preliminary annual average 

of employment for the previous year. The 340 counties presented in 

this release were derived using 2013 preliminary annual averages of 

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

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

Washington, Minn.; and Cleveland, Okla. These counties will be included in all 2014 quarterly releases. The counties in table 2 are selected and sorted each year based on the annual average employment 

from the preceding year.

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

QCEW BED CES

Source • Count of UI administrative records 

submitted by 9.4 million establishments in first quarter of 2014 

• Count of longitudinally-linked UI administrative records submitted by 

7.5 million private-sector employers

• Sample survey: 588,000 establishments

Coverage • UI and UCFE coverage, including 

all employers subject to state and 

federal UI laws

• UI coverage, excluding government, 

private households, and establishments with zero employment

Nonfarm wage and salary jobs:

• UI coverage, excluding agriculture, private 

households, and self-employed workers

• Other employment, including railroads, 

religious organizations, and other nonUI-covered jobs

Publication frequency

• Quarterly

— 6 months after the end of each 

quarter

• Quarterly

— 8 months after the end of each 

quarter

• Monthly

— Usually first Friday of following 

month

Use of UI file • Directly summarizes and publishes 

each new quarter of UI data

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

annually realign sample-based estimates 

to population counts (benchmarking)

Principal

products

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

MSA, state, and national levels by 

detailed industry

• Provides quarterly employer dynamics data on establishment openings, 

closings, expansions, and contractions 

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

state private-sector total level 

• Future expansions will include data 

with greater industry detail and data 

at the county and MSA level 

• Provides current monthly estimates of 

employment, hours, and earnings at the 

MSA, state, and national level by industry

Principal uses • Major uses include:

— Detailed locality data

— Periodic universe counts for 

benchmarking sample survey estimates

— Sample frame for BLS establishment surveys

• Major uses include:

— Business cycle analysis

— Analysis of employer dynamics 

underlying economic expansions 

and contractions

— Analysis of employment expansion and contraction by size of 

firm

• Major uses include:

— Principal national economic indicator

— Official time series for employment 

change measures

— Input into other major economic indicators

Program Web 

sites

• www.bls.gov/cew/ • www.bls.gov/bdm/ • www.bls.gov/ces/
The preliminary QCEW data presented in this release may differ 

from data released by the individual states. These potential differences 

result from the states' continuing receipt of UI data over time and ongoing review and editing. The individual states determine their data 

release timetables.

Differences between QCEW, BED, and CES employment 

measures

The Bureau publishes three different establishment-based employment measures for any given quarter. Each of these measures—

QCEW, Business Employment Dynamics (BED), and Current Employment Statistics (CES)—makes use of the quarterly UI employment reports in producing data; however, each measure has a somewhat different universe coverage, estimation procedure, and publication product.

Differences in coverage and estimation methods can result in somewhat different measures of employment change over time. It is important to understand program differences and the intended uses of the 

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

Coverage

Employment and wage data for workers covered by state UI laws 

are compiled from quarterly contribution reports submitted to the 

SWAs by employers. For federal civilian workers covered by the Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees (UCFE) program, 

employment and wage data are compiled from quarterly reports submitted by four major federal payroll processing centers on behalf of 

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

report directly to the individual SWA. In addition to the quarterly contribution reports, employers who operate multiple establishments 

within a state complete a questionnaire, called the "Multiple Worksite 

Report," which provides detailed information on the location and industry of each of their establishments. QCEW employment and wage 

data are derived from microdata summaries of 9.2 million employer 

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

2013. These reports are based on place of employment rather than 

place of residence.

UI and UCFE coverage is broad and has been basically comparable 

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

include most State and local government employees. In 2013, UI and 

UCFE programs covered workers in 134.0 million jobs. The estimated 

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

93.7 percent of the wage and salary component of personal income 

and 39.8 percent of the gross domestic product.

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

Armed Forces, elected officials in most states, most employees of railroads, some domestic workers, most student workers at schools, and 

employees of certain small nonprofit organizations.

State and federal UI laws change periodically. These changes may 

have an impact on the employment and wages reported by employers 

covered under the UI program. Coverage changes may affect the overthe-year comparisons presented in this news release.

Concepts and methodology

Monthly employment is based on the number of workers who 

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

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

reported, including production and sales workers, corporation officials, executives, supervisory personnel, and clerical workers. Workers on paid vacations and part-time workers also are included.

Average weekly wage values are calculated by dividing quarterly 

total wages by the average of the three monthly employment levels 

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

the 13 weeks in the quarter. These calculations are made using unrounded employment and wage values. The average wage values that 

can be calculated using rounded data from the BLS database may differ from the averages reported. Included in the quarterly wage data are 

non-wage cash payments such as bonuses, the cash value of meals and 

lodging when supplied, tips and other gratuities, and, in some states, 

employer contributions to certain deferred compensation plans such 

as 401(k) plans and stock options. Over-the-year comparisons of average weekly wages may reflect fluctuations in average monthly employment and/or total quarterly wages between the current quarter and 

prior year levels.

Average weekly wages are affected by the ratio of full-time to parttime workers as well as the number of individuals in high-paying and 

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

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

increase significantly when there is a large decline in the number of 

employees that had been receiving below-average wages. Wages may 

include payments to workers not present in the employment counts 

because they did not work during the pay period including the 12th of 

the month. When comparing average weekly wage levels between industries, states, or quarters, these factors should be taken into consideration.

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

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

particular, this effect has been observed in counties where government 

employers represent a large fraction of overall employment. Similar 

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

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

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

pronounced in federal government due to the uniform nature of federal 

payroll processing. Most federal employees are paid on a biweekly 

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

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

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

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

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

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

In order to ensure the highest possible quality of data, states verify 

with employers and update, if necessary, the industry, location, and 

ownership classification of all establishments on a 3-year cycle. 

Changes in establishment classification codes resulting from this process are introduced with the data reported for the first quarter of the 
year. Changes resulting from improved employer reporting also are 

introduced in the first quarter.

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

simply the sums of individual establishment records and reflect the 

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

in time. Establishments can move in or out of a county or industry for 

a number of reasons—some reflecting economic events, others reflecting administrative changes. For example, economic change 

would come from a firm relocating into the county; administrative 

change would come from a company correcting its county designation.

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

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

done by modifying the prior-year levels used to calculate the over-theyear changes. Percent changes are calculated using an adjusted version of the final 2013 quarterly data as the base data. The adjusted 

prior-year levels used to calculate the over-the-year percent change in 

employment and wages are not published. These adjusted prior-year 

levels do not match the unadjusted data maintained on the BLS Web 

site. Over-the-year change calculations based on data from the Web 

site, or from data published in prior BLS news releases, may differ 

substantially from the over-the-year changes presented in this news 

release.

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

measures presented in this release account for most of the administrative changes—those occurring when employers update the industry, 

location, and ownership information of their establishments. The most 

common adjustments for administrative change are the result of updated information about the county location of individual establishments. Included in these adjustments are administrative changes involving the classification of establishments that were previously reported in the unknown or statewide county or unknown industry categories. Adjusted data account for improvements in reporting employment and wages for individual and multi-unit establishments. To accomplish this, adjustments were implemented to account for: administrative changes caused by multi-unit employers who start reporting 

for each individual establishment rather than as a single entity (first 

quarter of 2008); selected large administrative changes in employment 

and wages (second quarter of 2011); and state verified improvements 

in reporting of employment and wages (third quarter of 2014). These 

adjustments allow QCEW to include county employment and wage 

growth rates in this news release that would otherwise not meet publication standards.

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

measures presented in any County Employment and Wages news release are valid for comparisons between the starting and ending points 

(a 12-month period) used in that particular release. Comparisons may 

not be valid for any time period other than the one featured in a release 

even if the changes were calculated using adjusted data.

County definitions are assigned according to Federal Information 

Processing Standards Publications (FIPS PUBS) as issued by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, after approval by the 

Secretary of Commerce pursuant to Section 5131 of the Information 

Technology Management Reform Act of 1996 and the Computer Security Act of 1987, Public Law 104-106. Areas shown as counties include those designated as independent cities in some jurisdictions and, 

in Alaska, those designated as census areas where counties have not 

been created. County data also are presented for the New England 

states for comparative purposes even though townships are the more 

common designation used in New England (and New Jersey). The regions referred to in this release are defined as census regions.

Additional statistics and other information

Employment and Wages Annual Averages Online features comprehensive information by detailed industry on establishments, employment, and wages for the nation and all states. The 2013 edition of this 

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

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

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

Employment and Wages Annual Averages 2013 are now available 

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

of Employment and Wages Annual Averages Online will be available 

in September 2015. 

News releases on quarterly measures of gross job flows also are 

available upon request from the Division of Administrative Statistics 

and Labor Turnover (Business Employment Dynamics), telephone 

(202) 691-6467; (http://www.bls.gov/bdm/); (e-mail: 

BDMInfo@bls.gov).

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

message referral phone number: 1-800-877-8339.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 340 largest counties,

fourth quarter 2014

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2014

(thousands)

December

2014

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

Fourth

quarter

2014

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

United States4.............................. 9,479.2 139,204.8 2.2 - $1,035 3.5 -

Jefferson, AL................................ 17.8 342.7 0.2 311 1,026 3.3 191

Madison, AL................................. 9.1 186.4 1.4 214 1,106 2.4 258

Mobile, AL.................................... 9.6 167.6 1.0 249 897 3.8 133

Montgomery, AL........................... 6.3 129.7 0.1 317 901 2.4 258

Shelby, AL.................................... 5.1 80.6 3.1 84 978 3.7 143

Tuscaloosa, AL............................. 4.3 91.9 4.3 28 869 2.8 231

Anchorage Borough, AK............... 8.4 152.8 0.0 320 1,094 4.2 99

Maricopa, AZ................................ 94.6 1,821.9 2.7 105 974 2.2 273

Pima, AZ....................................... 18.9 358.8 0.3 303 858 2.1 278

Benton, AR................................... 5.8 108.3 5.5 9 996 9.9 1

Pulaski, AR................................... 14.4 245.9 0.7 272 936 3.7 143

Washington, AR........................... 5.7 98.1 3.5 66 896 4.3 87

Alameda, CA................................ 58.0 708.7 2.8 104 1,319 4.4 81

Contra Costa, CA......................... 30.1 344.1 1.8 174 1,215 2.1 278

Fresno, CA................................... 31.3 349.4 0.6 284 808 4.9 50

Kern, CA....................................... 17.4 306.9 0.3 303 873 2.7 235

Los Angeles, CA........................... 447.3 4,243.8 1.6 197 1,201 3.5 168

Marin, CA..................................... 12.2 112.0 0.6 284 1,280 5.9 29

Monterey, CA............................... 13.0 159.4 1.9 162 851 3.7 143

Orange, CA.................................. 109.5 1,506.0 2.6 112 1,162 4.3 87

Placer, CA.................................... 11.6 144.6 3.4 71 1,034 5.8 31

Riverside, CA............................... 54.3 641.2 3.5 66 803 4.0 113

Sacramento, CA........................... 53.3 620.7 2.2 140 1,095 2.7 235

San Bernardino, CA..................... 52.0 682.3 4.4 25 852 3.5 168

San Diego, CA.............................. 102.1 1,359.7 1.9 162 1,138 2.6 244

San Francisco, CA....................... 58.2 659.1 4.4 25 1,850 4.9 50

San Joaquin, CA.......................... 16.9 217.7 2.5 118 835 2.5 248

San Luis Obispo, CA.................... 9.9 109.4 1.8 174 837 3.7 143

San Mateo, CA............................. 26.4 385.0 4.8 18 2,166 -20.4 339

Santa Barbara, CA....................... 14.7 186.5 2.5 118 981 4.9 50

Santa Clara, CA........................... 66.9 999.3 3.6 57 2,114 6.8 15

Santa Cruz, CA............................ 9.3 94.6 3.7 51 926 5.0 46

Solano, CA................................... 10.4 129.6 1.7 183 1,026 0.9 322

Sonoma, CA................................. 19.0 192.0 0.9 259 952 4.2 99

Stanislaus, CA.............................. 14.5 170.3 2.5 118 832 3.9 125

Tulare, CA.................................... 9.3 146.5 0.7 272 739 6.2 23

Ventura, CA.................................. 25.2 317.5 0.9 259 1,025 5.0 46

Yolo, CA....................................... 6.2 92.3 1.2 227 1,092 7.1 10

Adams, CO................................... 9.6 189.0 6.4 3 987 4.3 87

Arapahoe, CO.............................. 20.0 311.5 3.1 84 1,223 6.7 17

Boulder, CO.................................. 13.8 172.2 2.9 97 1,213 3.1 208

Denver, CO.................................. 28.4 474.3 5.0 13 1,247 1.8 300

Douglas, CO................................. 10.5 110.3 3.6 57 1,240 8.8 5

El Paso, CO.................................. 17.4 252.9 2.5 118 916 3.4 179

Jefferson, CO............................... 18.3 226.2 3.5 66 1,042 4.0 113

Larimer, CO.................................. 10.8 144.3 4.3 28 962 6.8 15

Weld, CO...................................... 6.4 101.6 8.0 1 922 6.0 27

Fairfield, CT................................. 34.2 428.4 1.7 183 1,674 1.1 315

Hartford, CT.................................. 26.6 509.0 1.2 227 1,246 2.8 231

New Haven, CT............................ 23.1 365.5 1.1 236 1,087 4.5 73

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

fourth quarter 2014 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2014

(thousands)

December

2014

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

Fourth

quarter

2014

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

New London, CT.......................... 7.1 121.2 -0.5 330 $1,013 4.3 87

New Castle, DE............................ 18.4 287.7 3.1 84 1,164 0.7 326

Washington, DC........................... 36.8 736.9 1.6 197 1,696 3.0 220

Alachua, FL.................................. 6.9 122.6 2.7 105 888 2.7 235

Brevard, FL................................... 15.1 193.1 1.6 197 885 2.0 291

Broward, FL.................................. 67.4 764.4 2.9 97 960 4.0 113

Collier, FL..................................... 12.8 137.8 5.0 13 891 3.1 208

Duval, FL..................................... 28.0 469.1 2.5 118 988 4.3 87

Escambia, FL............................... 8.2 125.2 1.6 197 817 5.3 37

Hillsborough, FL........................... 40.0 643.8 3.3 75 979 2.1 278

Lake, FL....................................... 7.8 88.2 3.1 84 691 3.6 157

Lee, FL......................................... 20.3 237.9 6.2 4 803 2.4 258

Leon, FL....................................... 8.4 143.6 1.4 214 842 2.7 235

Manatee, FL................................. 10.1 116.4 3.0 92 767 3.4 179

Marion, FL.................................... 8.2 96.6 3.1 84 707 2.5 248

Miami-Dade, FL............................ 95.2 1,082.5 3.3 75 1,008 2.5 248

Okaloosa, FL................................ 6.3 77.1 0.3 303 823 4.7 60

Orange, FL................................... 39.0 751.4 3.4 71 895 3.8 133

Osceola, FL.................................. 6.1 83.0 2.9 97 687 3.9 125

Palm Beach, FL............................ 53.3 565.1 3.8 46 1,006 1.0 319

Pasco, FL..................................... 10.4 108.6 4.6 21 711 2.7 235

Pinellas, FL................................... 31.8 405.0 2.1 151 928 1.9 297

Polk, FL........................................ 12.8 204.3 2.2 140 777 3.7 143

Sarasota, FL................................ 15.3 158.6 5.1 12 860 3.2 199

Seminole, FL................................ 14.4 173.1 3.7 51 843 3.4 179

Volusia, FL................................... 13.8 158.9 2.6 112 729 4.0 113

Bibb, GA....................................... 4.5 83.7 2.3 130 802 4.7 60

Chatham, GA................................ 8.3 142.4 4.6 21 871 2.7 235

Clayton, GA.................................. 4.4 115.6 3.8 46 977 7.6 7

Cobb, GA...................................... 22.9 332.6 4.1 36 1,081 3.6 157

De Kalb, GA................................. 19.0 289.8 2.3 130 1,013 2.2 273

Fulton, GA.................................... 45.2 790.5 4.1 36 1,338 3.7 143

Gwinnett, GA................................ 25.6 333.3 3.8 46 991 3.1 208

Muscogee, GA.............................. 4.8 95.1 -0.4 328 804 2.0 291

Richmond, GA.............................. 4.7 104.1 2.3 130 834 1.8 300

Honolulu, HI.................................. 24.9 466.6 0.5 291 945 4.0 113

Ada, ID......................................... 14.0 213.0 1.6 197 950 5.9 29

Champaign, IL.............................. 4.5 89.7 0.5 291 868 5.2 41

Cook, IL........................................ 160.7 2,512.5 1.6 197 1,209 3.2 199

Du Page, IL.................................. 39.6 608.0 1.7 183 1,178 0.3 329

Kane, IL........................................ 14.3 205.6 0.3 303 912 4.5 73

Lake, IL........................................ 23.5 331.4 -0.6 335 1,341 2.8 231

McHenry, IL.................................. 9.2 95.8 0.0 320 847 2.5 248

McLean, IL.................................... 4.0 84.4 -0.9 336 968 1.3 313

Madison, IL................................... 6.3 97.9 2.1 151 848 3.5 168

Peoria, IL...................................... 4.9 100.7 -0.9 336 954 1.8 300

St. Clair, IL.................................... 5.8 93.8 1.3 223 799 2.4 258

Sangamon, IL............................... 5.5 129.9 2.0 158 1,019 0.8 325

Will, IL.......................................... 16.6 219.3 1.1 236 895 3.7 143

Winnebago, IL.............................. 7.0 127.6 1.1 236 874 3.4 179

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

fourth quarter 2014 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2014

(thousands)

December

2014

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

Fourth

quarter

2014

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

Allen, IN........................................ 8.8 181.1 1.8 174 $806 4.1 109

Elkhart, IN..................................... 4.7 122.6 4.3 28 837 6.6 19

Hamilton, IN.................................. 8.8 128.3 4.4 25 971 3.5 168

Lake, IN........................................ 10.2 187.9 -0.3 325 898 2.4 258

Marion, IN..................................... 23.5 587.9 1.6 197 1,004 3.1 208

St. Joseph, IN............................... 5.8 120.0 1.7 183 807 2.5 248

Tippecanoe, IN............................. 3.3 82.5 2.2 140 852 4.4 81

Vanderburgh, IN........................... 4.8 107.3 1.9 162 852 7.0 11

Black Hawk, IA.......................... 3.8 75.5 -0.5 330 930 3.2 199

Johnson, IA.................................. 4.0 80.8 0.3 303 915 3.5 168

Linn, IA......................................... 6.6 130.0 1.4 214 1,018 6.3 21

Polk, IA........................................ 16.5 287.5 1.6 197 1,029 3.7 143

Scott, IA........................................ 5.5 91.0 1.0 249 857 2.4 258

Johnson, KS................................. 21.8 335.9 3.4 71 1,041 2.0 291

Sedgwick, KS............................... 12.4 247.7 0.6 284 921 1.5 306

Shawnee, KS................................ 4.9 97.2 0.7 272 826 2.4 258

Wyandotte, KS............................. 3.3 88.5 4.3 28 940 4.3 87

Boone, KY................................... 4.2 80.4 2.3 130 890 2.9 227

Fayette, KY................................... 10.5 191.3 0.8 264 881 4.3 87

Jefferson, KY................................ 24.6 451.5 2.5 118 964 3.4 179

Caddo, LA.................................... 7.3 117.3 1.2 227 861 3.9 125

Calcasieu, LA............................... 4.9 90.9 5.4 11 908 3.9 125

East Baton Rouge, LA.................. 14.6 273.5 3.2 80 975 4.5 73

Jefferson, LA................................ 13.5 195.0 1.1 236 926 2.2 273

Lafayette, LA................................ 9.2 144.3 1.5 209 1,033 3.6 157

Orleans, LA.................................. 11.6 191.4 2.4 126 996 2.4 258

St. Tammany, LA.......................... 7.6 85.6 4.2 33 892 4.6 68

Cumberland, ME.......................... 12.8 175.3 1.0 249 951 5.2 41

Anne Arundel, MD........................ 14.7 258.6 1.0 249 1,089 2.3 272

Baltimore, MD............................... 21.2 373.4 0.8 264 1,043 3.6 157

Frederick, MD............................... 6.3 97.4 1.0 249 968 2.1 278

Harford, MD.................................. 5.6 90.6 1.0 249 982 1.4 311

Howard, MD................................. 9.5 161.8 1.1 236 1,243 3.6 157

Montgomery, MD.......................... 32.6 462.7 1.4 214 1,342 2.1 278

Prince Georges, MD..................... 15.7 309.1 1.3 223 1,049 4.6 68

Baltimore City, MD....................... 13.8 335.6 1.8 174 1,223 4.9 50

Barnstable, MA............................. 9.2 88.7 2.2 140 887 3.7 143

Bristol, MA.................................... 16.8 222.8 1.9 162 962 6.3 21

Essex, MA.................................... 23.1 318.6 1.4 214 1,096 4.3 87

Hampden, MA.............................. 16.8 203.8 1.4 214 947 4.3 87

Middlesex, MA.............................. 52.2 875.4 2.6 112 1,482 3.6 157

Norfolk, MA................................... 24.3 344.3 1.9 162 1,254 2.6 244

Plymouth, MA............................... 14.7 186.3 2.6 112 982 3.8 133

Suffolk, MA................................... 26.2 630.4 2.4 126 1,856 6.2 23

Worcester, MA.............................. 23.1 334.7 2.1 151 1,030 3.4 179

Genesee, MI................................. 7.0 135.8 0.9 259 837 3.1 208

Ingham, MI................................... 6.1 151.4 -0.3 325 966 3.3 191

Kalamazoo, MI............................. 5.1 114.6 1.4 214 934 3.7 143

Kent, MI....................................... 14.0 371.3 3.1 84 909 3.4 179

Macomb, MI.................................. 17.3 312.7 2.1 151 1,025 1.5 306

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

fourth quarter 2014 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2014

(thousands)

December

2014

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

Fourth

quarter

2014

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

Oakland, MI.................................. 38.3 704.8 1.6 197 $1,164 4.0 113

Ottawa, MI.................................... 5.5 116.7 4.1 36 914 4.7 60

Saginaw, MI.................................. 4.0 84.8 -0.1 323 818 3.0 220

Washtenaw, MI............................. 8.1 203.9 1.9 162 1,069 4.2 99

Wayne, MI.................................... 30.5 706.5 2.2 140 1,119 3.0 220

Anoka, MN.................................... 7.0 118.5 1.7 183 949 5.3 37

Dakota, MN.................................. 9.7 183.9 1.8 174 984 5.4 35

Hennepin, MN.............................. 41.3 883.7 1.7 183 1,259 4.1 109

Olmsted, MN................................ 3.4 92.6 -0.3 325 1,021 -5.5 338

Ramsey, MN................................. 13.3 327.2 1.4 214 1,137 3.6 157

St. Louis, MN................................ 5.3 96.7 0.5 291 824 3.1 208

Stearns, MN................................. 4.3 84.1 0.7 272 835 2.2 273

Washington, MN........................... 5.3 77.8 0.9 259 834 3.5 168

Harrison, MS................................ 4.5 82.9 -0.4 328 714 2.9 227

Hinds, MS..................................... 6.0 121.1 0.8 264 871 1.0 319

Boone, MO................................... 4.8 91.6 2.3 130 791 3.3 191

Clay, MO...................................... 5.3 95.2 4.5 23 930 5.2 41

Greene, MO.................................. 8.3 161.4 2.6 112 773 5.0 46

Jackson, MO................................ 20.2 354.4 0.9 259 1,031 3.0 220

St. Charles, MO............................ 8.7 135.3 0.3 303 811 5.3 37

St. Louis, MO................................ 34.6 590.9 1.2 227 1,121 2.5 248

St. Louis City, MO........................ 11.6 224.4 1.9 162 1,067 3.5 168

Yellowstone, MT........................... 6.3 79.6 1.6 197 900 5.0 46

Douglas, NE................................. 18.4 332.4 1.7 183 932 4.7 60

Lancaster, NE............................... 9.9 164.9 0.8 264 819 3.8 133

Clark, NV..................................... 52.6 895.5 4.8 18 885 1.1 315

Washoe, NV................................. 14.1 199.0 3.1 84 923 3.2 199

Hillsborough, NH.......................... 12.2 199.1 1.6 197 1,210 6.7 17

Rockingham, NH.......................... 10.7 142.6 1.7 183 1,060 7.4 9

Atlantic, NJ................................... 6.6 124.1 -5.0 339 872 7.0 11

Bergen, NJ................................... 32.8 448.4 0.7 272 1,291 4.2 99

Burlington, NJ............................... 11.1 200.8 0.6 284 1,060 2.4 258

Camden, NJ................................. 11.9 200.7 1.1 236 1,017 -0.8 334

Essex, NJ.................................... 20.4 338.7 0.4 297 1,234 0.2 331

Gloucester, NJ.............................. 6.2 103.1 2.3 130 909 1.5 306

Hudson, NJ................................... 14.3 244.1 1.7 183 1,335 3.9 125

Mercer, NJ.................................... 11.0 243.8 3.7 51 1,306 1.1 315

Middlesex, NJ.............................. 21.9 401.6 1.0 249 1,217 2.4 258

Monmouth, NJ.............................. 20.0 252.1 2.5 118 1,053 1.7 303

Morris, NJ..................................... 17.0 284.6 0.2 311 1,512 -2.9 337

Ocean, NJ.................................... 12.7 157.6 2.0 158 845 2.1 278

Passaic, NJ.................................. 12.3 170.6 -0.5 330 1,016 2.4 258

Somerset, NJ............................... 10.0 183.4 2.2 140 1,543 3.6 157

Union, NJ..................................... 14.3 223.5 0.5 291 1,341 4.5 73

Bernalillo, NM............................... 17.8 317.6 0.7 272 873 4.4 81

Albany, NY................................... 10.3 230.4 1.8 174 1,062 4.8 57

Bronx, NY..................................... 17.8 257.1 3.2 80 958 2.5 248

Broome, NY.................................. 4.6 88.7 0.8 264 786 3.1 208

Dutchess, NY............................... 8.5 111.4 0.7 272 1,000 4.6 68

Erie, NY........................................ 24.6 466.3 0.7 272 898 4.8 57

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

fourth quarter 2014 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2014

(thousands)

December

2014

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

Fourth

quarter

2014

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

Kings, NY..................................... 57.9 590.9 5.0 13 $849 3.9 125

Monroe, NY.................................. 18.7 383.3 0.7 272 935 4.2 99

Nassau, NY.................................. 53.6 623.6 1.1 236 1,158 3.4 179

New York, NY............................... 128.0 2,568.3 2.7 105 2,138 4.4 81

Oneida, NY................................... 5.4 105.1 0.2 311 793 3.4 179

Onondaga, NY.............................. 13.2 246.2 0.2 311 938 3.0 220

Orange, NY.................................. 10.2 140.6 2.2 140 847 3.4 179

Queens, NY.................................. 50.0 569.4 3.9 42 974 1.7 303

Richmond, NY.............................. 9.6 101.4 0.8 264 888 4.6 68

Rockland, NY............................... 10.3 120.2 2.3 130 1,052 -1.3 336

Saratoga, NY................................ 5.9 82.6 1.9 162 908 2.5 248

Suffolk, NY................................... 52.0 646.4 0.5 291 1,125 4.7 60

Westchester, NY.......................... 36.5 423.2 1.9 162 1,407 4.5 73

Buncombe, NC............................. 8.3 122.9 3.4 71 797 4.9 50

Catawba, NC................................ 4.3 83.2 1.7 183 760 4.0 113

Cumberland, NC........................... 6.2 118.6 0.1 317 771 0.7 326

Durham, NC................................. 7.7 192.2 2.2 140 1,271 1.0 319

Forsyth, NC.................................. 9.2 181.6 2.0 158 933 4.2 99

Guilford, NC.................................. 14.1 275.2 1.5 209 890 3.5 168

Mecklenburg, NC.......................... 34.0 630.4 3.8 46 1,125 2.5 248

New Hanover, NC........................ 7.5 104.9 3.5 66 828 3.8 133

Wake, NC..................................... 30.9 503.3 3.9 42 1,008 2.4 258

Cass, ND...................................... 6.8 115.9 3.7 51 935 4.5 73

Butler, OH..................................... 7.6 146.9 2.9 97 875 3.1 208

Cuyahoga, OH.............................. 35.4 717.9 0.4 297 1,050 3.7 143

Delaware, OH............................... 4.7 82.8 0.4 297 968 0.9 322

Franklin, OH................................. 30.3 727.9 2.9 97 998 2.9 227

Hamilton, OH................................ 23.2 505.9 1.8 174 1,139 6.1 26

Lake, OH...................................... 6.3 95.4 0.8 264 861 5.5 33

Lorain, OH.................................... 6.0 96.8 0.6 284 816 2.1 278

Lucas, OH.................................... 10.0 208.1 0.6 284 896 5.4 35

Mahoning, OH.............................. 5.9 99.8 1.0 249 734 3.8 133

Montgomery, OH.......................... 11.9 250.5 1.9 162 879 2.1 278

Stark, OH..................................... 8.7 160.3 1.5 209 789 4.0 113

Summit, OH................................. 14.0 264.6 1.2 227 914 4.2 99

Warren, OH................................. 4.5 82.5 2.1 151 880 5.3 37

Cleveland, OK.............................. 5.3 81.5 2.1 151 762 4.7 60

Oklahoma, OK.............................. 26.7 452.2 2.3 130 981 2.0 291

Tulsa, OK..................................... 21.5 350.6 2.7 105 952 0.3 329

Clackamas, OR............................ 13.5 148.3 3.0 92 939 2.6 244

Jackson, OR................................ 6.9 82.6 3.6 57 747 3.3 191

Lane, OR...................................... 11.4 145.4 2.7 105 796 3.2 199

Marion, OR................................... 9.9 140.6 3.7 51 811 4.2 99

Multnomah, OR............................ 31.8 476.8 3.6 57 1,030 2.4 258

Washington, OR........................... 17.5 271.0 2.6 112 1,231 6.0 27

Allegheny, PA............................... 35.3 688.8 -0.1 323 1,096 2.5 248

Berks, PA..................................... 8.9 169.5 1.7 183 913 4.6 68

Bucks, PA..................................... 19.7 254.9 1.7 183 1,001 4.2 99

Butler, PA..................................... 5.0 85.0 0.7 272 937 -0.8 334

Chester, PA.................................. 15.2 243.9 1.2 227 1,333 3.3 191

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

fourth quarter 2014 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2014

(thousands)

December

2014

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

Fourth

quarter

2014

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

Cumberland, PA........................... 6.2 129.7 2.5 118 $922 3.6 157

Dauphin, PA................................ 7.3 177.2 1.2 227 996 2.6 244

Delaware, PA............................... 13.9 221.1 1.7 183 1,084 1.1 315

Erie, PA........................................ 7.2 125.2 1.0 249 806 4.1 109

Lackawanna, PA.......................... 5.9 98.5 0.3 303 765 3.2 199

Lancaster, PA............................... 13.0 230.2 3.0 92 853 3.0 220

Lehigh, PA.................................... 8.6 184.2 0.4 297 1,033 7.8 6

Luzerne, PA.................................. 7.5 141.5 0.7 272 781 2.9 227

Montgomery, PA........................... 27.4 481.4 1.1 236 1,262 3.8 133

Northampton, PA.......................... 6.6 107.8 2.0 158 881 3.6 157

Philadelphia, PA........................... 34.8 652.5 2.2 140 1,210 2.2 273

Washington, PA............................ 5.4 87.7 1.5 209 1,085 9.2 2

Westmoreland, PA....................... 9.3 133.4 1.0 249 829 4.1 109

York, PA....................................... 9.0 174.2 0.7 272 875 4.5 73

Providence, RI.............................. 17.4 283.5 2.1 151 1,062 4.4 81

Charleston, SC............................. 12.9 232.2 4.3 28 880 4.3 87

Greenville, SC.............................. 13.1 254.6 5.0 13 880 2.7 235

Horry, SC..................................... 8.1 111.3 3.6 57 610 3.7 143

Lexington, SC............................... 6.0 114.4 2.4 126 765 5.2 41

Richland, SC................................ 9.4 213.2 3.2 80 862 1.9 297

Spartanburg, SC........................... 5.9 126.5 2.9 97 862 4.5 73

York, SC....................................... 5.1 83.1 4.9 17 806 0.9 322

Minnehaha, SD............................. 6.8 122.7 2.2 140 878 3.8 133

Davidson, TN................................ 20.1 467.8 3.6 57 1,076 1.5 306

Hamilton, TN................................ 9.0 189.7 1.1 236 974 7.0 11

Knox, TN...................................... 11.4 230.2 3.0 92 923 5.2 41

Rutherford, TN.............................. 4.9 115.7 3.9 42 908 3.2 199

Shelby, TN.................................... 19.8 489.7 1.4 214 1,041 2.1 278

Williamson, TN............................. 7.4 112.1 6.1 5 1,231 4.9 50

Bell, TX......................................... 5.0 112.9 0.5 291 812 2.7 235

Bexar, TX..................................... 37.4 811.5 3.2 80 910 3.4 179

Brazoria, TX................................. 5.3 101.2 4.1 36 1,047 8.9 4

Brazos, TX.................................... 4.2 99.0 4.8 18 772 4.0 113

Cameron, TX................................ 6.4 135.6 1.6 197 621 3.8 133

Collin, TX...................................... 21.6 354.7 3.6 57 1,186 3.2 199

Dallas, TX..................................... 71.8 1,591.0 4.2 33 1,233 3.1 208

Denton, TX.................................. 12.8 211.4 5.7 7 938 6.6 19

El Paso, TX.................................. 14.4 289.1 1.2 227 707 3.2 199

Fort Bend, TX............................... 11.3 170.3 5.5 9 1,048 3.5 168

Galveston, TX............................... 5.7 102.5 2.3 130 918 4.7 60

Gregg, TX..................................... 4.2 80.5 3.3 75 940 2.8 231

Harris, TX..................................... 109.5 2,312.2 3.9 42 1,373 4.3 87

Hidalgo, TX................................... 11.9 246.5 2.3 130 641 3.6 157

Jefferson, TX................................ 5.8 126.4 4.5 23 1,079 7.6 7

Lubbock, TX................................. 7.3 133.6 1.9 162 803 4.4 81

McLennan, TX.............................. 5.0 106.7 1.7 183 832 4.0 113

Midland, TX.................................. 5.4 94.7 8.0 1 1,425 9.0 3

Montgomery, TX........................... 10.1 164.6 5.7 7 1,044 3.9 125

Nueces, TX.................................. 8.2 166.7 3.6 57 936 7.0 11

Potter, TX..................................... 4.0 79.1 1.2 227 830 3.5 168

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

fourth quarter 2014 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2014

(thousands)

December

2014

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

Fourth

quarter

2014

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2013-143

Ranking by

percent

change

Smith, TX..................................... 6.0 100.4 3.8 46 $872 2.0 291

Tarrant, TX................................... 40.3 842.8 3.1 84 1,019 3.3 191

Travis, TX..................................... 35.8 669.4 4.2 33 1,170 4.7 60

Webb, TX..................................... 5.0 97.8 3.6 57 696 4.2 99

Williamson, TX............................. 9.1 148.3 2.7 105 960 0.7 326

Davis, UT..................................... 7.9 115.7 3.5 66 802 4.3 87

Salt Lake, UT................................ 41.6 639.7 2.4 126 983 5.5 33

Utah, UT....................................... 14.3 202.3 5.8 6 810 -0.5 333

Weber, UT.................................... 5.7 97.3 3.0 92 750 4.0 113

Chittenden, VT............................. 6.4 101.6 1.3 223 1,032 3.9 125

Arlington, VA................................ 8.6 165.7 0.0 320 1,613 1.5 306

Chesterfield, VA........................... 8.0 129.6 1.1 236 876 0.2 331

Fairfax, VA.................................... 34.6 586.8 0.2 311 1,584 2.0 291

Henrico, VA.................................. 10.3 182.3 2.7 105 977 3.3 191

Loudoun, VA................................ 10.5 150.1 1.1 236 1,204 1.3 313

Prince William, VA........................ 8.3 120.5 1.3 223 891 3.0 220

Alexandria City, VA...................... 6.1 95.9 0.3 303 1,464 3.7 143

Chesapeake City, VA................... 5.6 97.0 0.1 317 792 2.1 278

Newport News City, VA................ 3.6 99.0 -0.5 330 960 3.4 179

Norfolk City, VA........................... 5.4 135.0 -1.1 338 1,001 5.6 32

Richmond City, VA....................... 7.0 149.1 0.4 297 1,101 3.5 168

Virginia Beach City, VA................ 11.1 171.2 1.1 236 809 3.3 191

Benton, WA.................................. 5.7 79.7 3.7 51 997 1.9 297

Clark, WA..................................... 14.0 142.9 4.1 36 927 3.7 143

King, WA...................................... 84.9 1,262.8 3.3 75 1,384 6.2 23

Kitsap, WA.................................... 6.7 83.5 1.8 174 870 3.1 208

Pierce, WA................................... 21.8 284.1 2.9 97 887 2.1 278

Snohomish, WA............................ 20.4 271.9 1.9 162 1,071 4.8 57

Spokane, WA............................... 15.8 208.5 2.2 140 839 2.1 278

Thurston, WA............................... 7.9 105.2 3.3 75 876 2.1 278

Whatcom, WA.............................. 7.1 84.6 1.8 174 805 2.4 258

Yakima, WA................................. 8.0 99.7 4.0 41 708 3.1 208

Kanawha, WV............................... 6.0 105.0 0.2 311 868 2.7 235

Brown, WI..................................... 6.4 150.3 0.4 297 931 4.0 113

Dane, WI...................................... 14.1 319.5 1.5 209 1,020 1.6 305

Milwaukee, WI.............................. 25.2 484.6 0.6 284 1,010 4.9 50

Outagamie, WI............................. 4.9 104.7 1.1 236 865 3.8 133

Waukesha, WI.............................. 12.3 234.0 0.8 264 1,026 3.1 208

Winnebago, WI............................. 3.5 90.1 -0.5 330 974 1.4 311

San Juan, PR............................... 11.4 262.7 -1.6 (5) 659 0.2 (5)

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

2 Average weekly wages were calculated using unrounded data.

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

Note.

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

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

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

(UCFE) programs. These 339 U.S. counties comprise 72.1 percent of the total covered workers in the U.S.
Table 2. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 10 largest counties,

fourth quarter 2014

Employment Average weekly wage 1

County by NAICS supersector

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2014

(thousands)

December

2014

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2013-142

Fourth

quarter

2014

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2013-142

United States3................................................................. 9,479.2 139,204.8 2.2 $1,035 3.5

 Private industry............................................................. 9,184.9 117,701.2 2.6 1,042 3.6

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 137.6 1,989.9 3.4 1,215 5.0

 Construction............................................................... 760.5 6,192.9 5.6 1,174 5.0

 Manufacturing............................................................ 339.9 12,255.7 1.5 1,268 4.1

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 1,920.3 27,247.3 2.2 863 4.0

 Information................................................................. 153.7 2,756.5 0.7 1,755 0.0

 Financial activities...................................................... 841.8 7,759.4 1.2 1,664 4.7

 Professional and business services........................... 1,702.8 19,532.8 3.3 1,377 3.1

 Education and health services................................... 1,498.4 20,926.8 2.0 941 3.1

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 800.1 14,502.5 2.6 438 3.8

 Other services............................................................ 820.2 4,255.2 2.0 688 3.8

 Government.................................................................. 294.3 21,503.6 0.5 997 3.2

Los Angeles, CA.............................................................. 447.3 4,243.8 1.6 1,201 3.5

 Private industry............................................................. 441.5 3,698.0 1.6 1,189 3.5

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.5 9.5 -4.4 1,472 -15.8

 Construction............................................................... 13.4 119.4 1.0 1,218 4.4

 Manufacturing............................................................ 12.5 358.2 -2.5 1,228 4.0

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 53.6 820.4 1.3 938 2.6

 Information................................................................. 9.7 198.9 0.2 2,285 4.4

 Financial activities...................................................... 24.7 209.7 -0.8 1,850 5.5

 Professional and business services........................... 48.1 612.8 -0.1 1,536 6.7

 Education and health services................................... 204.0 724.0 2.4 898 2.4

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 31.0 469.8 3.3 964 0.2

 Other services............................................................ 27.9 146.6 2.3 704 4.1

 Government.................................................................. 5.7 545.8 1.6 1,283 4.1

New York, NY.................................................................. 128.0 2,568.3 2.7 2,138 4.4

 Private industry............................................................. 127.6 2,127.8 3.1 2,337 4.2

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.0 0.2 -0.7 1,976 0.2

 Construction............................................................... 2.2 35.2 4.2 2,230 7.1

 Manufacturing............................................................ 2.2 25.9 -0.8 1,577 2.4

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 20.6 279.1 2.1 1,439 2.9

 Information................................................................. 4.8 153.8 1.9 2,715 7.4

 Financial activities...................................................... 19.3 363.6 1.8 4,984 4.9

 Professional and business services........................... 27.1 537.0 3.2 2,550 4.4

 Education and health services................................... 9.8 334.2 3.7 1,301 2.6

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 13.7 289.6 3.9 981 6.1

 Other services............................................................ 20.3 101.7 3.4 1,142 2.4

 Government.................................................................. 0.4 440.4 0.8 1,184 4.7

Cook, IL........................................................................... 160.7 2,512.5 1.6 1,209 3.2

 Private industry............................................................. 159.4 2,215.9 1.8 1,212 3.4

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.1 0.9 11.5 1,294 17.5

 Construction............................................................... 13.3 68.9 10.1 1,606 6.0

 Manufacturing............................................................ 6.8 186.3 -0.1 1,307 5.7

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 31.8 478.6 2.0 937 2.2

 Information................................................................. 2.9 55.0 2.3 1,663 -1.5

 Financial activities...................................................... 16.3 185.0 0.3 2,215 1.7

 Professional and business services........................... 34.3 460.2 1.4 1,594 4.3

 Education and health services................................... 16.8 428.2 1.6 1,006 5.1

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 14.5 251.6 2.2 496 2.3

 Other services............................................................ 18.2 97.5 1.9 897 3.8

 Government.................................................................. 1.3 296.6 0.3 1,187 1.2

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

fourth quarter 2014 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 1

County by NAICS supersector

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2014

(thousands)

December

2014

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2013-142

Fourth

quarter

2014

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2013-142

Harris, TX........................................................................ 109.5 2,312.2 3.9 $1,373 4.3

 Private industry............................................................. 108.9 2,045.5 4.2 1,412 4.2

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 1.8 95.0 4.5 3,321 -1.7

 Construction............................................................... 6.9 159.6 9.6 1,465 7.8

 Manufacturing............................................................ 4.7 201.7 4.4 1,673 6.8

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 24.7 488.4 4.0 1,210 4.5

 Information................................................................. 1.2 28.3 -3.3 1,518 5.9

 Financial activities...................................................... 11.3 119.8 1.7 1,758 5.3

 Professional and business services........................... 22.1 399.9 3.2 1,788 4.4

 Education and health services................................... 14.9 275.9 3.9 1,056 4.6

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 9.2 211.4 5.0 454 3.4

 Other services............................................................ 11.7 64.6 4.9 816 6.5

 Government.................................................................. 0.6 266.7 1.8 1,077 4.3

Maricopa, AZ.................................................................... 94.6 1,821.9 2.7 974 2.2

 Private industry............................................................. 93.9 1,609.5 2.9 973 2.2

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.5 8.5 3.5 918 -1.8

 Construction............................................................... 7.3 93.5 0.4 1,072 3.5

 Manufacturing............................................................ 3.2 114.8 0.7 1,375 5.5

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 20.1 369.1 2.4 873 1.9

 Information................................................................. 1.6 34.2 5.5 1,261 2.0

 Financial activities...................................................... 11.2 157.0 3.2 1,229 3.1

 Professional and business services........................... 22.2 314.5 3.4 1,090 1.3

 Education and health services................................... 10.8 268.6 3.8 1,007 -0.2

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 7.5 197.9 3.0 463 5.7

 Other services............................................................ 6.4 48.4 1.7 687 2.2

 Government.................................................................. 0.7 212.5 1.2 986 2.8

Dallas, TX........................................................................ 71.8 1,591.0 4.2 1,233 3.1

 Private industry............................................................. 71.3 1,421.2 4.5 1,250 3.1

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.6 10.1 4.6 3,902 5.5

 Construction............................................................... 4.1 78.6 7.6 1,243 6.9

 Manufacturing............................................................ 2.7 107.8 1.1 1,445 5.1

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 15.5 331.2 5.5 1,066 1.1

 Information................................................................. 1.4 49.6 0.0 1,780 0.5

 Financial activities...................................................... 8.6 153.8 2.7 1,694 6.9

 Professional and business services........................... 16.2 319.1 5.7 1,496 3.0

 Education and health services................................... 8.8 184.4 4.1 1,071 3.0

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 6.2 145.6 5.2 510 -1.0

 Other services............................................................ 6.8 40.5 2.1 793 2.9

 Government.................................................................. 0.5 169.8 2.2 1,090 2.5

Orange, CA...................................................................... 109.5 1,506.0 2.6 1,162 4.3

 Private industry............................................................. 108.1 1,367.6 2.6 1,167 4.4

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.2 3.0 -2.0 887 22.2

 Construction............................................................... 6.5 83.2 5.2 1,288 4.0

 Manufacturing............................................................ 4.9 158.8 -0.1 1,482 10.1

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 16.7 266.9 2.0 1,030 3.7

 Information................................................................. 1.2 23.5 -4.4 1,825 9.0

 Financial activities...................................................... 10.8 114.6 1.4 1,958 2.6

 Professional and business services........................... 20.7 282.3 2.2 1,384 4.4

 Education and health services................................... 27.5 188.8 2.3 990 1.6

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 7.9 193.7 2.8 469 7.8

 Other services............................................................ 6.8 42.8 2.1 710 3.3

 Government.................................................................. 1.3 138.4 2.5 1,109 3.4

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

fourth quarter 2014 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 1

County by NAICS supersector

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2014

(thousands)

December

2014

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2013-142

Fourth

quarter

2014

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2013-142

San Diego, CA................................................................ 102.1 1,359.7 1.9 $1,138 2.6

 Private industry............................................................. 100.7 1,139.0 2.2 1,127 2.1

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.7 9.5 2.6 695 5.1

 Construction............................................................... 6.4 64.6 3.0 1,185 5.8

 Manufacturing............................................................ 3.0 97.4 0.9 1,589 4.7

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 14.1 223.9 0.8 838 3.8

 Information................................................................. 1.2 23.9 -3.9 1,677 -1.5

 Financial activities...................................................... 9.5 70.5 -0.9 1,493 8.7

 Professional and business services........................... 18.3 231.2 1.3 1,784 -1.1

 Education and health services................................... 28.2 185.9 3.0 979 2.6

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 7.6 175.4 2.6 460 4.3

 Other services............................................................ 7.3 48.7 3.7 606 4.1

 Government.................................................................. 1.4 220.7 0.6 1,193 5.5

King, WA......................................................................... 84.9 1,262.8 3.3 1,384 6.2

 Private industry............................................................. 84.4 1,100.7 3.6 1,402 6.4

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.4 2.5 2.5 1,417 4.6

 Construction............................................................... 6.1 60.6 13.1 1,315 3.7

 Manufacturing............................................................ 2.3 105.8 0.2 1,640 6.8

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 14.9 241.7 4.3 1,170 5.1

 Information................................................................. 2.0 85.0 2.0 2,974 16.5

 Financial activities...................................................... 6.5 65.9 1.3 1,766 10.8

 Professional and business services........................... 16.1 211.6 4.8 1,766 3.3

 Education and health services................................... 20.5 162.6 2.9 970 2.1

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 6.9 123.7 2.5 544 2.1

 Other services............................................................ 8.6 41.3 2.7 822 2.9

 Government.................................................................. 0.6 162.1 1.4 1,267 5.0

Miami-Dade, FL............................................................... 95.2 1,082.5 3.3 1,008 2.5

 Private industry............................................................. 94.9 946.2 4.0 986 2.4

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.5 9.3 0.2 593 8.2

 Construction............................................................... 5.5 37.8 11.1 986 4.4

 Manufacturing............................................................ 2.7 37.5 2.2 989 3.9

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 27.5 284.2 3.4 884 -0.6

 Information................................................................. 1.6 18.3 0.5 1,532 3.0

 Financial activities...................................................... 10.0 73.8 5.1 1,583 4.4

 Professional and business services........................... 20.0 147.7 5.3 1,312 2.3

 Education and health services................................... 10.1 164.7 2.4 980 4.0

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 7.2 132.1 3.4 569 2.5

 Other services............................................................ 8.2 38.8 4.5 616 2.8

 Government.................................................................. 0.3 136.3 -1.2 1,162 4.5

1 Average weekly wages were calculated using unrounded data.

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

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

Note: Data are preliminary. Counties selected are based on 2013 annual average employment. Includes workers covered by Unemployment Insurance

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

fourth quarter 2014

Employment Average weekly wage 1

State

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2014

(thousands)

December

2014

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2013-14

Fourth

quarter

2014

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2013-14

United States2.......................................... 9,479.2 139,204.8 2.2 $1,035 3.5

Alabama.................................................... 118.0 1,891.4 1.3 881 3.5

Alaska........................................................ 22.4 317.6 0.8 1,063 4.0

Arizona...................................................... 148.9 2,630.8 2.2 926 2.3

Arkansas................................................... 87.4 1,180.5 2.2 807 4.5

California................................................... 1,403.6 16,068.5 2.6 1,209 2.9

Colorado.................................................... 180.7 2,478.0 3.9 1,066 4.1

Connecticut............................................... 114.7 1,681.2 1.2 1,278 2.7

Delaware................................................... 30.0 433.0 2.9 1,049 1.5

District of Columbia................................... 36.8 736.9 0.9 1,696 3.7

Florida....................................................... 649.0 8,009.6 3.5 911 3.1

Georgia...................................................... 286.3 4,131.9 3.7 958 3.8

Hawaii........................................................ 39.3 638.3 0.7 908 4.2

Idaho......................................................... 55.2 650.7 2.5 782 4.0

Illinois........................................................ 421.9 5,844.1 1.4 1,089 2.8

Indiana....................................................... 159.2 2,946.5 1.7 846 3.9

Iowa........................................................... 100.3 1,527.6 1.1 870 4.3

Kansas...................................................... 86.2 1,377.2 1.3 855 2.6

Kentucky.................................................... 121.6 1,852.2 1.8 836 4.1

Louisiana................................................... 126.5 1,954.0 2.1 923 3.8

Maine......................................................... 49.6 592.7 0.9 826 5.1

Maryland.................................................... 166.1 2,590.3 1.3 1,113 3.5

Massachusetts.......................................... 236.1 3,415.6 2.2 1,315 4.5

Michigan.................................................... 237.6 4,158.9 2.1 984 3.3

Minnesota.................................................. 167.0 2,762.9 1.4 1,024 3.6

Mississippi................................................. 72.1 1,118.6 1.0 747 2.3

Missouri..................................................... 187.9 2,709.8 1.5 891 3.4

Montana.................................................... 44.5 442.2 0.5 794 4.5

Nebraska................................................... 70.4 958.1 1.4 837 5.2

Nevada...................................................... 77.2 1,229.6 4.2 899 1.6

New Hampshire......................................... 50.8 638.0 1.4 1,081 6.3

New Jersey............................................... 266.1 3,933.6 1.3 1,211 2.0

New Mexico............................................... 56.1 808.4 1.3 850 4.4

New York.................................................. 627.6 9,067.6 2.0 1,321 4.3

North Carolina........................................... 261.7 4,141.8 2.4 890 3.4

North Dakota............................................. 32.1 454.8 4.5 1,050 7.1

Ohio........................................................... 289.4 5,264.3 1.6 922 3.9

Oklahoma.................................................. 107.9 1,614.3 2.1 876 2.8

Oregon...................................................... 140.0 1,755.4 3.2 928 3.8

Pennsylvania............................................. 351.2 5,716.5 1.2 1,013 3.7

Rhode Island............................................. 36.0 471.5 1.9 1,003 4.5

South Carolina.......................................... 120.1 1,931.4 2.9 817 3.2

South Dakota............................................ 32.2 412.5 1.3 791 4.2

Tennessee................................................. 147.9 2,822.1 2.4 927 3.5

Texas......................................................... 627.9 11,662.7 3.7 1,070 4.3

Utah........................................................... 92.6 1,324.2 3.0 872 4.3

Vermont..................................................... 24.6 311.0 0.7 882 4.1

Virginia...................................................... 237.5 3,691.4 0.6 1,057 2.8

Washington............................................... 238.1 3,069.7 3.2 1,082 4.5

West Virginia............................................. 50.0 712.0 0.1 818 3.3

Wisconsin.................................................. 167.5 2,789.3 1.3 894 3.4

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

fourth quarter 2014 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 1

State

Establishments,

fourth quarter

2014

(thousands)

December

2014

(thousands)

Percent

change,

December

2013-14

Fourth

quarter

2014

Percent

change,

fourth quarter

2013-14

Wyoming................................................... 25.5 283.6 1.5 $952 3.9

Puerto Rico............................................... 49.0 944.2 -1.5 556 0.7

Virgin Islands............................................ 3.5 38.5 -0.3 746 -1.2

1 Average weekly wages were calculated using unrounded data.

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

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

Federal Employees (UCFE) programs.
Largest Counties

Higher than U.S. average

U.S. average or lower

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

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

December 2013-14 (U.S. average = 2.2 percent)
Largest Counties

Higher than U.S. average

U.S. average or lower

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

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

or more employees, fourth quarter 2013-14 (U.S. average = 3.5 percent)