New England Information Office

COUNTY EMPLOYMENT AND WAGES IN RHODE ISLAND
Second Quarter 2007

In the second quarter of 2007, average weekly wages in Kent County increased by 3.9 percent over-the-year, the higher rate among Rhode Island's two counties with 75,000 or more jobs as measured by 2006 annual average employment. In Providence County, the average wage rate posted a 2.0-percent wage gain over the previous year. Providence County's average weekly wage level of $801 exceeded Kent County's $717 wage level. (See table 1.) Regional Commissioner Denis McSweeney noted that wage rates for these two large Rhode Island counties were less than the national rate of 4.6 percent and their average wages were below the national level of $820.

County Wage Levels

Among Rhode Island's two large counties, no county had average weekly wage levels in the top third nationally among the 328 large counties in the second quarter of 2007. Average weekly wages in Kent County were 13.0-percent below the national level, ranking in the bottom third nationally (221st) among the 328 largest counties in the U.S. In Providence County, wages were 2.0-percent below that for the nation, ranking in the top half nationally (132nd). Providence and Kent counties had wages falling $19 and $103, respectively, below the national average.

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 U.S. 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), and 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

Rhode Island's two large counties recorded wage growth below the national increase of 4.6 percent in the second quarter of 2007. (See table 1.) As mentioned, Kent County's 3.9-percent wage gain was the larger increase in the State, ranking 163rd highest in the nation, followed by Providence County's 2.0-percent increase, which ranked in the bottom fifth nationally at 288th.

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. Clayton County had the largest over-the-year gain in average weekly wages in the second quarter of 2007 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).

Six counties experienced over-the-year declines in average weekly wages. Saginaw, Mich. had the largest decline, -5.2 percent, followed by the counties of Orleans, La. (-2.9 percent), Lake, Fla. (-1.1 percent), and Genesee, Mich. (-1.0 percent). The two counties with the smallest over-the-year declines were Lorain, Ohio. (-0.9 percent) and Orange, Fla. (-0.1 percent).

State Average Weekly Wages

At the State level, the average weekly wage in Rhode Island was $774, $46 below the nationwide figure. Rhode Island had the 22nd 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 ($1,008), 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), Misssissippi ($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. Utah was second with 6.6 percent wage growth, followed by Georgia at 6.5 percent. Connecticut was fourth averaging 6.4 percent. Montana and New Hampshire were fifth highest at 6.3 percent each. Rhode Island recorded one of the smallest wage gains, 2.5 percent, ranking the 49th highest increase among the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Delaware posted the smallest wage gain, up 2.2 percent. No state experienced over-the-year declines.

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 nearly 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.

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.