COUNTY EMPLOYMENT AND WAGES IN MASSACHUSETTS
SECOND QUARTER 2007
In the second quarter of 2007, average weekly wages in Middlesex County increased 6.0 percent over the year, the largest advance among Massachusetts' nine large counties with 75,000 or more jobs as measured by 2006 annual average employment, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor. Suffolk County's 4.7-percent wage growth was second fastest in the State, followed by Essex County's 4.5-percent increase. Suffolk County had the highest average weekly wage level in Massachusetts at $1,284, followed by Middlesex County ($1,179) and Norfolk County ($986). (See table 1.) Regional Commissioner Denis McSweeney noted that nationally, average weekly wages grew at a 4.6-percent pace, averaging $820 in the second quarter of 2007.
County Wage Levels
Three of Massachusetts' nine large counties-Suffolk, Middlesex, and Norfolk-had average weekly wage levels exceeding $900 in the second quarter of 2007. Essex County had the fourth-highest wage level ($879), followed by Worcester County ($843). All five of these large counties recorded wage levels greater than the nationwide average of $820 and ranked in the top third nationally among the 328 large counties in the United States. More specifically, the average weekly wage in Suffolk County was $464 or 57 percent above the national level, ranking 9th highest nationwide. In Middlesex County, the average weekly wage was $359 or 44 percent above that for the nation and placed 13th.
At the other end of the wage spectrum, Barnstable County ($708), reported the lowest average weekly wage in the State and was the only county to place in the bottom third of the national ranking at 234th.
Average weekly wages were higher than the national average in 110 of the largest 328 U.S. counties in the second quarter of 2007. New York County, N.Y., held the top position among the highest-paid large counties with an average weekly wage of $1,540. Santa Clara, Calif., was second with an average weekly wage of $1,504, followed by Clayton, Ga. ($1,358), Washington, D.C. ($1,357), and Arlington, Va. ($1,352). Three of the 10 counties with the highest wages in the United States were located in the greater New York metropolitan area (New York, N.Y., Somerset, N.J., and Fairfield, Conn.); 3 others were located in or around the San Francisco area (Santa Clara, Calif., San Francisco, Calif., and San Mateo, Calif.), while 2 others were located in or around the Washington D.C. metropolitan area (Arlington, Va., and Washington, D.C.). Rounding out the top 10 were Clayton, Ga., part of the Atlanta metropolitan area, and Suffolk County, Mass., part of the Boston metropolitan area.
There were 218 counties with an average weekly wage below the national average in the second quarter of 2007. The lowest average weekly wage was reported in Cameron County, Texas ($515), followed by the counties of Hidalgo, Texas ($518), Horry, S.C., and Webb, Texas ($545 each), and Yakima, Wash. ($555). The average weekly wage in the lowest-paid county, Cameron, was approximately one-third the wage in the highest-paid county, New York.
County Wage Changes
Middlesex County's 6.0-percent wage gain was the largest increase in the State from the second quarter of 2006 to the second quarter of 2007 and ranked 46th highest in the nation. Two counties recorded wage growth close to the national increase of 4.6 percent-Suffolk (4.7 percent,107th) and Essex (4.5 percent,122nd). Norfolk County (1.2 percent, 302nd) reported the lowest wage growth in the State and ranked in the bottom quartile nationally. The remaining five counties registered wage growth rates ranging from 3.6 to 3.8 percent and were in the middle of the national ranking.
Among the largest counties, Clayton County, Ga., led the nation in growth in average weekly wages, with an increase of 87.3 percent from the second quarter of 2006 to the second quarter of 2007. Clayton County's over-the-year gain in average weekly wages in 2007 was due to increases in wage disbursements in the trade, transportation, and utilities supersector during the quarter. Queens, N.Y., was second with growth of 12.7 percent, followed by the counties of Rockingham, N.H. (10.1 percent), Ventura, Calif. (9.2 percent), and Lake, Ill. (9.1 percent).
Nationally, six large counties experienced over-the-year declines in average weekly wages. Saginaw, Mich., had the largest decline (-5.2 percent), followed by Orleans County, La. (-2.9 percent).
State Average Weekly Wages
The average weekly wage in Massachusetts was $1,008, $188 above the nationwide figure and the 4th highest wage among the 50 states and the District of Columbia. (See table 2.) Nationally, 9 of the 16 areas in which the average weekly wage levels surpassed the U.S. average fell in a contiguous band along the East Coast stretching from Virginia to New Hampshire. The five highest wage levels in the nation were in the District of Columbia ($1,357), Connecticut ($1,033), New York ($1,020), Massachusetts, and New Jersey ($989). Average weekly wages in this group were 32 percent above that for the nation. During this same period, three states had wage levels averaging less than 75 percent of national earnings: South Dakota ($590), Mississippi ($609), and Montana ($611).
Wyoming experienced wage growth of 8.0 percent from the second quarter of 2006 to the second quarter of 2007, higher than any other state. Five other states experienced wage growth from 6.6 to 6.3 percent during this period-Utah, Georgia, Connecticut, Montana and New Hampshire. At the other end of the scale, Delaware posted the smallest increase in wages, up 2.2 percent. No state experienced an over-the-year decrease.
Average weekly wage data by county are compiled under the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) program, also known as the ES-202 program. The data are derived from reports submitted by employers subject to state and federal unemployment insurance (UI) laws. The 8.9 million employer reports cover 137.0 million full- and part-time workers. The average weekly wage values are calculated by dividing quarterly total wages by the average of the three monthly employment levels. This number then is divided by 13, the number of weeks in a quarter. It is to be noted, therefore, that over-the-year wage changes for geographic areas may reflect shifts in the composition of employment by industry, occupation, and such other factors as hours of work. Thus, wages may vary among counties, metropolitan areas, or states for reasons other than changes in the average wage level. Data for all states, Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs), counties, and the nation are available on the BLS Web site at www.bls.gov/cew/; however, data in QCEW press releases have been revised (see Technical Note below) and may not match the data contained on the Bureau's Web site.
Additional statistics and other information
An annual bulletin, Employment and Wages, features comprehensive information by detailed industry on establishments, employment, and wages for the nation and all states. The 2006 edition of this bulletin will contain selected data produced by Business Employment Dynamics (BED) on job gains and losses, as well as selected data from the first quarter 2007 version of the national news release. As with the 2005 edition, this edition will include the data on a CD for enhanced access and usability with the printed booklet containing selected graphic representations of QCEW data; the data tables themselves will be published exclusively in electronic formats as PDFs. Employment and Wages Annual Averages, 2006 will be available for sale in early 2008 from the United States Government Printing Office, Superintendent of Documents, P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250, telephone (866) 512-1800, outside Washington, D.C. Within Washington, D.C., the telephone number is (202) 512-1800. The fax number is (202) 512-2104.
QCEW-based news releases issued by other regional offices have been placed at one convenient BLS Web site location, www.bls.gov/cew/cewregional.htm.
For personal assistance or further information on the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages Program, as well as other Bureau programs, contact the Boston Information Office at (617) 565-2327 from 8:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. and 1:30 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. ET.
TECHNICAL NOTE
QCEW data are the sums of individual establishment records reflecting the number of establishments that exist in a county or industry at a point in time. For this reason, county and industry data are not designed to be used as a time series.
The preliminary QCEW data presented in this release may differ from data released by the individual states as well as from the data presented on the BLS Web site. The potential differences result from several causes. Differences between BLS and state published data may be due to the continuing receipt, review and editing of UI data over time. On the other hand, differences between data in this release and the data found on the BLS Web site are the result of adjustments made to improve over-the-year comparisons. Specifically, these adjustments account for administrative (noneconomic) changes such as a correction to a previously reported location or industry classification. Adjusting for these administrative changes allows users to more accurately assess changes of an economic nature (such as a firm moving from one county to another or changing its primary economic activity) over a 12-month period. Currently, adjusted data are available only from BLS press releases.
|
Bureau of Labor Statistics
