For release 10:00 a.m. (EST), Thursday, March 8, 2018 USDL-18-0334 

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

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

COUNTY EMPLOYMENT AND WAGES

Third Quarter 2017 

From September 2016 to September 2017, employment increased in 283 of the 346 largest U.S. 

counties, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Midland, Texas, had the largest percentage

increase with a gain of 10.4 percent over the year, above the national job growth rate of 1.0 percent. 

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

gained 4,526 jobs over the year (24.4 percent). Collier, Fla., had the largest over-the-year percentage 

decrease in employment among the largest counties in the U.S., with a loss of 5.2 percent. Within 

Collier, construction had the largest decrease in employment, with a loss of 1,879 jobs (-12.8 percent). 

The U.S. average weekly wage decreased 0.6 percent over the year, declining to $1,021 in the third 

quarter of 2017. This is the third decline since first quarter 2016, and one of only nine declines in the 

history of the series, which dates back to 1978. Mercer, N.J., had the largest over-the-year percentage

decrease in average weekly wages with a loss of 8.8 percent. Within Mercer, an average weekly wage 

loss of $260 (-13.1 percent) in professional and business services made the largest contribution to the 

county’s decrease in average weekly wages. Midland, Texas, had the largest over-the-year percentage

increase in average weekly wages with a gain of 8.4 percent. Within Midland, natural resources and 

mining had the largest impact on the county’s average weekly wage change with an increase of $180 

(9.5 percent) over the year. 

Chart 1. Large counties ranked by percent increase in 

employment, September 2016-17 

(U.S. average = 1.0 percent)

Chart 2. Large counties ranked by percent decrease in 

average weekly wages, third quarter 2016-17 

(U.S. average = -0.6 percent)

4

6

8

10

Midland,

Texas

Elkhart,

Ind.

Weld,

Colo.

Clark,

Wash.

Calcasieu,

La.

Percent

-10

-8

-6

-4

Mercer,

N.J.

Wyandotte,

Kan.

Clark,

Nev.

Somerset,

N.J.

Clay,

Mo.

Percent
- 2 -

County employment and wage data are from the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) 

program, which provides the only detailed quarterly and annual universe count of establishments, 

employment, and wages at the county, metropolitan statistical area, state, and national levels by detailed 

industry. These data are published within 6 months following the end of each quarter. 

Large County Employment 

In September 2017, national employment was 144.5 million (as measured by the QCEW program). Over 

the year, employment increased 1.0 percent, or 1.5 million. In September 2017, the 346 U.S. counties 

with 75,000 or more jobs accounted for 72.7 percent of total U.S. employment and 77.8 percent of total 

wages. These 346 counties had a net job growth of 1.1 million over the year, accounting for 77.3 percent 

of the overall U.S. employment increase. (See chart 3.) The 5 counties with the largest increases in 

employment levels had a combined over-the-year employment gain of 201,100 jobs, which was 13.8 

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

Employment declined in 60 of the largest counties from September 2016 to September 2017. Collier, 

Fla., had the largest over-the-year percentage decrease in employment (-5.2 percent), followed by Lee, 

Fla.; Jefferson, Texas; Sangamon, Ill.; and Brazoria, Texas. (See table 1.)

Table A. Large counties ranked by September 2017 employment, September 2016-17 employment increase, and 

September 2016-17 percent increase in employment 

Employment in large counties

September 2017 employment Increase in employment, Percent increase in employment, 

(thousands) September 2016-17 September 2016-17

(thousands)

United States 144,464.4 United States 1,459.4 United States 1.0

Los Angeles, Calif. 4,408.1 Los Angeles, Calif. 58.1 Midland, Texas 10.4

Cook, Ill. 2,578.3 Maricopa, Ariz. 48.2 Elkhart, Ind. 5.2

New York, N.Y. 2,451.9 King, Wash. 36.7 Weld, Colo. 5.0

Harris, Texas 2,261.3 Dallas, Texas 31.1 Clark, Wash. 4.6

Maricopa, Ariz. 1,938.0 New York, N.Y. 27.0 Calcasieu, La. 4.5

Dallas, Texas 1,691.1 Kings, N.Y. 25.4 Rutherford, Tenn. 4.3

Orange, Calif. 1,598.6 Santa Clara, Calif. 23.2 Utah, Utah 4.2

San Diego, Calif. 1,439.5 Clark, Nev. 22.8 Montgomery, Texas 4.0

King, Wash. 1,367.1 San Bernardino, Calif. 22.6 Benton, Wash. 3.8

Miami-Dade, Fla. 1,092.6 Orange, Calif. 21.7 Kings, N.Y. 3.7

Large County Average Weekly Wages 

Average weekly wages for the nation decreased to $1,021, a 0.6 percent decrease, during the year ending 

in the third quarter of 2017. Among the 346 largest counties, 265 had over-the-year decreases in average 

weekly wages. (See chart 4.) Mercer, N.J., had the largest percentage wage decrease among the largest 

U.S. counties (-8.8 percent). (See table B.) 

Of the 346 largest counties, 71 experienced an over-the-year increase in average weekly wages.

Midland, Texas, had the largest percentage increase in average weekly wages (8.4 percent), followed by 

Union, N.J.; Elkhart, Ind.; Forsyth, N.C.; and Maui + Kalawao, Hawaii. (See table 1.)
- 3 -

Table B. Large counties ranked by third quarter 2017 average weekly wages, third quarter 2016-17

decrease in average weekly wages, and third quarter 2016-17 percent decrease in average weekly wages 

Average weekly wage in large counties

Average weekly wage, Decrease in average weekly Percent decrease in average 

third quarter 2017 wage, third quarter 2016-17 weekly wage, third

quarter 2016-17

United States $1,021 United States -$6 United States -0.6

Santa Clara, Calif. $2,320 Mercer, N.J. -$118 Mercer, N.J. -8.8

San Mateo, Calif. 2,123 Somerset, N.J. -74 Wyandotte, Kan. -6.0

San Francisco, Calif. 1,954 Wyandotte, Kan. -61 Clark, Nev. -5.3

New York, N.Y. 1,889 Fairfield, Conn. -58 Somerset, N.J. -5.0

Washington, D.C. 1,759 Middlesex, Mass. -57 Clay, Mo. -4.8

Suffolk, Mass. 1,691 Clark, Nev. -50 Washington, Ark. -4.7

Arlington, Va. 1,642 Clay, Mo. -43 Okaloosa, Fla. -4.3

King, Wash. 1,626 Jefferson, Ky. -42 McLean, Ill. -4.2

Fairfax, Va. 1,540 Dauphin, Pa. -42 Jefferson, Ky. -4.2

Middlesex, Mass. 1,498 Anchorage, Alaska -41 Montgomery, Ala. -4.1

Washington, Ark. -41 Sedgwick, Kan. -4.1

McLean, Ill. -41

Mecklenburg, N.C. -41

Norfolk City, Va. -41

Ten Largest U.S. Counties 

Among the 10 largest counties, 9 had over-the-year percentage increases in employment in September 

2017. King, Wash., had the largest gain (2.8 percent). Within King, trade, transportation, and utilities 

had the largest over-the-year employment level increase, with a gain of 16,733 jobs, or 6.6 percent. 

Miami-Dade, Fla., had the only percentage decrease in employment among the 10 largest counties (-1.7 

percent). Within Miami-Dade, leisure and hospitality had the largest over-the-year employment level 

decrease, with a loss of 6,855 jobs, or -4.9 percent. (See table 2.) 

Average weekly wages decreased over the year in 7 of the 10 largest U.S. counties. Dallas, Texas, 

experienced the largest percentage loss in average weekly wages (-1.9 percent). Within Dallas, trade, 

transportation, and utilities had the largest impact on the county’s average weekly wage loss. Within 

trade, transportation, and utilities, average weekly wages decreased by $61, or -5.5 percent, over the 

year. King, Wash., had the largest percentage gain in average weekly wages among the 10 largest 

counties (2.7 percent). Within King, information had the largest impact on the county’s average weekly 

wage growth with an increase of $169 (3.4 percent) over the year. 

For More Information

The tables and charts included in this release contain data for the nation and for the 346 U.S. counties 

with annual average employment levels of 75,000 or more in 2016. September 2017 employment and 

2017 third quarter average weekly wages for all states are provided in table 3 of this release.
- 4 -

Effects of Hurricanes Irma and Maria on the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages

Hurricanes Irma and Maria made landfall in the United States on September 7 and September 20, 

2017, respectively, during the QCEW third quarter reference period. These events did not cause 

changes to QCEW methodology. However, they did affect data collection in Puerto Rico and the 

U.S. Virgin Islands. For more information, please visit this webpage: www.bls.gov/bls/hurricanesharvey-irma-maria.htm.

QCEW Publication Acceleration and Conversion to Two Data Releases

The QCEW publication process is accelerating for a more timely release. Beginning with the 

fourth quarter 2017 release, QCEW data will be published in two parts. The current County 

Employment and Wages news release and associated data will be accelerated and published first. 

The full QCEW data release will occur two weeks later, accompanied by a data release notice.

Alaska Area Name Changes Effective with QCEW Release for Third Quarter 2017

These Alaska area names have been updated for the current and future QCEW releases. 

Previous Name Current Name

Aleutian East Borough Aleutians East Borough

Aleutian West Census Area Aleutians West Census Area

Anchorage Borough Anchorage Municipality

Juneau Borough Juneau City and Borough

Petersburg Census Area Petersburg Borough

Sitka Borough Sitka City and Borough

Yakutat Borough Yakutat City and Borough

The data are derived from reports submitted by employers who are subject to unemployment insurance 

(UI) laws. The 9.9 million employer reports cover 144.5 million full- and part-time workers. Data for the 

third quarter of 2017 will be available later at www.bls.gov/cew. Additional information about the 

quarterly employment and wages data is available in the Technical Note. More information about 

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

The most current news release on quarterly measures of gross job flows is available from QCEW 

Business Employment Dynamics at www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cewbd.pdf. 

Several BLS regional offices issue QCEW news releases targeted to local data users. Links to these 

releases are available at www.bls.gov/cew/cewregional.htm. 

The County Employment and Wages release for fourth quarter 2017 is scheduled to be released 

on Wednesday, May 23, 2018. 

 
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 2017 North American Industry 

Classification System (NAICS). Data for 2017 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 347 counties 

presented in this release were derived using 2016 preliminary annual averages of employment. For 2017 data, three counties have 

been added to the publication tables: Sussex, Del.; Maui + Kalawao, Hawaii; and Deschutes, Ore. These counties will be included 

in all 2017 quarterly releases. One county, Gregg, Texas, which 

was published in the 2016 releases, will be excluded from this and 

future 2017 releases because its 2016 annual average employment 

level was less than 75,000. 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 9.9 million establishments in first quarter of 2017 

Count of longitudinally-linked UI administrative records submitted by 7.9 

million private-sector employers

Sample survey: 651,000 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

— Within 6 months after the end of 

each quarter

Quarterly

— 7 months after the end of each 

quarter

Monthly

— Usually the 3rd Friday after the end 

of the week including the 12th of the 

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 lossesUses 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, 

metropolitan statistical area (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 federal 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: QCEW, Business Employment 

Dynamics (BED), and Current Employment Statistics (CES). Each of 

these measures 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 9.7 million employer 

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

2016. 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 2016, UI and 

UCFE programs covered workers in 141.9 million jobs. The estimated 

136.6 million workers in these jobs (after adjustment for multiple jobholders) represented 96.4 percent of civilian wage and salary employment. Covered workers received $7.607 trillion in pay, representing 

94.1 percent of the wage and salary component of personal income 

and 40.9 percent of the gross domestic product.

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

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

employees of certain small nonprofit organizations.

State and federal UI laws change periodically. These changes may 

have an impact on the employment and wages reported by employers 

covered under the UI program. Coverage changes may affect the 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 that reflect economic events or 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 2016 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 eliminate the effect of 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 2016 edition of this 

publication, which was published in September 2017, contains selected data produced by Business Employment Dynamics (BED) on 

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

2017 version of this news release. Tables and additional content from

the 2016 edition of Employment and Wages Annual Averages Online 

are now available at www.bls.gov/cew/cewbultn16.htm. The 2017 

edition of Employment and Wages Annual Averages Online will be 

available in September 2018. 

News releases on quarterly measures of gross job flows also are 

available from BED at www.bls.gov/bdm, (202) 691-6467, or 

data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/forms/bdm.

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

message referral phone number: (800) 877-8339.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 347 largest counties,

third quarter 2017

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

third quarter

2017

(thousands)

September

2017

(thousands)

Percent

change,

September

2016-173

Ranking by

percent

change

Third

quarter

2017

Percent

change,

third quarter

2016-173

Ranking by

percent

change

United States4.............................. 9,916.5 144,464.4 1.0 - $1,021 -0.6 -

Jefferson, AL................................ 18.7 344.2 1.1 145 990 -1.8 237

Madison, AL................................. 9.6 195.5 1.3 114 1,103 -1.6 217

Mobile, AL.................................... 10.2 170.5 0.6 209 874 -1.5 208

Montgomery, AL........................... 6.4 132.7 1.0 157 825 -4.1 336

Shelby, AL.................................... 5.8 85.8 1.4 104 956 -1.4 195

Tuscaloosa, AL............................. 4.6 94.0 1.0 157 831 1.0 35

Anchorage, AK............................. 8.3 151.5 -1.2 332 1,063 -3.7 330

Maricopa, AZ................................ 96.6 1,938.0 2.6 32 987 -1.1 168

Pima, AZ....................................... 18.7 365.6 1.1 145 869 0.6 49

Benton, AR................................... 6.5 118.1 1.0 157 942 0.7 43

Pulaski, AR................................... 14.4 251.3 0.8 182 904 -2.2 266

Washington, AR........................... 6.0 107.1 2.6 32 823 -4.7 341

Alameda, CA................................ 63.5 777.0 2.4 42 1,390 0.0 72

Butte, CA..................................... 8.5 84.2 1.2 132 789 1.3 27

Contra Costa, CA......................... 32.4 368.0 0.6 209 1,240 0.0 72

Fresno, CA................................... 35.5 393.4 1.6 80 804 -0.4 103

Kern, CA....................................... 19.0 330.3 1.7 79 844 -1.9 245

Los Angeles, CA........................... 488.1 4,408.1 1.3 114 1,147 1.1 32

Marin, CA..................................... 12.5 114.5 0.7 192 1,237 -0.1 82

Merced, CA................................. 6.7 84.3 2.6 32 807 -0.5 111

Monterey, CA............................... 13.7 204.8 0.3 244 885 -0.7 133

Napa, CA..................................... 5.9 79.2 1.9 67 1,020 0.7 43

Orange, CA.................................. 120.4 1,598.6 1.4 104 1,135 -1.1 168

Placer, CA.................................... 13.0 161.9 1.9 67 1,033 -1.0 156

Riverside, CA............................... 63.9 711.3 2.8 28 831 -1.3 186

Sacramento, CA........................... 58.1 649.7 2.1 54 1,110 -0.4 103

San Bernardino, CA..................... 59.0 731.5 3.2 20 864 -1.3 186

San Diego, CA.............................. 110.9 1,439.5 1.2 132 1,112 -1.6 217

San Francisco, CA....................... 60.7 722.3 2.4 42 1,954 3.2 8

San Joaquin, CA.......................... 17.7 253.2 2.5 40 868 -0.7 133

San Luis Obispo, CA.................... 10.4 118.8 3.1 22 860 -0.8 142

San Mateo, CA............................. 28.3 400.2 1.3 114 2,123 1.1 32

Santa Barbara, CA....................... 15.6 202.5 1.6 80 979 -2.1 263

Santa Clara, CA........................... 72.8 1,077.2 2.2 52 2,320 2.6 13

Santa Cruz, CA............................ 9.6 107.6 0.6 209 924 -1.2 175

Solano, CA................................... 11.5 139.7 1.8 75 1,058 -0.1 82

Sonoma, CA................................. 20.1 209.0 1.5 92 993 -0.5 111

Stanislaus, CA.............................. 15.6 190.1 0.7 192 880 -0.8 142

Tulare, CA.................................... 10.4 162.9 0.5 223 737 -0.8 142

Ventura, CA.................................. 27.1 321.2 1.2 132 988 -3.1 314

Yolo, CA....................................... 6.7 102.0 -0.5 306 1,094 -2.2 266

Adams, CO................................... 11.0 207.1 3.1 22 1,015 0.0 72

Arapahoe, CO.............................. 22.1 329.5 1.9 67 1,187 -0.9 150

Boulder, CO.................................. 15.4 181.0 2.1 54 1,237 1.5 26

Denver, CO.................................. 32.4 510.4 2.0 60 1,257 0.8 38

Douglas, CO................................. 12.1 121.3 2.5 40 1,114 -0.6 121

El Paso, CO.................................. 19.8 272.5 2.0 60 948 1.7 17

Jefferson, CO............................... 20.3 234.3 0.6 209 1,057 0.6 49

Larimer, CO.................................. 12.2 160.2 2.1 54 967 3.0 10

Weld, CO...................................... 7.4 106.7 5.0 3 927 1.6 21

 See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 347 largest counties,

third quarter 2017 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

third quarter

2017

(thousands)

September

2017

(thousands)

Percent

change,

September

2016-173

Ranking by

percent

change

Third

quarter

2017

Percent

change,

third quarter

2016-173

Ranking by

percent

change

Fairfield, CT................................. 35.5 420.9 -0.8 321 $1,422 -3.9 333

Hartford, CT.................................. 28.0 509.9 0.6 209 1,185 -1.3 186

New Haven, CT............................ 24.2 364.3 0.5 223 1,051 -1.2 175

New London, CT.......................... 7.5 124.5 0.8 182 993 -2.6 296

New Castle, DE............................ 20.0 286.4 0.1 270 1,146 1.2 30

Sussex, DE.................................. 6.8 81.9 3.0 24 737 -1.9 245

Washington, DC........................... 40.4 764.7 0.7 192 1,759 1.3 27

Alachua, FL.................................. 7.1 129.1 0.6 209 881 0.0 72

Bay, FL......................................... 5.6 77.5 0.3 244 729 -3.6 326

Brevard, FL................................... 15.6 201.6 -1.1 329 902 -3.0 311

Broward, FL.................................. 68.8 778.9 -0.7 314 941 -1.1 168

Collier, FL..................................... 13.8 128.3 -5.2 346 857 -1.6 217

Duval, FL..................................... 29.2 498.6 1.3 114 951 -1.7 231

Escambia, FL............................... 8.0 133.7 1.2 132 802 -0.6 121

Hillsborough, FL........................... 41.8 662.5 -0.5 306 976 -1.8 237

Lake, FL....................................... 8.1 93.8 -0.5 306 692 -3.5 323

Lee, FL......................................... 21.7 239.7 -2.8 345 810 0.1 64

Leon, FL....................................... 8.7 146.8 -1.5 334 852 0.8 38

Manatee, FL................................. 10.7 116.1 -0.1 287 793 -3.2 316

Marion, FL.................................... 8.2 99.0 -0.1 287 695 -3.2 316

Miami-Dade, FL............................ 97.5 1,092.6 -1.7 337 984 -0.1 82

Okaloosa, FL................................ 6.3 82.9 0.7 192 819 -4.3 340

Orange, FL................................... 41.9 811.7 1.3 114 895 -1.4 195

Osceola, FL.................................. 6.9 90.6 2.0 60 689 -2.5 285

Palm Beach, FL............................ 55.9 576.0 -1.0 328 951 -2.4 281

Pasco, FL..................................... 10.8 115.0 0.9 167 717 -0.1 82

Pinellas, FL................................... 32.7 418.2 0.2 259 881 -1.9 245

Polk, FL........................................ 13.1 211.4 1.2 132 777 -0.8 142

Sarasota, FL................................ 15.8 161.5 -0.8 321 841 0.5 52

Seminole, FL................................ 14.9 185.3 0.4 233 866 0.1 64

Volusia, FL................................... 14.2 166.8 -0.7 314 720 -1.0 156

Bibb, GA....................................... 4.2 81.8 -1.5 334 799 0.8 38

Chatham, GA................................ 8.0 148.9 -0.1 287 852 -2.3 274

Clayton, GA.................................. 4.0 122.9 0.9 167 1,027 4.3 6

Cobb, GA...................................... 21.8 356.1 1.6 80 1,066 -2.2 266

DeKalb, GA................................. 17.9 298.0 1.4 104 1,031 -0.5 111

Fulton, GA.................................... 43.0 853.5 2.0 60 1,324 -1.5 208

Gwinnett, GA................................ 24.8 351.3 1.4 104 968 -1.6 217

Hall, GA....................................... 4.4 85.7 2.7 31 853 -0.8 142

Muscogee, GA.............................. 4.5 93.2 0.7 192 842 2.8 11

Richmond, GA.............................. 4.4 104.5 0.6 209 866 -1.9 245

Honolulu, HI.................................. 26.1 472.5 0.2 259 989 -0.9 150

Maui + Kalawao, HI...................... 6.2 76.4 0.2 259 891 4.6 5

Ada, ID......................................... 15.9 236.5 3.2 20 902 -0.2 90

Champaign, IL.............................. 4.0 91.3 0.9 167 885 -1.4 195

Cook, IL........................................ 137.9 2,578.3 0.1 270 1,157 -0.3 98

DuPage, IL................................. 34.5 621.8 0.8 182 1,161 0.5 52

Kane, IL........................................ 12.5 211.0 -0.4 300 921 -0.9 150

Lake, IL........................................ 20.1 339.7 1.6 80 1,263 -2.0 256

McHenry, IL.................................. 7.8 99.1 0.2 259 833 -2.9 307

 See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 347 largest counties,

third quarter 2017 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

third quarter

2017

(thousands)

September

2017

(thousands)

Percent

change,

September

2016-173

Ranking by

percent

change

Third

quarter

2017

Percent

change,

third quarter

2016-173

Ranking by

percent

change

McLean, IL.................................... 3.4 84.0 -0.4 300 $939 -4.2 338

Madison, IL................................... 5.4 99.4 1.3 114 782 -2.6 296

Peoria, IL...................................... 4.2 103.6 -0.4 300 1,077 1.6 21

St. Clair, IL.................................... 5.0 94.0 0.3 244 808 -1.9 245

Sangamon, IL............................... 4.7 127.1 -2.1 343 1,012 -0.4 103

Will, IL.......................................... 14.6 244.2 2.6 32 879 -3.5 323

Winnebago, IL.............................. 6.0 126.2 -0.7 314 888 1.8 16

Allen, IN........................................ 8.8 186.3 0.4 233 821 -1.6 217

Elkhart, IN..................................... 4.7 135.7 5.2 2 924 6.5 3

Hamilton, IN.................................. 9.4 140.4 1.1 145 976 0.7 43

Lake, IN........................................ 10.4 189.3 -0.4 300 877 0.0 72

Marion, IN..................................... 24.0 598.2 0.1 270 1,020 -1.6 217

St. Joseph, IN............................... 5.8 123.7 -1.1 329 827 -1.2 175

Tippecanoe, IN............................. 3.4 83.9 -0.1 287 886 1.6 21

Vanderburgh, IN........................... 4.8 110.2 2.0 60 824 0.2 63

Johnson, IA.................................. 4.2 84.5 0.7 192 965 -0.6 121

Linn, IA......................................... 6.9 130.6 -0.2 296 966 -3.4 321

Polk, IA........................................ 17.4 298.5 0.3 244 1,012 -2.7 300

Scott, IA........................................ 5.6 91.4 0.1 270 825 -2.3 274

Johnson, KS................................. 23.9 343.6 1.6 80 1,008 -1.9 245

Sedgwick, KS............................... 12.7 247.0 -0.5 306 849 -4.1 336

Shawnee, KS................................ 5.2 96.5 -1.8 340 820 -2.3 274

Wyandotte, KS............................. 3.5 92.4 1.5 92 953 -6.0 345

Boone, KY................................... 4.4 87.7 3.3 16 877 -3.8 332

Fayette, KY................................... 10.9 195.8 0.5 223 893 -2.7 300

Jefferson, KY................................ 25.0 468.0 0.7 192 959 -4.2 338

Caddo, LA.................................... 7.3 111.5 -1.7 337 812 0.0 72

Calcasieu, LA............................... 5.3 99.2 4.5 5 909 -0.8 142

East Baton Rouge, LA.................. 15.8 264.9 -0.1 287 940 -3.0 311

Jefferson, LA................................ 14.0 189.4 -1.8 340 899 -2.5 285

Lafayette, LA................................ 9.6 129.6 0.2 259 858 -3.6 326

Orleans, LA.................................. 12.7 192.9 0.2 259 937 -2.5 285

St. Tammany, LA.......................... 8.4 88.0 -0.7 314 844 -1.2 175

Cumberland, ME.......................... 14.0 184.2 1.8 75 932 -0.4 103

Anne Arundel, MD........................ 15.2 271.4 0.5 223 1,071 -1.4 195

Baltimore, MD............................... 21.2 373.7 -0.9 325 1,012 -1.8 237

Frederick, MD............................... 6.4 101.4 1.0 157 939 -2.6 296

Harford, MD.................................. 5.8 94.1 1.1 145 984 -2.5 285

Howard, MD................................. 10.0 171.3 0.6 209 1,230 -2.5 285

Montgomery, MD.......................... 32.8 469.9 0.2 259 1,336 -1.3 186

Prince George's, MD.................... 15.9 316.4 -0.3 299 1,080 -2.7 300

Baltimore City, MD....................... 13.6 346.0 2.1 54 1,199 -1.2 175

Barnstable, MA............................. 9.6 102.1 0.1 270 849 -0.7 133

Bristol, MA.................................... 17.7 227.6 1.1 145 901 -1.3 186

Essex, MA.................................... 25.9 327.3 0.0 284 1,072 -0.2 90

Hampden, MA.............................. 18.4 210.3 0.8 182 915 -1.8 237

Middlesex, MA.............................. 55.4 904.1 1.6 80 1,498 -3.7 330

Norfolk, MA................................... 25.5 352.5 0.4 233 1,142 -0.2 90

Plymouth, MA............................... 16.0 194.8 1.3 114 937 -0.7 133

Suffolk, MA................................... 29.9 675.0 0.9 167 1,691 1.7 17

 See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 347 largest counties,

third quarter 2017 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

third quarter

2017

(thousands)

September

2017

(thousands)

Percent

change,

September

2016-173

Ranking by

percent

change

Third

quarter

2017

Percent

change,

third quarter

2016-173

Ranking by

percent

change

Worcester, MA.............................. 25.5 349.3 0.7 192 $1,011 -0.3 98

Genesee, MI................................. 6.8 134.8 0.2 259 845 -1.2 175

Ingham, MI................................... 6.0 153.2 1.1 145 935 -2.2 266

Kalamazoo, MI............................. 5.0 117.7 -0.1 287 944 0.3 59

Kent, MI....................................... 14.5 396.4 1.5 92 891 -2.0 256

Macomb, MI.................................. 17.6 327.7 0.1 270 1,016 -0.2 90

Oakland, MI.................................. 39.4 731.3 1.0 157 1,116 -1.3 186

Ottawa, MI.................................... 5.7 126.9 1.0 157 864 -0.2 90

Saginaw, MI.................................. 3.9 84.3 -0.7 314 812 -2.2 266

Washtenaw, MI............................. 8.2 213.1 1.5 92 1,101 0.5 52

Wayne, MI.................................... 30.9 722.3 0.7 192 1,092 -1.8 237

Anoka, MN.................................... 7.2 123.0 2.0 60 1,008 -1.9 245

Dakota, MN.................................. 9.9 188.7 0.7 192 959 -3.6 326

Hennepin, MN.............................. 41.0 927.2 1.8 75 1,236 -2.9 307

Olmsted, MN................................ 3.4 97.7 1.6 80 1,180 2.5 14

Ramsey, MN................................. 13.4 334.9 0.4 233 1,124 -2.5 285

St. Louis, MN................................ 5.3 99.1 0.6 209 844 -3.1 314

Stearns, MN................................. 4.3 87.2 0.9 167 877 -0.8 142

Washington, MN........................... 5.5 85.4 3.3 16 851 -2.0 256

Harrison, MS................................ 4.6 85.0 -1.1 329 697 -2.4 281

Hinds, MS..................................... 5.8 120.4 -0.7 314 855 -1.8 237

Boone, MO................................... 5.1 94.6 1.2 132 819 -1.9 245

Clay, MO...................................... 5.7 107.4 2.8 28 856 -4.8 342

Greene, MO.................................. 9.1 166.2 1.3 114 781 -2.6 296

Jackson, MO................................ 22.4 369.2 1.0 157 1,019 -0.6 121

St. Charles, MO............................ 9.6 147.9 0.9 167 807 -1.7 231

St. Louis, MO................................ 39.7 607.8 0.8 182 1,048 -0.7 133

St. Louis City, MO........................ 14.8 228.0 0.2 259 1,066 -3.6 326

Yellowstone, MT........................... 6.8 82.0 -0.6 311 865 -1.7 231

Douglas, NE................................. 19.3 338.7 0.1 270 957 -2.5 285

Lancaster, NE............................... 10.4 168.9 -0.4 300 842 -0.4 103

Clark, NV..................................... 55.3 970.2 2.4 42 898 -5.3 344

Washoe, NV................................. 14.8 218.8 2.1 54 933 0.1 64

Hillsborough, NH.......................... 12.2 201.9 0.6 209 1,126 -0.8 142

Merrimack, NH............................. 5.2 77.2 0.1 270 962 0.8 38

Rockingham, NH.......................... 11.0 151.0 0.9 167 993 0.3 59

Atlantic, NJ................................... 6.5 126.2 -1.7 337 841 -0.7 133

Bergen, NJ................................... 33.0 445.4 0.6 209 1,166 -0.5 111

Burlington, NJ............................... 11.0 206.0 1.4 104 1,019 -3.3 319

Camden, NJ................................. 12.1 206.9 1.5 92 966 -1.5 208

Essex, NJ.................................... 20.4 342.5 1.6 80 1,228 -2.1 263

Gloucester, NJ.............................. 6.3 108.3 1.1 145 848 -2.8 306

Hudson, NJ................................... 15.1 262.2 1.9 67 1,363 0.1 64

Mercer, NJ.................................... 11.2 250.0 0.4 233 1,219 -8.8 346

Middlesex, NJ.............................. 22.3 425.0 1.3 114 1,152 -2.9 307

Monmouth, NJ.............................. 20.1 261.9 1.0 157 972 -0.5 111

Morris, NJ..................................... 17.1 290.8 1.5 92 1,466 -0.7 133

Ocean, NJ.................................... 13.2 169.6 2.3 48 797 -2.3 274

Passaic, NJ.................................. 12.7 167.1 0.3 244 976 -2.3 274

Somerset, NJ............................... 10.2 187.1 0.2 259 1,415 -5.0 343

 See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 347 largest counties,

third quarter 2017 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

third quarter

2017

(thousands)

September

2017

(thousands)

Percent

change,

September

2016-173

Ranking by

percent

change

Third

quarter

2017

Percent

change,

third quarter

2016-173

Ranking by

percent

change

Union, NJ..................................... 14.3 220.4 0.4 233 $1,332 8.2 2

Bernalillo, NM............................... 18.3 327.4 -0.2 296 876 -1.6 217

Albany, NY................................... 10.4 234.4 -0.4 300 1,049 -1.0 156

Bronx, NY..................................... 18.9 300.9 0.1 270 1,005 1.6 21

Broome, NY.................................. 4.5 86.6 -0.9 325 818 1.2 30

Dutchess, NY............................... 8.5 113.2 0.7 192 974 -0.6 121

Erie, NY........................................ 24.9 473.3 0.3 244 893 -1.7 231

Kings, NY..................................... 63.2 714.5 3.7 10 856 -1.2 175

Monroe, NY.................................. 18.9 386.8 0.7 192 947 -2.7 300

Nassau, NY.................................. 54.5 631.2 0.9 167 1,108 1.7 17

New York, NY............................... 129.2 2,451.9 1.1 145 1,889 0.5 52

Oneida, NY................................... 5.4 104.6 -0.5 306 789 -0.6 121

Onondaga, NY.............................. 12.9 245.6 0.0 284 924 -1.4 195

Orange, NY.................................. 10.5 143.8 1.4 104 850 -1.2 175

Queens, NY.................................. 53.4 665.8 2.3 48 970 -0.5 111

Richmond, NY.............................. 9.9 116.0 1.3 114 928 0.5 52

Rockland, NY............................... 10.9 125.0 1.6 80 953 -3.4 321

Saratoga, NY................................ 6.0 87.0 2.4 42 917 -1.1 168

Suffolk, NY................................... 53.4 665.9 0.5 223 1,098 -2.7 300

Westchester, NY.......................... 36.6 428.4 1.0 157 1,235 0.1 64

Buncombe, NC............................. 9.2 130.3 1.5 92 789 0.4 58

Catawba, NC................................ 4.4 87.0 1.5 92 774 -1.4 195

Cumberland, NC........................... 6.2 118.3 -0.1 287 802 -1.5 208

Durham, NC................................. 8.3 197.9 0.7 192 1,255 -0.3 98

Forsyth, NC.................................. 9.2 184.8 0.4 233 952 5.3 4

Guilford, NC.................................. 14.3 279.5 0.1 270 886 0.3 59

Mecklenburg, NC.......................... 37.6 685.8 2.4 42 1,132 -3.5 323

New Hanover, NC........................ 8.1 111.8 1.5 92 820 -0.1 82

Wake, NC..................................... 34.3 544.1 2.6 32 1,039 -1.0 156

Cass, ND...................................... 7.2 118.4 -0.1 287 934 -1.6 217

Butler, OH..................................... 7.9 155.2 2.0 60 901 -1.4 195

Cuyahoga, OH.............................. 36.0 721.1 0.3 244 1,028 0.1 64

Delaware, OH............................... 5.3 88.1 0.5 223 974 -0.5 111

Franklin, OH................................. 32.3 753.6 1.6 80 1,032 -1.1 168

Hamilton, OH................................ 24.0 516.8 0.7 192 1,094 -1.9 245

Lake, OH...................................... 6.3 95.4 0.7 192 820 -1.4 195

Lorain, OH.................................... 6.2 98.3 0.5 223 787 -2.2 266

Lucas, OH.................................... 10.1 208.0 -0.6 311 878 -1.5 208

Mahoning, OH.............................. 5.9 97.8 0.3 244 730 -1.5 208

Montgomery, OH.......................... 11.9 255.9 1.1 145 866 -1.8 237

Stark, OH..................................... 8.6 159.3 0.3 244 769 0.1 64

Summit, OH................................. 14.4 267.9 0.0 284 886 -2.1 263

Warren, OH................................. 4.9 92.4 1.3 114 977 -1.0 156

Cleveland, OK.............................. 5.8 81.1 0.5 223 748 -1.7 231

Oklahoma, OK.............................. 28.2 451.9 0.9 167 949 -2.2 266

Tulsa, OK..................................... 22.6 353.3 0.8 182 908 -2.5 285

Clackamas, OR............................ 14.9 163.3 2.1 54 963 -0.4 103

Deschutes, OR............................. 8.5 81.4 3.5 13 858 4.1 7

Jackson, OR................................ 7.4 89.5 2.6 32 788 -1.0 156

Lane, OR...................................... 12.1 155.2 1.2 132 804 -0.9 150

 See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 347 largest counties,

third quarter 2017 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

third quarter

2017

(thousands)

September

2017

(thousands)

Percent

change,

September

2016-173

Ranking by

percent

change

Third

quarter

2017

Percent

change,

third quarter

2016-173

Ranking by

percent

change

Marion, OR................................... 10.8 155.8 1.3 114 $845 1.0 35

Multnomah, OR............................ 35.0 504.4 1.6 80 1,070 -0.4 103

Washington, OR........................... 19.3 290.9 2.4 42 1,318 -0.6 121

Allegheny, PA............................... 35.6 699.0 1.1 145 1,076 -1.6 217

Berks, PA..................................... 9.0 172.3 0.6 209 923 -2.5 285

Bucks, PA..................................... 20.0 264.7 1.2 132 934 -2.4 281

Butler, PA..................................... 5.1 85.7 0.1 270 943 -0.6 121

Chester, PA.................................. 15.5 250.8 1.2 132 1,207 -1.5 208

Cumberland, PA........................... 6.5 133.6 0.6 209 917 -2.3 274

Dauphin, PA................................ 7.6 182.5 0.9 167 996 -4.0 334

Delaware, PA............................... 14.1 223.3 0.9 167 1,058 -1.0 156

Erie, PA........................................ 7.0 123.2 -0.2 296 787 -0.6 121

Lackawanna, PA.......................... 5.7 98.7 0.4 233 773 -2.3 274

Lancaster, PA............................... 13.5 238.4 1.1 145 855 -1.0 156

Lehigh, PA.................................... 8.8 191.0 0.9 167 992 -1.1 168

Luzerne, PA.................................. 7.5 146.5 1.0 157 800 -3.3 319

Montgomery, PA........................... 27.7 493.6 1.2 132 1,212 -1.8 237

Northampton, PA.......................... 6.8 115.3 1.3 114 871 -1.5 208

Philadelphia, PA........................... 35.1 676.8 1.2 132 1,212 -1.2 175

Washington, PA............................ 5.5 87.8 1.5 92 985 0.0 72

Westmoreland, PA....................... 9.3 134.7 0.5 223 839 1.1 32

York, PA....................................... 9.2 179.3 0.3 244 898 -0.1 82

Providence, RI.............................. 18.3 288.1 0.5 223 1,026 -2.0 256

Charleston, SC............................. 15.1 244.7 0.4 233 902 -1.4 195

Greenville, SC.............................. 13.9 266.1 1.4 104 877 -1.6 217

Horry, SC..................................... 8.7 127.8 1.3 114 633 0.0 72

Lexington, SC............................... 6.6 118.5 2.2 52 778 -1.6 217

Richland, SC................................ 10.1 218.1 -0.6 311 893 0.8 38

Spartanburg, SC........................... 6.2 138.4 3.5 13 856 -1.0 156

York, SC....................................... 5.6 93.7 3.6 11 825 -0.5 111

Minnehaha, SD............................. 7.3 125.8 0.8 182 902 -0.6 121

Davidson, TN................................ 22.5 488.8 2.3 48 1,062 0.0 72

Hamilton, TN................................ 9.7 202.0 1.5 92 903 0.7 43

Knox, TN...................................... 12.3 238.6 0.6 209 874 -1.6 217

Rutherford, TN.............................. 5.6 126.3 4.3 6 901 -1.0 156

Shelby, TN.................................... 20.5 493.5 0.3 244 1,028 -1.6 217

Williamson, TN............................. 8.7 129.9 3.4 15 1,133 -3.2 316

Bell, TX......................................... 5.4 117.5 0.3 244 863 -0.3 98

Bexar, TX..................................... 41.0 857.8 1.3 114 905 -0.7 133

Brazoria, TX................................. 5.8 107.2 -1.9 342 1,074 -0.9 150

Brazos, TX.................................... 4.6 102.9 1.4 104 775 1.3 27

Cameron, TX................................ 6.5 138.2 0.4 233 612 -3.0 311

Collin, TX...................................... 24.8 398.0 3.3 16 1,190 -0.7 133

Dallas, TX..................................... 76.7 1,691.1 1.9 67 1,213 -1.9 245

Denton, TX.................................. 14.9 239.6 3.0 24 929 -2.5 285

El Paso, TX.................................. 15.1 300.9 0.8 182 717 -1.5 208

Fort Bend, TX............................... 13.2 177.3 0.9 167 942 -2.0 256

Galveston, TX............................... 6.2 108.5 -0.1 287 886 -1.3 186

Harris, TX..................................... 114.7 2,261.3 0.1 270 1,247 -1.7 231

Hidalgo, TX................................... 12.3 252.7 1.6 80 649 -0.6 121

 See footnotes at end of table.
Table 1. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 347 largest counties,

third quarter 2017 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 2

County1

Establishments,

third quarter

2017

(thousands)

September

2017

(thousands)

Percent

change,

September

2016-173

Ranking by

percent

change

Third

quarter

2017

Percent

change,

third quarter

2016-173

Ranking by

percent

change

Jefferson, TX................................ 5.9 119.7 -2.3 344 $1,052 -1.4 195

Lubbock, TX................................. 7.5 139.1 1.3 114 790 -2.7 300

McLennan, TX.............................. 5.3 112.5 0.4 233 841 0.5 52

Midland, TX.................................. 5.5 91.4 10.4 1 1,283 8.4 1

Montgomery, TX........................... 11.3 176.4 4.0 8 1,003 -0.5 111

Nueces, TX.................................. 8.3 160.5 -0.7 314 883 -0.2 90

Potter, TX..................................... 4.0 78.0 -0.8 321 821 -1.0 156

Smith, TX..................................... 6.2 102.4 0.9 167 843 0.6 49

Tarrant, TX................................... 43.2 877.8 2.3 48 1,000 -2.9 307

Travis, TX..................................... 40.6 728.0 2.6 32 1,188 0.9 37

Webb, TX..................................... 5.4 100.1 1.2 132 672 -1.0 156

Williamson, TX............................. 10.7 164.6 2.9 27 1,010 -1.3 186

Davis, UT..................................... 8.4 128.1 3.6 11 816 -1.4 195

Salt Lake, UT................................ 44.7 688.0 1.8 75 993 -0.1 82

Utah, UT....................................... 16.1 232.7 4.2 7 822 0.0 72

Weber, UT.................................... 6.0 104.4 1.9 67 781 0.1 64

Chittenden, VT............................. 6.9 102.6 0.3 244 983 -1.2 175

Arlington, VA................................ 9.3 176.0 0.9 167 1,642 -0.4 103

Chesterfield, VA........................... 9.1 136.1 3.0 24 865 -2.0 256

Fairfax, VA.................................... 37.4 603.0 0.7 192 1,540 -0.6 121

Henrico, VA.................................. 11.6 194.0 1.5 92 960 -2.5 285

Loudoun, VA................................ 12.3 163.9 2.6 32 1,179 1.6 21

Prince William, VA........................ 9.4 127.4 1.9 67 894 -2.2 266

Alexandria City, VA...................... 6.4 92.7 -1.6 336 1,438 -0.2 90

Chesapeake City, VA................... 6.1 97.6 -0.9 325 807 -0.1 82

Newport News City, VA................ 3.9 98.0 1.3 114 993 -0.3 98

Norfolk City, VA........................... 5.9 142.1 0.8 182 990 -4.0 334

Richmond City, VA....................... 7.7 153.9 0.3 244 1,113 -1.2 175

Virginia Beach City, VA................ 12.2 178.7 0.3 244 775 -1.4 195

Benton, WA.................................. 5.7 89.6 3.8 9 1,030 -1.6 217

Clark, WA..................................... 14.5 158.0 4.6 4 975 0.7 43

King, WA...................................... 86.2 1,367.1 2.8 28 1,626 2.7 12

Kitsap, WA.................................... 6.7 87.5 1.4 104 947 -2.4 281

Pierce, WA................................... 21.7 305.1 1.1 145 953 0.3 59

Snohomish, WA............................ 20.7 283.4 -0.8 321 1,102 -0.5 111

Spokane, WA............................... 15.6 220.8 1.4 104 889 0.7 43

Thurston, WA............................... 8.3 114.8 3.3 16 946 1.9 15

Whatcom, WA.............................. 7.3 89.8 1.9 67 858 1.7 17

Yakima, WA................................. 7.7 125.0 1.3 114 735 3.2 8

Kanawha, WV............................... 5.7 100.0 -1.4 333 880 -1.1 168

Brown, WI..................................... 6.9 157.1 1.2 132 884 -2.0 256

Dane, WI...................................... 15.7 333.1 0.7 192 1,017 -1.4 195

Milwaukee, WI.............................. 26.6 487.0 0.1 270 955 -1.3 186

Outagamie, WI............................. 5.3 108.1 0.8 182 871 -0.2 90

Waukesha, WI.............................. 13.2 242.7 0.2 259 986 -1.9 245

Winnebago, WI............................. 3.8 93.5 0.1 270 921 -0.9 150

San Juan, PR............................... 10.8 240.6 -2.4 (5) 617 -2.2 (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 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 346 U.S. counties comprise 72.7 percent of the total covered workers in the U.S.
Table 2. Covered establishments, employment, and wages in the 10 largest counties,

third quarter 2017

Employment Average weekly wage 1

County by NAICS supersector

Establishments,

third quarter

2017

(thousands)

September

2017

(thousands)

Percent

change,

September

2016-172

Third

quarter

2017

Percent

change,

third quarter

2016-172

United States3................................................................. 9,916.5 144,464.4 1.0 $1,021 -0.6

 Private industry............................................................. 9,617.8 122,881.9 1.2 1,013 -0.6

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 137.0 1,997.3 2.5 1,016 1.2

 Construction............................................................... 788.8 7,093.0 2.3 1,140 -0.3

 Manufacturing............................................................ 347.3 12,443.1 0.6 1,221 -1.8

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 1,919.2 27,119.8 0.6 861 -0.5

 Information................................................................. 163.5 2,788.4 -0.4 1,977 2.2

 Financial activities...................................................... 872.5 8,101.5 1.3 1,517 -0.8

 Professional and business services........................... 1,789.9 20,414.8 0.9 1,310 -0.2

 Education and health services................................... 1,656.2 22,170.0 1.7 941 -1.6

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 841.9 16,027.9 0.9 440 -0.2

 Other services............................................................ 843.4 4,410.1 0.1 714 1.1

 Government.................................................................. 298.7 21,582.5 0.2 1,070 -0.7

Los Angeles, CA.............................................................. 488.1 4,408.1 1.3 1,147 1.1

 Private industry............................................................. 481.8 3,839.8 1.4 1,113 1.4

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.5 7.6 -0.3 1,094 -9.6

 Construction............................................................... 14.4 139.7 3.3 1,202 1.6

 Manufacturing............................................................ 12.2 344.6 -3.2 1,281 -1.0

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 54.6 819.7 0.3 937 0.8

 Information................................................................. 10.3 214.9 0.2 2,194 3.6

 Financial activities...................................................... 26.3 218.7 0.3 1,766 0.3

 Professional and business services........................... 48.9 615.4 2.2 1,369 1.3

 Education and health services................................... 230.9 780.0 2.6 874 -1.4

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 33.7 521.6 1.6 626 -0.3

 Other services............................................................ 26.6 148.3 -0.3 1,061 37.6

 Government.................................................................. 6.3 568.3 0.6 1,385 0.1

Cook, IL........................................................................... 137.9 2,578.3 0.1 1,157 -0.3

 Private industry............................................................. 136.6 2,282.2 0.2 1,160 -0.5

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.1 1.3 12.1 1,131 -5.0

 Construction............................................................... 10.6 76.9 1.3 1,451 0.1

 Manufacturing............................................................ 5.8 183.9 0.3 1,205 -3.2

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 27.5 467.5 -0.5 955 1.0

 Information................................................................. 2.3 50.4 -1.6 1,805 0.2

 Financial activities...................................................... 13.7 194.8 0.6 2,006 -0.4

 Professional and business services........................... 28.6 474.3 -0.5 1,480 -0.1

 Education and health services................................... 15.3 443.9 0.7 989 -0.4

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 13.6 289.7 1.4 534 -2.6

 Other services............................................................ 15.6 96.4 -0.4 915 -0.3

 Government.................................................................. 1.3 296.1 -0.6 1,134 2.4

New York, NY.................................................................. 129.2 2,451.9 1.1 1,889 0.5

 Private industry............................................................. 128.4 2,188.8 1.2 1,955 0.4

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.0 0.2 12.8 1,853 -0.9

 Construction............................................................... 2.3 41.3 -1.5 1,865 0.8

 Manufacturing............................................................ 2.1 25.2 -5.0 1,543 12.3

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 19.7 251.9 -0.8 1,380 2.9

 Information................................................................. 5.0 165.0 2.7 2,608 2.6

 Financial activities...................................................... 19.6 373.5 0.8 3,366 -0.3

 Professional and business services........................... 27.3 575.1 1.6 2,185 0.2

 Education and health services................................... 10.1 341.1 0.7 1,336 -0.3

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 14.7 300.1 1.5 903 0.6

 Other services............................................................ 20.6 103.7 0.9 1,174 0.6

 Government.................................................................. 0.8 263.1 0.1 1,332 1.4

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

third quarter 2017 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 1

County by NAICS supersector

Establishments,

third quarter

2017

(thousands)

September

2017

(thousands)

Percent

change,

September

2016-172

Third

quarter

2017

Percent

change,

third quarter

2016-172

Harris, TX........................................................................ 114.7 2,261.3 0.1 $1,247 -1.7

 Private industry............................................................. 114.1 1,990.5 0.1 1,257 -2.0

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 1.6 66.4 0.3 2,994 -1.7

 Construction............................................................... 7.4 155.9 -2.9 1,287 -4.5

 Manufacturing............................................................ 4.8 170.0 1.4 1,598 1.8

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 25.0 463.7 0.0 1,137 -0.6

 Information................................................................. 1.2 25.5 -6.4 1,530 6.4

 Financial activities...................................................... 12.1 126.3 1.4 1,579 -0.8

 Professional and business services........................... 23.2 397.3 0.6 1,545 -4.7

 Education and health services................................... 16.1 290.1 0.4 1,024 -1.5

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 10.1 227.9 -0.4 460 -0.6

 Other services............................................................ 11.7 65.6 -0.8 781 -2.4

 Government.................................................................. 0.5 270.7 0.4 1,177 0.4

Maricopa, AZ.................................................................... 96.6 1,938.0 2.6 987 -1.1

 Private industry............................................................. 95.9 1,724.5 2.8 976 -1.2

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.4 7.6 0.0 962 2.8

 Construction............................................................... 6.8 112.4 7.5 1,056 0.8

 Manufacturing............................................................ 3.1 119.7 3.2 1,347 -4.1

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 18.1 372.4 1.8 892 -0.8

 Information................................................................. 1.5 34.0 0.4 1,392 -6.9

 Financial activities...................................................... 10.7 176.3 4.0 1,253 -2.2

 Professional and business services........................... 20.5 327.9 0.5 1,057 0.0

 Education and health services................................... 10.8 297.0 2.7 1,000 -2.2

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 7.8 213.0 2.9 490 4.0

 Other services............................................................ 6.1 50.1 -2.5 730 2.1

 Government.................................................................. 0.7 213.5 0.4 1,089 0.3

Dallas, TX........................................................................ 76.7 1,691.1 1.9 1,213 -1.9

 Private industry............................................................. 76.1 1,518.6 2.2 1,218 -2.0

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.5 8.8 7.9 3,601 0.3

 Construction............................................................... 4.6 88.6 2.5 1,233 -1.0

 Manufacturing............................................................ 2.8 112.7 1.3 1,438 -6.0

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 16.0 346.1 2.9 1,052 -5.5

 Information................................................................. 1.4 48.2 -3.3 1,813 -0.2

 Financial activities...................................................... 9.5 166.7 4.1 1,673 0.4

 Professional and business services........................... 17.2 343.4 1.5 1,408 -1.2

 Education and health services................................... 9.6 198.4 2.0 1,078 -1.1

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 6.9 161.5 2.0 515 2.0

 Other services............................................................ 6.9 42.8 0.5 812 -0.5

 Government.................................................................. 0.6 172.5 -0.5 1,171 -1.0

Orange, CA...................................................................... 120.4 1,598.6 1.4 1,135 -1.1

 Private industry............................................................. 119.0 1,454.8 1.6 1,122 -1.1

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.2 2.8 -4.4 894 -4.9

 Construction............................................................... 6.8 103.1 3.8 1,338 1.4

 Manufacturing............................................................ 4.9 157.4 -1.0 1,385 -2.7

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 17.1 259.1 0.8 1,029 0.5

 Information................................................................. 1.4 26.5 0.4 1,945 1.8

 Financial activities...................................................... 11.3 117.9 0.3 1,813 1.2

 Professional and business services........................... 20.8 303.8 0.7 1,285 -2.1

 Education and health services................................... 33.6 211.1 3.7 953 -1.4

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 8.7 218.0 1.6 506 -0.8

 Other services............................................................ 6.8 45.3 -1.1 713 -0.6

 Government.................................................................. 1.4 143.9 -0.7 1,267 -2.6

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

third quarter 2017 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 1

County by NAICS supersector

Establishments,

third quarter

2017

(thousands)

September

2017

(thousands)

Percent

change,

September

2016-172

Third

quarter

2017

Percent

change,

third quarter

2016-172

San Diego, CA................................................................ 110.9 1,439.5 1.2 $1,112 -1.6

 Private industry............................................................. 108.9 1,208.2 1.4 1,073 -1.0

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.6 9.4 -1.5 774 5.6

 Construction............................................................... 7.0 81.0 4.6 1,203 0.1

 Manufacturing............................................................ 3.2 108.4 0.3 1,533 -2.9

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 14.3 225.3 0.9 891 -0.8

 Information................................................................. 1.2 24.1 -1.4 2,107 7.0

 Financial activities...................................................... 10.1 73.5 1.0 1,419 -1.3

 Professional and business services........................... 18.3 232.1 0.6 1,471 -1.6

 Education and health services................................... 31.8 199.2 2.2 963 -0.7

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 8.4 195.5 0.2 502 -0.6

 Other services............................................................ 7.3 51.5 0.3 625 -0.8

 Government.................................................................. 1.9 231.3 0.2 1,329 -3.5

King, WA......................................................................... 86.2 1,367.1 2.8 1,626 2.7

 Private industry............................................................. 85.6 1,202.3 3.2 1,659 2.5

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.4 3.2 -0.9 1,355 11.9

 Construction............................................................... 6.8 71.9 4.3 1,363 0.0

 Manufacturing............................................................ 2.5 101.9 -2.5 1,601 -1.0

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 14.4 269.1 6.6 1,513 8.1

 Information................................................................. 2.3 105.0 5.2 5,099 3.4

 Financial activities...................................................... 6.7 68.2 1.8 1,631 -0.8

 Professional and business services........................... 18.0 225.9 2.2 1,669 0.4

 Education and health services................................... 18.0 171.1 2.7 1,033 -1.9

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 7.3 141.2 2.8 596 2.2

 Other services............................................................ 9.3 44.7 1.3 873 -4.2

 Government.................................................................. 0.5 164.8 -0.3 1,382 2.5

Miami-Dade, FL............................................................... 97.5 1,092.6 -1.7 984 -0.1

 Private industry............................................................. 97.2 954.5 -1.9 951 -0.7

 Natural resources and mining.................................... 0.5 7.1 -6.8 628 -1.9

 Construction............................................................... 6.5 42.9 -3.8 955 -1.1

 Manufacturing............................................................ 2.8 40.0 -1.4 881 -9.0

 Trade, transportation, and utilities.............................. 25.3 274.4 -1.4 892 -0.7

 Information................................................................. 1.5 17.4 -1.6 1,602 -10.2

 Financial activities...................................................... 10.6 74.7 0.4 1,476 -0.7

 Professional and business services........................... 21.9 151.7 -2.1 1,105 -1.1

 Education and health services................................... 10.5 175.4 -0.6 965 -1.1

 Leisure and hospitality............................................... 7.2 132.0 -4.9 639 8.1

 Other services............................................................ 8.3 37.3 -5.1 625 -0.2

 Government.................................................................. 0.3 138.1 0.2 1,225 3.2

1 Average weekly wages were calculated using unrounded data.

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

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

Note: Data are preliminary. Counties selected are based on 2016 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,

third quarter 2017

Employment Average weekly wage 1

State

Establishments,

third quarter

2017

(thousands)

September

2017

(thousands)

Percent

change,

September

2016-17

Third

quarter

2017

Percent

change,

third quarter

2016-17

United States2.......................................... 9,916.5 144,464.4 1.0 $1,021 -0.6

Alabama.................................................... 125.5 1,941.1 0.8 859 -1.3

Alaska........................................................ 22.2 335.4 -0.7 1,025 -2.8

Arizona...................................................... 158.6 2,760.1 2.4 948 -0.2

Arkansas................................................... 89.7 1,213.0 0.6 788 -0.6

California................................................... 1,534.7 17,153.4 1.7 1,215 0.5

Colorado.................................................... 200.0 2,625.9 1.9 1,067 0.5

Connecticut............................................... 119.2 1,676.3 0.1 1,179 -2.2

Delaware................................................... 32.3 443.0 0.4 1,026 0.4

District of Columbia................................... 40.4 764.7 0.7 1,759 1.3

Florida....................................................... 677.2 8,305.8 -0.2 896 -1.1

Georgia...................................................... 276.0 4,343.5 1.3 961 -0.9

Hawaii........................................................ 41.9 652.5 0.4 953 -0.3

Idaho......................................................... 61.7 722.3 2.7 778 -0.5

Illinois........................................................ 367.3 5,969.6 0.5 1,057 -0.3

Indiana....................................................... 164.6 3,044.0 0.6 861 -0.6

Iowa........................................................... 102.2 1,546.1 -0.2 855 -2.2

Kansas...................................................... 90.4 1,376.4 -0.1 839 -2.1

Kentucky.................................................... 121.9 1,890.4 0.5 837 -2.4

Louisiana................................................... 131.9 1,904.3 -0.1 869 -1.7

Maine......................................................... 54.7 621.9 0.7 821 -0.5

Maryland.................................................... 170.1 2,661.8 0.5 1,105 -1.7

Massachusetts.......................................... 255.0 3,568.0 0.9 1,265 -0.9

Michigan.................................................... 245.2 4,334.3 0.9 964 -1.1

Minnesota.................................................. 171.2 2,883.0 1.1 1,030 -2.0

Mississippi................................................. 73.4 1,129.1 -0.1 729 -1.4

Missouri..................................................... 209.3 2,805.8 0.9 878 -1.2

Montana.................................................... 49.1 468.6 0.9 793 0.1

Nebraska................................................... 73.5 973.3 -0.2 850 -0.8

Nevada...................................................... 81.3 1,337.7 2.9 914 -3.8

New Hampshire......................................... 52.5 659.1 0.6 1,022 -0.4

New Jersey............................................... 270.6 4,043.6 1.1 1,156 -1.5

New Mexico............................................... 58.2 816.0 0.3 823 -0.8

New York.................................................. 650.3 9,329.8 1.2 1,219 -0.2

North Carolina........................................... 274.0 4,348.0 1.3 904 -0.7

North Dakota............................................. 32.0 419.2 -1.0 953 -1.2

Ohio........................................................... 297.0 5,383.6 0.6 920 -0.8

Oklahoma.................................................. 111.0 1,593.3 0.7 843 -1.2

Oregon...................................................... 152.1 1,905.3 1.8 969 -0.1

Pennsylvania............................................. 358.1 5,836.5 1.0 1,002 -1.1

Rhode Island............................................. 37.5 484.5 0.8 973 -1.8

South Carolina.......................................... 129.5 2,027.2 0.8 828 -0.5

South Dakota............................................ 33.4 426.2 0.4 803 -0.7

Tennessee................................................. 158.2 2,953.3 1.1 903 -1.2

Texas......................................................... 675.5 12,008.9 1.4 1,032 -1.0

Utah........................................................... 99.8 1,444.1 2.6 879 -0.2

Vermont..................................................... 25.6 310.3 0.1 869 -1.4

Virginia...................................................... 272.2 3,843.6 1.0 1,053 -0.8

Washington............................................... 238.6 3,343.4 2.0 1,208 1.7

West Virginia............................................. 50.6 694.0 0.2 826 1.1

Wisconsin.................................................. 173.4 2,866.9 0.5 876 -1.0

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

third quarter 2017 - Continued

Employment Average weekly wage 1

State

Establishments,

third quarter

2017

(thousands)

September

2017

(thousands)

Percent

change,

September

2016-17

Third

quarter

2017

Percent

change,

third quarter

2016-17

Wyoming................................................... 26.3 276.2 0.3 $868 0.3

Puerto Rico............................................... 46.3 862.8 -3.1 509 -2.7

Virgin Islands............................................ 3.4 36.9 -1.1 763 -1.9

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

September 2016-17 (U.S. average = 1.0 percent)

 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, third quarter 2016-17 (U.S. average = -0.6 percent)

Higher than U.S. average

U.S. average or lower

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics