Technical Contact: USDL: 06-1680 (202) 691-6199 NCSinfo@bls.gov Media Contact: FOR RELEASE: 10:00 A.M. EDT (202) 691-5902 THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 2006 Internet address: http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ocs/home.htm OCCUPATIONAL PAY RELATIVES, 2005 The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) of the U.S. Department of Labor produces relative occupational pay comparisons between metropolitan areas and the United States as a whole. Using data from the National Compensation Survey (NCS), pay relatives-a means of assessing relative pay differences—have been prepared for 2005 for each of the 9 major occupational groups within 78 Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs), as well as averaged across all occupations for each area. (See table 1.) In addition, for the first time, similar area-to-area comparisons have been calculated for all 78 areas and soon will be available on the BLS website at http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ocs/payrel.htm. The pay relative in 2005 for workers in construction and extraction occupations in the San Francisco MSA was 123, meaning the pay in San Francisco in that occupational group averaged 23 percent more than the national average pay for that occupational group. The pay relative averaged across all occupations in the San Francisco MSA was 117, meaning that pay on average was 17 percent above the national average. By contrast, the pay relative for workers in construction and extraction occupations in the Brownsville, Texas MSA was 72, meaning pay for workers in those occupations averaged 28 percent less than the national average. Pay averaged across all occupations in the Brownsville area was 19 percent below the national average. Pay relatives calculated for all occupations were significantly different from the national average in 64 of the 78 areas. The National Compensation Survey (NCS), introduced in 1997, collects earnings and other data on employee compensation covering over 820 detailed occupations in 152 metropolitan and non-metropolitan areas. Average occupational earnings from the NCS are published annually for more than 80 metropolitan areas and for the United States as a whole. What is a pay relative? 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. Metropolitan areas differ greatly in the types of occupations that are available to the local workforce. For example, in Brownsville, Texas, the ratio of workers in the high-paying management, business, and financial occupational group to the number of workers in all occupations is approximately 5 percent, whereas nationally this ratio is nearly 9 percent.1 Similarly, the composition of establishment and occupational characteristics varies by area. 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 wage determination. To illustrate the importance of controlling for these effects, consider the following example. The average pay for professional workers in San Francisco is $39.41 and the average pay for professional workers in the entire United States is $30.24.2 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: ($39.41/$30.24)X100=130 However, this comparison does not control for the interarea difference in occupational composition. Some of the 30 percent pay premium in San Francisco relative to the nation as a whole is due to the higher concentration of highly compensated professional workers in San Francisco. A more accurate estimate of the geographic effect on wage determination in San Francisco can be obtained by taking into account this and other differences. Controlling for the differences in occupational composition, establishment and occupational characteristics, and the payroll reference date in San Francisco relative to the nation as the whole, the pay relative for professional and related occupations in San Francisco is equal to 117. Using pay relative data Because the NCS is a sample survey, pay relatives derived from the NCS will differ to some extent from the true pay relatives that could be calculated only by collecting information on every job in every establishment. For similar reasons, pay relatives derived from the NCS may fluctuate from one year to the next. To assist data users with the use of these data, tests have been conducted to determine whether differences between each pay relative and the pay relative for the nation as a whole are statistically significant (that is, the pay for the given occupation in that area is too different from the national average to be accounted for by the randomness of the survey’s sample). Similar tests are conducted for the area-to-area comparisons. In all tables, statistically significant pay relatives are denoted with an asterisk (*). More information on significance testing is available in the Technical Note. Also because of sample variation from year to year, data users are cautioned about inferring that there have been actual changes in underlying economic conditions from changes in the estimated pay relatives between 2004 and 2005. This caution applies even more strongly to estimates by occupational group. 1 Data for this example are based on the May 2005 Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oessrcma.htm. 2 Average pay for professional workers in San Francisco and for the United States are based on wage estimates published in the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA National Compensation Survey, March 2005 and the National Compensation Survey: Occupational Wages in the United States, June 2005, http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ocs/compub.htm. TABLE 1. Pay relatives for major occupational groups in metropolitan areas, National Compensation Survey, July 2005 (Average pay nationally for all occupations and for each occupational group shown = 100.) Management, Metropolitan Area1 All business, occupations and financial United States......................... 100 100 Amarillo, TX.......................... 89* 78* Anchorage, AK......................... 110* 112* Atlanta, GA........................... 103* 105 Augusta-Aiken, GA-SC.................. 97* 90* Austin-San Marcos, TX................. 96* 91* Birmingham, AL........................ 95* 91* Bloomington, IN....................... 94* 97 Boston-Worcester-Lawrence, MA-NH-ME-CT 112* 110* Brownsville-Harlingen-San Benito, TX.. 81* 82* Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY............. 103* 87* Charleston-North Charleston, SC....... 92* 89* Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC-SC... 97 93* Chicago-Gary-Kenosha, IL-IN-WI........ 108* 107* Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN......... 100 97 Cleveland-Akron, OH................... 100 91* Columbus, OH.......................... 101 107* Corpus Christi, TX.................... 87* 87* Dallas-Fort Worth, TX................. 99 101 Dayton-Springfield, OH................ 98* 100 Denver-Boulder-Greeley, CO............ 101 94 Detroit-Ann Arbor-Flint, MI........... 106* 101 Elkhart-Goshen, IN.................... 98* 101 Fort Collins-Loveland, CO............. 96* 90* Grand Rapids-Muskegon-Holland, MI..... 103* 98* Great Falls, MT....................... 90* 90* Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point, NC.................................... 99* 102 Greenville-Spartanburg-Anderson, SC... 97* 99 Hartford, CT.......................... 112* 106 Hickory-Morganton-Lenoir, NC.......... 97* 90* Honolulu, HI.......................... 103* 99 Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, TX........ 97* 98 Huntsville, AL........................ 95* 98 Indianapolis, IN...................... 99 92* Iowa City, IA......................... 101 94* See footnotes at end of table. (Continued) (Average pay nationally for all occupations and for each occupational group shown = 100.) Metropolitan Area1 Professional Service and related United States......................... 100 100 Amarillo, TX.......................... 87* 86* Anchorage, AK......................... 103 121* Atlanta, GA........................... 101 97* Augusta-Aiken, GA-SC.................. 101 91* Austin-San Marcos, TX................. 93* 94* Birmingham, AL........................ 92* 100 Bloomington, IN....................... 90* 93* Boston-Worcester-Lawrence, MA-NH-ME-CT 107* 113* Brownsville-Harlingen-San Benito, TX.. 97* 77* Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY............. 93* 109* Charleston-North Charleston, SC....... 94* 85* Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC-SC... 93* 98 Chicago-Gary-Kenosha, IL-IN-WI........ 107* 106* Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN......... 99 101 Cleveland-Akron, OH................... 99 98 Columbus, OH.......................... 96 98 Corpus Christi, TX.................... 92* 83* Dallas-Fort Worth, TX................. 102 95* Dayton-Springfield, OH................ 95* 96* Denver-Boulder-Greeley, CO............ 103* 98 Detroit-Ann Arbor-Flint, MI........... 107* 103* Elkhart-Goshen, IN.................... 100 93* Fort Collins-Loveland, CO............. 94* 91* Grand Rapids-Muskegon-Holland, MI..... 97* 105* Great Falls, MT....................... 84* 93* Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point, NC.................................... 93* 98 Greenville-Spartanburg-Anderson, SC... 92* 95* Hartford, CT.......................... 109* 121* Hickory-Morganton-Lenoir, NC.......... 96* 92* Honolulu, HI.......................... 108* 106* Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, TX........ 101 87* Huntsville, AL........................ 96* 92* Indianapolis, IN...................... 98 101 Iowa City, IA......................... 100 106* See footnotes at end of table. (Continued) (Average pay nationally for all occupations and for each occupational group shown = 100.) Office and Metropolitan Area1 Sales and administrat- related ive support United States......................... 100 100 Amarillo, TX.......................... 91* 89* Anchorage, AK......................... 106 107* Atlanta, GA........................... 101 106* Augusta-Aiken, GA-SC.................. 84* 99 Austin-San Marcos, TX................. 101 98* Birmingham, AL........................ 97 97* Bloomington, IN....................... 94* 90* Boston-Worcester-Lawrence, MA-NH-ME-CT 113* 116* Brownsville-Harlingen-San Benito, TX.. 86* 78* Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY............. 104* 99 Charleston-North Charleston, SC....... 100 96* Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC-SC... 85 99 Chicago-Gary-Kenosha, IL-IN-WI........ 108* 111* Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN......... 108* 102 Cleveland-Akron, OH................... 98 102 Columbus, OH.......................... 117 100 Corpus Christi, TX.................... 92* 86* Dallas-Fort Worth, TX................. 107* 99 Dayton-Springfield, OH................ 99 92* Denver-Boulder-Greeley, CO............ 103 104* Detroit-Ann Arbor-Flint, MI........... 102 104* Elkhart-Goshen, IN.................... 97 92* Fort Collins-Loveland, CO............. 99* 96* Grand Rapids-Muskegon-Holland, MI..... 112* 101* Great Falls, MT....................... 90* 82* Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point, NC.................................... 104* 100 Greenville-Spartanburg-Anderson, SC... 91* 98* Hartford, CT.......................... 113* 112* Hickory-Morganton-Lenoir, NC.......... 97* 100 Honolulu, HI.......................... 100 99 Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, TX........ 98 98 Huntsville, AL........................ 95 96* Indianapolis, IN...................... 96 98 Iowa City, IA......................... 95* 103* See footnotes at end of table. (Continued) (Average pay nationally for all occupations and for each occupational group shown = 100.) Construction Installation, Metropolitan Area1 and maintenance, extraction and repair United States......................... 100 100 Amarillo, TX.......................... 85* 84* Anchorage, AK......................... 123* 108* Atlanta, GA........................... 103 105* Augusta-Aiken, GA-SC.................. 83* 100 Austin-San Marcos, TX................. 95* 98 Birmingham, AL........................ 84* 90* Bloomington, IN....................... 83* 98 Boston-Worcester-Lawrence, MA-NH-ME-CT 118* 112* Brownsville-Harlingen-San Benito, TX.. 72* 80* Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY............. 108* 98* Charleston-North Charleston, SC....... 82* 87* Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC-SC... 96 98 Chicago-Gary-Kenosha, IL-IN-WI........ 124* 111* Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN......... 87* 99 Cleveland-Akron, OH................... 102 108* Columbus, OH.......................... 102 98 Corpus Christi, TX.................... 78* 80* Dallas-Fort Worth, TX................. 89* 95* Dayton-Springfield, OH................ 107* 106* Denver-Boulder-Greeley, CO............ 95 110* Detroit-Ann Arbor-Flint, MI........... 112* 103 Elkhart-Goshen, IN.................... 100 87* Fort Collins-Loveland, CO............. 98 102 Grand Rapids-Muskegon-Holland, MI..... 122* 96* Great Falls, MT....................... 125* 103 Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point, NC.................................... 96* 98* Greenville-Spartanburg-Anderson, SC... 81* 87* Hartford, CT.......................... 118* 107 Hickory-Morganton-Lenoir, NC.......... 83* 90* Honolulu, HI.......................... 107 110* Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, TX........ 91* 97 Huntsville, AL........................ 97 90* Indianapolis, IN...................... 96 102 Iowa City, IA......................... 104* 91* See footnotes at end of table. (Continued) (Average pay nationally for all occupations and for each occupational group shown = 100.) Transporta- Metropolitan Area1 Production tion and material moving United States......................... 100 100 Amarillo, TX.......................... 94* 94* Anchorage, AK......................... 116* 114* Atlanta, GA........................... 99 112* Augusta-Aiken, GA-SC.................. 102 93* Austin-San Marcos, TX................. 98* 93* Birmingham, AL........................ 92* 96* Bloomington, IN....................... 98 108* Boston-Worcester-Lawrence, MA-NH-ME-CT 109* 114* Brownsville-Harlingen-San Benito, TX.. 73* 79* Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY............. 110* 106* Charleston-North Charleston, SC....... 93* 108* Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC-SC... 100 104* Chicago-Gary-Kenosha, IL-IN-WI........ 107* 105 Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN......... 102 101 Cleveland-Akron, OH................... 108* 104 Columbus, OH.......................... 98 99 Corpus Christi, TX.................... 88* 88* Dallas-Fort Worth, TX................. 89* 102 Dayton-Springfield, OH................ 109* 97* Denver-Boulder-Greeley, CO............ 99 105* Detroit-Ann Arbor-Flint, MI........... 118* 105 Elkhart-Goshen, IN.................... 98* 113* Fort Collins-Loveland, CO............. 101 104* Grand Rapids-Muskegon-Holland, MI..... 107* 103* Great Falls, MT....................... 100 86* Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point, NC.................................... 101 105* Greenville-Spartanburg-Anderson, SC... 104* 101 Hartford, CT.......................... 108* 112* Hickory-Morganton-Lenoir, NC.......... 100 107* Honolulu, HI.......................... 96 101 Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, TX........ 99 94* Huntsville, AL........................ 97* 94 Indianapolis, IN...................... 106* 100 Iowa City, IA......................... 95* 103 See footnotes at end of table. (Continued) (Average pay nationally for all occupations and for each occupational group shown = 100.) Management, Metropolitan Area1 All business, occupations and financial Johnstown, PA......................... 89* 90* Kansas City, MO-KS.................... 97* 94* Knoxville, TN......................... 92* 96* Lincoln, NE........................... 89* 91* Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA.................................... 105* 104* Louisville, KY-IN..................... 99 101 Melbourne-Titusville-Palm Bay, FL..... 91* 95* Memphis, TN-AR-MS..................... 94* 92* Miami-Fort Lauderdale, FL............. 95* 97 Milwaukee-Racine, WI.................. 101 102 Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN-WI........... 108* 106* Mobile, AL............................ 94* 103 New Orleans, LA....................... 93* 100 New York-Northern New Jersey- Long Island, NY-NJ-CT-PA................... 112* 113* Norfolk-VA Beach-Newport News, VA-NC.. 93* 92* Ocala, FL............................. 90* 91* Oklahoma City, OK..................... 91* 97* Orlando, FL........................... 93* 93 Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-DE-MD........................... 106* 109* Phoenix-Mesa, AZ...................... 100 95 Pittsburgh, PA........................ 96* 94* Portland-Salem, OR-WA................. 101 101 Providence-Fall River-Warwick, RI-MA.. 108* 115* Reading, PA........................... 103* 122* Reno, NV.............................. 97* 93* Richland-Kennewick-Pasco, WA.......... 102* 100 Richmond-Petersburg, VA............... 98* 99 Rochester, NY......................... 98* 97* Rockford, IL.......................... 101* 88* Sacramento-Yolo, CA................... 107* 107* Salinas, CA........................... 113* 115* San Antonio, TX....................... 90* 92* San Diego, CA......................... 105* 100 San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA.... 117* 112* See footnotes at end of table. (Continued) (Average pay nationally for all occupations and for each occupational group shown = 100.) Metropolitan Area1 Professional Service and related Johnstown, PA......................... 89* 91* Kansas City, MO-KS.................... 92* 95 Knoxville, TN......................... 91* 90* Lincoln, NE........................... 87* 90* Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA.................................... 109* 108* Louisville, KY-IN..................... 99 101 Melbourne-Titusville-Palm Bay, FL..... 83* 93* Memphis, TN-AR-MS..................... 88* 88* Miami-Fort Lauderdale, FL............. 94* 92* Milwaukee-Racine, WI.................. 94* 104 Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN-WI........... 103* 120* Mobile, AL............................ 92* 86* New Orleans, LA....................... 97* 86* New York-Northern New Jersey- Long Island, NY-NJ-CT-PA................... 114* 114* Norfolk-VA Beach-Newport News, VA-NC.. 94* 92* Ocala, FL............................. 86* 91* Oklahoma City, OK..................... 86* 90* Orlando, FL........................... 91* 88* Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-DE-MD........................... 109* 107* Phoenix-Mesa, AZ...................... 102 97 Pittsburgh, PA........................ 95* 97 Portland-Salem, OR-WA................. 94* 112* Providence-Fall River-Warwick, RI-MA.. 110* 116* Reading, PA........................... 98* 100 Reno, NV.............................. 95* 99 Richland-Kennewick-Pasco, WA.......... 96* 112* Richmond-Petersburg, VA............... 97* 98* Rochester, NY......................... 98* 105* Rockford, IL.......................... 99 101 Sacramento-Yolo, CA................... 106* 116* Salinas, CA........................... 122* 117* San Antonio, TX....................... 93* 84* San Diego, CA......................... 110* 114* San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA.... 117* 123* See footnotes at end of table. (Continued) (Average pay nationally for all occupations and for each occupational group shown = 100.) Office and Metropolitan Area1 Sales and administrat- related ive support Johnstown, PA......................... 89* 84* Kansas City, MO-KS.................... 96 100 Knoxville, TN......................... 100 92* Lincoln, NE........................... 81* 88* Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA.................................... 108* 107* Louisville, KY-IN..................... 94* 97* Melbourne-Titusville-Palm Bay, FL..... 94* 87* Memphis, TN-AR-MS..................... 97* 96* Miami-Fort Lauderdale, FL............. 94* 97 Milwaukee-Racine, WI.................. 110 102 Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN-WI........... 109* 106* Mobile, AL............................ 103* 94* New Orleans, LA....................... 106* 92* New York-Northern New Jersey- Long Island, NY-NJ-CT-PA................... 108* 113* Norfolk-VA Beach-Newport News, VA-NC.. 94* 95* Ocala, FL............................. 93* 92* Oklahoma City, OK..................... 87* 87* Orlando, FL........................... 100 93* Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-DE-MD........................... 99 108* Phoenix-Mesa, AZ...................... 107 103 Pittsburgh, PA........................ 93* 98 Portland-Salem, OR-WA................. 106 100 Providence-Fall River-Warwick, RI-MA.. 104* 108* Reading, PA........................... 102 99 Reno, NV.............................. 101 94* Richland-Kennewick-Pasco, WA.......... 107* 98* Richmond-Petersburg, VA............... 97* 99* Rochester, NY......................... 93* 97* Rockford, IL.......................... 100 93* Sacramento-Yolo, CA................... 108 105* Salinas, CA........................... 119* 105* San Antonio, TX....................... 98 90* San Diego, CA......................... 107* 103 San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA.... 113* 121* See footnotes at end of table. (Continued) (Average pay nationally for all occupations and for each occupational group shown = 100.) Construction Installation, Metropolitan Area1 and maintenance, extraction and repair Johnstown, PA......................... 91* 98 Kansas City, MO-KS.................... 96 100 Knoxville, TN......................... 84* 89* Lincoln, NE........................... 85* 100 Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA.................................... 113* 107* Louisville, KY-IN..................... 106* 99 Melbourne-Titusville-Palm Bay, FL..... 93* 100 Memphis, TN-AR-MS..................... 89* 106* Miami-Fort Lauderdale, FL............. 84* 101 Milwaukee-Racine, WI.................. 110* 101 Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN-WI........... 110* 109* Mobile, AL............................ 98 93* New Orleans, LA....................... 84* 92* New York-Northern New Jersey- Long Island, NY-NJ-CT-PA................... 128* 112* Norfolk-VA Beach-Newport News, VA-NC.. 87* 95* Ocala, FL............................. 79* 88* Oklahoma City, OK..................... 91* 99 Orlando, FL........................... 87* 97 Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-DE-MD........................... 107* 106* Phoenix-Mesa, AZ...................... 89* 99 Pittsburgh, PA........................ 97 94* Portland-Salem, OR-WA................. 119* 104 Providence-Fall River-Warwick, RI-MA.. 103* 95* Reading, PA........................... 108* 101 Reno, NV.............................. 92* 106* Richland-Kennewick-Pasco, WA.......... 106* 91* Richmond-Petersburg, VA............... 87* 101 Rochester, NY......................... 90* 85* Rockford, IL.......................... 112* 103* Sacramento-Yolo, CA................... 100 114* Salinas, CA........................... 119* 117* San Antonio, TX....................... 89* 89* San Diego, CA......................... 102 103 San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA.... 123* 112* See footnotes at end of table. (Continued) (Average pay nationally for all occupations and for each occupational group shown = 100.) Transporta- Metropolitan Area1 Production tion and material moving Johnstown, PA......................... 88* 83* Kansas City, MO-KS.................... 104 98 Knoxville, TN......................... 89* 102 Lincoln, NE........................... 89* 91* Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA.................................... 99 97 Louisville, KY-IN..................... 98* 94* Melbourne-Titusville-Palm Bay, FL..... 94* 101 Memphis, TN-AR-MS..................... 97* 95* Miami-Fort Lauderdale, FL............. 97 96 Milwaukee-Racine, WI.................. 103 104 Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN-WI........... 113* 110* Mobile, AL............................ 94* 95* New Orleans, LA....................... 91* 91* New York-Northern New Jersey- Long Island, NY-NJ-CT-PA................... 103 113* Norfolk-VA Beach-Newport News, VA-NC.. 88* 94* Ocala, FL............................. 88* 100 Oklahoma City, OK..................... 94* 98 Orlando, FL........................... 91 100 Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-DE-MD........................... 105 108* Phoenix-Mesa, AZ...................... 95* 103 Pittsburgh, PA........................ 95 99 Portland-Salem, OR-WA................. 95* 98 Providence-Fall River-Warwick, RI-MA.. 104* 107* Reading, PA........................... 103* 105* Reno, NV.............................. 95* 100 Richland-Kennewick-Pasco, WA.......... 94* 97* Richmond-Petersburg, VA............... 96* 106* Rochester, NY......................... 98* 102* Rockford, IL.......................... 106* 104* Sacramento-Yolo, CA................... 104 113* Salinas, CA........................... 103 96 San Antonio, TX....................... 98 90* San Diego, CA......................... 102 97 San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA.... 109* 112* See footnotes at end of table. (Continued) (Average pay nationally for all occupations and for each occupational group shown = 100.) Management, Metropolitan Area1 All business, occupations and financial Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton, WA.......... 107* 96 Springfield, MA....................... 97 105* Springfield, MO....................... 90* 86* St. Louis, MO-IL...................... 100 99 Tallahassee, FL....................... 87* 76* Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL... 93* 93* Visalia-Tulare-Porterville, CA........ 95* 86* Washington-Baltimore, DC-MD-VA-WV..... 106* 101 York, PA.............................. 97* 104* Youngstown-Warren, OH................. 95* 86* See footnotes at end of table. (Continued) (Average pay nationally for all occupations and for each occupational group shown = 100.) Metropolitan Area1 Professional Service and related Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton, WA.......... 100 121* Springfield, MA....................... 112* 108* Springfield, MO....................... 92* 87* St. Louis, MO-IL...................... 96* 96 Tallahassee, FL....................... 88* 89* Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL... 90* 91* Visalia-Tulare-Porterville, CA........ 98* 100 Washington-Baltimore, DC-MD-VA-WV..... 109* 107* York, PA.............................. 99 99* Youngstown-Warren, OH................. 94* 87* See footnotes at end of table. (Continued) (Average pay nationally for all occupations and for each occupational group shown = 100.) Office and Metropolitan Area1 Sales and administrat- related ive support Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton, WA.......... 108* 108* Springfield, MA....................... 108* 112* Springfield, MO....................... 89* 87* St. Louis, MO-IL...................... 98 100 Tallahassee, FL....................... 92* 88* Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL... 89* 98 Visalia-Tulare-Porterville, CA........ 90* 95* Washington-Baltimore, DC-MD-VA-WV..... 100 112* York, PA.............................. 94* 95* Youngstown-Warren, OH................. 97* 87* See footnotes at end of table. (Continued) (Average pay nationally for all occupations and for each occupational group shown = 100.) Construction Installation, Metropolitan Area1 and maintenance, extraction and repair Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton, WA.......... 113* 105 Springfield, MA....................... 110* 108* Springfield, MO....................... 85* 96* St. Louis, MO-IL...................... 117* 101 Tallahassee, FL....................... 90* 85* Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL... 96 94* Visalia-Tulare-Porterville, CA........ 92* 94* Washington-Baltimore, DC-MD-VA-WV..... 102 111* York, PA.............................. 93* 99 Youngstown-Warren, OH................. 96* 96* See footnotes at end of table. (Continued) (Average pay nationally for all occupations and for each occupational group shown = 100.) Transporta- Metropolitan Area1 Production tion and material moving Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton, WA.......... 112* 106* Springfield, MA....................... 116* 73* Springfield, MO....................... 95* 92* St. Louis, MO-IL...................... 102 112* Tallahassee, FL....................... 90* 105* Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL... 92* 98 Visalia-Tulare-Porterville, CA........ 99 95* Washington-Baltimore, DC-MD-VA-WV..... 113* 99 York, PA.............................. 92* 99 Youngstown-Warren, OH................. 103* 110* * The pay relative for this area is significantly different from the national average of all areas at the 10 percent level of significance. For additional details, see the Technical Note. 1 A metropolitan area can be a Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) or Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area (CMSA) as defined by the Office of Management and Budget, 1994. Technical Note Because the NCS is a sample survey, data are subject to sampling error. For the data presented here, sampling error are differences that occur between the pay relatives estimated from the sample and the true pay relatives derived from the population. It is important to assess whether differences between each pay relative and the pay relative for the nation as a whole is likely to be the result of sampling error or of true differences in pay levels. To perform this assessment, a test of statistical significance is conducted. The test constructs a 90-percent confidence interval that assumes the given area’s true pay relative is equal to the national average. The confidence interval is constructed so that there is a 90 percent probability the pay relative calculated from any one sample is contained within the confidence interval. If from a single sample a calculated pay relative falls within the confidence interval, then the pay relative is not statistically significant and the hypothesis that the true pay relative is equal to the national average is accepted. However, if the pay relative falls outside of the constructed confidence interval then the pay relative is statistically significant at the 10-percent level. The hypothesis that the given area’s pay relative is equal to the pay relative for the nation is rejected and one can conclude with reasonable confidence that the true pay relative is different from the national average. In addition to sampling error, pay relatives are subject to a variety of sources that can adversely influence the estimates. The NCS may be unable to obtain information for some establishments; there may be difficulties with survey definitions; respondents may be unable to provide correct information, or mistakes in recording or coding the data may occur. Non-sampling errors of these kinds were not specifically measured. However, they are expected to be minimal due to the extensive training of the field economists who gathered the survey data, computer edits of the data, and detailed data review. Historical pay relative data are available for 1992-1996, 1998, 2002, and 2004. 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 for 2004 and 2005 were calculated using the same industry and occupation classification systems, methodology, and survey design. Nonetheless, comparisons between the estimates for the two years should be made only with a high degree of caution. Pay relatives were estimated using a multivariate regression technique methodology 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 significant 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. The pay relative regression methodology introduces another type of error. Regression models are subject to specification error. The significance test does not specifically measure specification error. However, care was taken to minimize this form of error by an extensive search across specifications for the model that performs best in terms of predictive accuracy. For more details, see Maury B. Gittleman, "Pay Relatives for Metropolitan Areas in the U.S." Monthly Labor Review, March 2005, pp. 46-53, and Parastou Karen Shahpoori, "Pay Relatives for Major Metropolitan Areas," Compensation and Working Conditions, Spring 2003.