For release 10:00 a.m. (EDT) Thursday, July 22, 2010 USDL-10-0994 

Technical information: (202) 691-6199 • NCSinfo@bls.gov • www.bls.gov/ncs 

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

OCCUPATIONAL PAY COMPARISONS AMONG METROPOLITAN AREAS, 2009 

Average pay for civilian workers in the San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA metropolitan area was 20 

percent above the national average in 2009, one of 77 metropolitan areas studied by the National 

Compensation Survey (NCS), the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor reported 

today. The Brownsville-Harlingen, TX metropolitan area had a pay relative of 79, meaning workers 

earned an average of 79 cents for every dollar earned by workers nationwide. Using data from the NCS, 

pay relatives—a means of assessing pay differences—are available for each of the nine major 

occupational groups within surveyed metropolitan areas, as well as averaged across all occupations for 

each area. The average pay relative nationally for all occupations and for each occupational group 

equals 100. (See table 1.) 

A pay relative is a calculation of pay—wages, salaries, commissions, and production bonuses—for a 

given metropolitan area relative to the nation as a whole. The calculation controls for differences among 

areas in occupational composition, establishment and occupational characteristics, and the fact that data 

are collected for areas at different times during the year. Simple pay comparisons calculating the ratio 

of the average pay for an area to the entire United States in percentage terms would not control for 

interarea differences in occupational composition and other factors, which may impact pay relatives. 

Chart 1 above lists selected metropolitan area pay relatives compared to average pay nationally among 

those studied in the NCS. Table A provides selected metropolitan area pay relatives for each of nine 

major occupational groups. In addition, area-to-area comparisons have been calculated for all 77 

metropolitan areas and are available on the BLS website at http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ocs/payrel.htm. 

Pay Relative (United States = 100) 

Chart 1. Pay relatives in selected metropolitan areas, National Compensation Survey, July 2009 

120 

110 

100 

 80 

 70 

San Jose-San 

Francisco, CA 

New York, 

NY-NJ-CT-PA 

Salinas, CA Boston, 

 MA-NH 

 United States Amarillo, TX Johnstown, PA Brownsville, TX 

 90 
- 2 - 

Table A. Selected metropolitan area-to-national pay relatives for nine major occupational groups, July 

2009 (of 77 metropolitan areas surveyed) 

 Major Occupational Group Metropolitan Area Pay Relative

Management, business, and financial New York-Newark-Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA 117 

San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA 113 

Professional and related Salinas, CA 120 

San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA 120 

Service San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA 125 

Salinas, CA 124 

Sales and related Salinas, CA 124 

San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA 124 

Office and administrative support San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA 120 

New York-Newark-Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA 116 

Construction and extraction Chicago-Naperville-Michigan City, IL-IN-WI 132 

New York-Newark-Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA 130 

Installation, maintenance, and repair Salinas, CA 122 

Denver-Aurora-Boulder, CO 116 

San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA 116 

Production Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Truckee, CA-NV 117 

Seattle-Tacoma-Olympia, WA 117 

Transportation and material moving Minneapolis-St. Paul-St. Cloud, MN-WI 115 

Providence-New Bedford-Fall River, RI-MA 113 

The pay relative for construction and extraction occupations in the Chicago-Naperville-Michigan City, 

IL-IN-WI area was 132, meaning the pay in the Chicago metropolitan area for that occupational group 

averaged 32 percent more than the national average pay for that occupational group. By contrast, the 

pay relative for workers in construction and extraction in the Brownsville-Harlingen, Texas area was 67, 

meaning pay for workers in those occupations averaged 33 percent less than the national average. (See 

table 1.) 

Yearly differences in area and occupational group pay relatives do not infer changes in underlying 

economic conditions. 

NOTE

Occupational Pay Relative news releases and supplemental area-to-area comparison tables for 2004-08 data 

were found to contain errors in identifying statistical significance. News releases and tables were reissued 

on May 26, 2010, with all notations for statistical significance removed. Pay relative estimates were not 

affected. Reissued news releases can be found at http://www.bls.gov/ncs. Reissued area-to-area pay 

comparisons tables can be found at http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ocs/payrel.htm. Statistical significance 

notations and measures are not included in the 2009 news release and area-to-area comparison tables. 
- 3 - 

TECHNICAL NOTE 

Pay relative controls and calculations

Pay relatives control for differences among areas in occupational composition as well as establishment 

and occupational characteristics. Metropolitan areas often differ greatly in the composition of 

establishments and occupations that are available to the local workforce. For example, in BrownsvilleHarlingen, Texas, the ratio of workers in the high-paying management, business, and financial 

occupational group to the number of workers in all occupations is under 6 percent, whereas nationally 

this ratio is over 9 percent.1

 In addition to these factors, the NCS collects compensation data for 

metropolitan areas at different times during the year. Payroll reference dates differ between areas, 

which makes direct comparisons between areas difficult. 

The pay relative approach controls for these differences to isolate the geographic effect on wages. To 

illustrate the importance of controlling for these effects, consider the following example. The average 

pay for construction and extraction workers in the Chicago-Naperville-Michigan City, IL-IN-WI 

metropolitan area in 2009 was $32.15 and in the United States, $20.98.2

 A simple pay comparison can 

be calculated from the ratio of the two average pay levels, multiplied by 100 to express the comparison 

as a percentage. The pay comparison in the example is calculated as: 

($32.15  $20.98)  100  153 

This comparison does not control for differences between Chicago and the nation in the mix of 

occupations, industries, and other factors. A more accurate estimate of the geographic effect of wages in 

Chicago can be obtained by taking these differences into account. Controlling for differences in 

occupational composition, establishment and occupational characteristics, and the payroll reference date 

in Chicago relative to the nation as a whole, the pay relative for construction and extraction occupations 

in Chicago is 132. 

Survey methodology

Pay relatives were estimated using a multivariate regression technique designed to control for interarea 

differences. This technique controls for the following ten characteristics: 

 Occupational type 

 Industry type 

 Work level 

 Full-time / part-time status 

 Time / incentive status 

 Union / nonunion status 

 Ownership type 

 Profit / non-profit status 

 Establishment employment 

 Payroll reference date 

Even accounting for the characteristics used in the current regression analysis, there is still wage 

variation across the areas. The variation is due to differences in wage determinants that were not 

included in the model. Examples of these determinants include price levels, environmental amenities 

such as a pleasant climate, and cultural amenities. 
- 4 - 

Historical pay relatives data are available for the survey years 1992-1996, 1998, 2002, 2004-2008. 

There are several differences between the recent pay relatives and the pay relatives for earlier years, 

including different industry and occupation classification systems, varying methodology, and different 

survey designs. These differences limit comparability. The pay relatives since 2004 have been 

calculated using the same industry and occupation classification systems, methodology, and survey 

design. Nonetheless, comparisons between the estimates for these years should be made only with 

caution. 

For more details on survey design, methodology, classification systems, recent changes in the survey, 

and appropriate use and limitations of the data, see BLS Handbook of Methods, Chapter 8, “National 

Compensation Measures,” available on the Internet at http://www.bls.gov/opub/hom/homch8_a.htm, 

especially the major section “Area-to-Nation and Area-to-Area Pay Comparisons.” 

Obtaining information

Articles, bulletins, and other information from the National Compensation Survey may be obtained by 

calling (202) 691-6199, sending email to NCSinfo@bls.gov, or visiting the Internet site 

http://www.bls.gov/ncs. Information in this release will be made available to sensory impaired 

individuals upon request. Voice phone: (202) 691-5200; Federal Relay Service Number: 1-800-877-

8339. 

1

Data for this example are based on the May 2009 Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Area Occupational Employment and 

Wage Estimates, on the Internet at http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oessrcma.htm. 2

 Average pay for construction and extraction workers in Chicago and for the United States are based on wage estimates 

published in the Chicago-Naperville-Michigan City, IL-IN-WI National Compensation Survey, October 2009 and the 

National Compensation Survey: Occupational Wages in the United States, 2009, on the Internet at 

http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ocs/compub.htm. 
- 5 - 

Table 1. Pay relatives for major occupational groups in metropolitan areas, National Compensation Survey, July 2009(Average pay nationally for all occupations and for each occupational group shown = 100.)

Metropolitan Area1 All occupations Management, business, and financial Professional and related Service Sales and related Office and administrative support Construction and extraction Installa

maintena

and re

United States .................................................... 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 

Amarillo, TX ...................................................... 87 93 84 91 82 91 86 

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Gainesville, GA-AL ...... 100 102 103 95 97 102 87 Austin-Round Rock, TX .................................... 93 92 91 89 101 94 85 Birmingham-Hoover, AL ................................... 95 91 101 96 96 98 84 Bloomington, IN ................................................ 91 91 91 88 85 91 81 

Bloomington-Normal, IL .................................... 100 95 105 103 100 97 115 

Boston-Worcester-Manchester, MA-NH ........... 111 104 110 113 107 113 120 

Brownsville-Harlingen, TX ................................ 79 89 89 85 73 77 67 

Buffalo-Niagara-Cattaraugus, NY ..................... 97 91 90 104 96 93 111 Charleston-North Charleston-Summerville,

SC ................................................................... 93 92 94 88 97 95 85 

Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC ............... 98 103 94 95 100 99 90 Chicago-Naperville-Michigan City, IL-IN-WI ..... 107 106 107 107 103 108 132 

Cincinnati-Middletown-Wilmington,

OH-KY-IN ....................................................... 100 99 103 100 102 100 87 

Cleveland-Akron-Elyria, OH ............................. 100 103 99 101 95 101 107 

Columbus-Marion-Chillicothe, OH .................... 100 95 96 103 102 99 100 Corpus Christi, TX ............................................ 89 86 90 88 93 86 90 

Dallas-Fort Worth, TX ....................................... 99 101 101 94 107 99 92 

Dayton-Springfield-Greenville, OH ................... 96 100 94 97 94 92 93 

Denver-Aurora-Boulder, CO ............................. 104 101 100 109 105 105 96 Detroit-Warren-Flint, MI .................................... 103 95 104 98 102 101 102 

Elkhart-Goshen, IN ........................................... 96 99 91 95 91 94 113 

Fort Collins-Loveland, CO ................................ 101 98 95 99 101 103 109 

Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI ............................. 100 93 98 104 113 100 105 Great Falls, MT ................................................. 89 86 79 97 90 81 102 

Greensboro-High Point, NC .............................. 96 101 96 91 98 96 89 

Greenville-Mauldin-Easley, SC ......................... 95 99 90 98 90 95 75 

Hartford-West Hartford-Willimantic, CT ............ 110 106 108 119 108 112 111 

Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton, NC ......................... 94 92 85 90 93 91 97 

Honolulu, HI ...................................................... 106 107 105 116 109 96 113 

Houston-Baytown-Huntsville, TX ...................... 98 101 103 87 102 100 91 

Huntsville-Decatur, AL ...................................... 98 104 99 93 100 93 93 

Indianapolis-Anderson-Columbus, IN ............... 94 82 96 94 83 96 94 

Iowa City, IA ..................................................... 97 97 94 102 96 101 106 

Johnstown, PA .................................................. 87 82 83 92 86 89 90 

Kansas City, MO-KS ......................................... 99 94 99 96 104 99 101 

Kennewick-Pasco-Richland, WA ...................... 104 104 98 111 108 99 107 Knoxville, TN .................................................... 88 103 93 80 95 90 81 

Lincoln, NE ....................................................... 88 81 83 92 82 89 80 

Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside, CA .......... 109 109 109 113 112 107 110 

See footnotes at end of table.
- 6 - 

Table 1. Pay relatives for major occupational groups in metropolitan areas, National Compensation Survey, July 2009 — Continued(Average pay nationally for all occupations and for each occupational group shown = 100.)

Metropolitan Area1 All occupations Management, business, and financial Professional and related Service Sales and related Office and administrative support Construction and extraction Installat

maintena

and rep

Louisville/Jefferson

County-Elizabethtown-Scottsburg, KY-IN ....... 94 88 94 96 98 97 93 

Memphis, TN-MS-AR ....................................... 94 95 94 86 103 96 91 Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL ... 97 100 92 100 99 100 95 Milwaukee-Racine-Waukesha, WI .................... 100 97 94 98 108 100 107 Minneapolis-St. Paul-St. Cloud, MN-WI ........... 108 101 103 117 109 105 111 Mobile, AL ......................................................... 90 93 92 90 85 91 92 New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA .................... 100 95 103 93 102 98 90 New York-Newark-Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA .. 114 117 115 114 112 116 130 Ocala, FL .......................................................... 89 75 84 90 91 95 80 Oklahoma City, OK ........................................... 92 93 90 92 97 89 104 Orlando-Kissimmee, FL .................................... 91 92 85 92 95 89 93 Palm Bay-Melbourne-Titusville, FL ................... 92 84 86 96 96 89 96 Philadelphia-Camden-Vineland,

PA-NJ-DE-MD ................................................ 105 105 106 103 98 108 105 

Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ .......................... 98 100 103 99 102 99 84 Pittsburgh-New Castle, PA ............................... 95 91 95 94 89 96 92 Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton, OR-WA .......... 105 103 100 112 106 106 105 Providence-New Bedford-Fall River, RI-MA ..... 107 102 108 106 106 106 110 Reading, PA ..................................................... 100 102 96 97 104 102 98 Reno-Sparks, NV .............................................. 100 100 99 98 103 102 93 Richmond, VA ................................................... 98 95 97 97 94 101 85 Rochester, NY .................................................. 100 94 100 105 100 99 99 Rockford, IL ...................................................... 97 89 93 99 101 95 115 Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Truckee, CA-NV ... 108 106 110 111 106 103 117 Salinas, CA ....................................................... 114 109 120 124 124 110 124 San Antonio, TX ............................................... 92 93 96 89 89 93 96 San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA .............. 108 105 108 115 102 104 111 San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA ............. 120 113 120 125 124 120 127 Seattle-Tacoma-Olympia, WA .......................... 110 105 106 119 112 106 111 Springfield, MA ................................................. 110 97 112 108 106 111 116 Springfield, MO ................................................. 90 92 86 90 92 88 82 St. Louis, MO-IL ................................................ 102 96 102 96 100 103 113 Tallahassee, FL ................................................ 88 79 82 93 91 89 92 Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL ............. 93 94 88 97 98 98 92 Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News,

VA-NC ............................................................ 92 83 91 94 94 94 88 

Visalia-Porterville, CA ....................................... 99 87 105 101 101 92 90 Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia,

DC-MD-VA-WV ............................................... 108 104 111 106 109 112 101 

York-Hanover, PA ............................................. 95 100 98 95 92 95 98 Youngstown-Warren-Boardman, OH-PA .......... 91 97 88 93 92 92 90 

1 A metropolitan area can be a Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) or Combined Statistical Area (CSA) as defined by the Office of Management and Budget, December 2003.