25

E. Employment Composition:

Variation Across States

and Metropolitan Areas

Fatemeh Hajiha and Laurie Salmon

Fatemeh Hajiha is an economist in the Division of Occupational

Employment Statistics, Bureau of Labor Statistics, and Laurie Salmon

is a supervisory economist in the same division.

The distribution of employment by occupation in a geographic area reflects the history and industrial andeconomic composition of the area. As a result, certain occupations may be more concentrated in particular

States or metropolitan areas. This article examines areas with

different staffing patterns to demonstrate the variability in

occupational composition among states. It also uses maps

to show how the concentration of occupations and occupational groups varies by area. The maps show the relative

importance of occupations in each area.

The national distribution of employment by occupation

was presented in chart A1, in the first article of this publication. Occupational composition of State and metropolitan

area workforces, though, can look quite different. For example, the Nation’s capital, the District of Columbia, has an

economic structure that does not resemble that of any State.

Chart E1 displays the District’s occupational employment

distribution, along with that of Arkansas. As in the Nation

as a whole, the largest occupational group in both the District of Columbia and Arkansas is office and administrative

support occupations; among the smallest in both is farming,

fishing, and forestry. However, the similarity of the distributions ends at their extreme points. The concentrations of the

District’s employment in 7 of the 22 occupational groups are

higher than those of any State in the Nation. They are legal;

business and financial operations; management; life, physical, and social science; arts, design, entertainment, sports,

and media; computer and mathematical; and protective service occupations. At the other extreme, the concentrations

of employment in eight major occupational groups are lower

 E.

Major occupational group

 Chart E1. Employment distribution in the District of Columbia and in Arkansas, by major occupational

 group, May 2004

0 5 10 15 20 25

District of Columbia

Arkansas

Management 

Business and financial operations 

Computer and mathematical 

Architecture and engineering 

Life, physical, and social science 

Community and social services 

Legal 

Education, training, and library 

Arts, design, entertainment, sports, and media 

Healthcare practitioners and technical 

Healthcare support 

Protective service 

Food preparation and serving related 

Building and grounds cleaning and maintenance 

Personal care and service 

Sales and related 

Office and administrative support 

Farming, fishing, and forestry 

Construction and extraction 

Installation, maintenance, and repair 

Production 

Transportation and material moving 

Percent of employment
26

than those of any State. They are sales and related; production; transportation and material moving; healthcare practitioners and technical; construction and extraction; installation, maintenance, and repair; food preparation and serving

related; and farming, fishing, and forestry occupations.

While the District of Columbia is unique, in part due to its

small size, urban nature, and government-dominated economic sector, divergence from the national occupational composition also can be seen for States. For example, chart E1

also shows the employment distribution for Arkansas. Arkansas has a much higher than average share of its employment in transportation and material-moving occupations and

production occupations, and among the lowest shares of

employment in architecture and engineering occupations and

personal care and service occupations.

Chart E2 depicts the variation in occupational employment concentrations among the 50 States. For each occupational group, there is a shaded band. The left edge of that

band represents the minimum concentration of State employment in the occupational group, while the right edge of the

band shows the maximum employment concentration in that

occupational group. The dividing line inside each band shows

the mean State concentration.

For instance, the left edge of the band for office and administrative support occupations indicates that employment

in this group accounts for 14 percent of employment in the

State with the lowest concentration of this occupational

group (in this case, Wyoming). The right edge of the band

shows that, in the State with the highest employment concentration of office and administrative support occupations

(Delaware, in this case), 21 percent of the workforce is found

in this group.

The bands in chart E2 encapsulate the variation in occupational concentrations among the 50 States. The chart

shows that office and administrative support occupations

account for the highest concentration of employment in all

50 States: the left edge of the band representing office and

administrative support occupations is to the right of the right

edge of any other bar. Not discernable in chart E2 is the fact

that, in 45 of the 50 States, farming, fishing, and forestry

occupations account for the lowest concentration of employment, and that legal occupations account for the second-lowest concentration of employment.

Chart E2 shows interstate variations in employment concentrations. Dividing the range for each group (maximum

minus minimum) by the average reveals that the interstate

variations in occupational concentration are lowest in office

and administrative support occupations, followed by sales

and related; installation, maintenance, and repair; healthcare

practitioners and technical; transportation and material-moving; and food preparation and serving related occupations.

At the other extreme, the interstate variations in occupational concentration are highest in the farming, fishing, and

forestry occupational group, even though it is the smallest

or second-smallest group in all 50 States. Employment concentrations also are highly variable in life, physical, and social science occupations; personal care and service occupations; computer and mathematical occupations; production

occupations; community and social services occupations;

and construction and extraction occupations.

The differences in occupational composition by State are

best seen graphically. The maps on the following pages

display the relative shares of each State’s workforce in various occupational groups. For example, because of its size,

Chart E2. Minimum, average, and maximum employment concentrations among States by 

 major occupational group, May 2004

Percent of employment

Major occupational group

0 10 20 30

Minimum Maximum Average

Life, physical, and social science

Management

Computer and mathematical 

Architecture and engineering

Business and financial operations

Healthcare practitioners and technical

Arts, design, entertainment, sports, and media

Education, training, and library

Construction and extraction

Installation, maintenance, and repair

Community and social services

Protective service

Sales and related

Production

Office and administrative support

Transportation and material moving

Healthcare support

Personal care and service

Building and grounds cleaning and maintenance

Farming, fishing, and forestry

Food preparation and serving related

Legal
27

California has one of the highest employment levels for

healthcare practitioners and technical occupations, but it

has one of the lowest concentrations of its workers in these

occupations. As this article has demonstrated, there are

some significant variations among States within certain

groups. The maps show that some of the differences are

regional. The States with the largest shares of production

occupations, for instance, are primarily located in the North

Central and Southeast regions of the country. Although the

industries present in these States may vary, they employ

similar numbers of production workers. In contrast, the share

of workers in management occupations is highest in Virginia

and Maryland. These differences by State affect each State’s

overall income level, at the same time that they reflect the

State’s history and economic structure.

The metropolitan area maps that follow the State maps

provide similar information. They show concentrations of

workers in specific occupations by metropolitan area rather

than by State. For some of the most common detailed occupations, such as retail salespersons and registered nurses,

the highest concentration of these workers appears in smaller

metropolitan areas with less diverse staffing patterns than

bigger cities. In contrast, some industry-specific occupations are largely found in the metropolitan areas in which

those industries are concentrated. For example, the map of

lawyers identifies several Eastern metropolitan areas, particularly the District of Columbia, as having the heaviest

concentrations of lawyers. Similarly, restaurant cooks are

found in greater numbers in metropolitan areas that are major

tourist destinations. In many cases, the cities that have the

largest employment in a given occupation are not among

those with a high share of employment in that occupation,

simply because there are many workers in a greater range of

occupations in large cities.