The two largest counties in Nebraska reported employment gains from December 2010 to December 2011, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. (Large counties are defined as those with employment of 75,000 or more as measured by 2010 annual average employment.) Regional Commissioner Charlene Peiffer noted that employment rose 1.2 percent in Lancaster County and 0.1 percent in Douglas County, both lower than the national increase of 1.4 percent.

Among the two largest counties in Nebraska, employment was higher in Douglas (315,700) in December 2011. Lancaster County recorded an employment level of 156,200. Collectively, Nebraska’s two large counties accounted for 51.8 percent of the state's employment. Nationwide, the 322 largest counties made up 70.7 percent of total U.S. employment.

The average weekly wage in Douglas County was $858 in the fourth quarter of 2011, a decrease of 2.6 percent from the fourth quarter of 2010. Average weekly wages in Lancaster County were $763, a 0.9- percent decrease from one year earlier. (See table 1.) Nationally, the average weekly wage fell 1.7 percent over the year to $955 in the fourth quarter of 2011.

Employment and wage levels (but not over-the-year changes) are also available for the 91 counties in Nebraska with employment below 75,000. All 91 smaller counties had average weekly wages below the national average of $955. (See table 2.)

Large county wage changes

As noted, average weekly wages in Douglas County fell 2.6 percent, ranking it 224th among the nation's 322 largest counties. Lancaster County ranked 88th nationwide with a 0.9-percent decline in average weekly wages. (See table 1.)

Nationwide, 282 large counties experienced declines in average weekly wages. Olmsted, Minn., had the largest wage loss (-21.3 percent). Douglas, Colo., had the second largest decrease (-8.6 percent), followed by Williamson, Tenn. (-6.7 percent).

Among the 322 largest counties, 36 had over-the-year increases in average weekly wages in the fourth quarter of 2011. Tulsa, Okla., had the largest average weekly wage increase with a gain of 8.6 percent, followed by the counties of Harford, Md. (5.8 percent), Lake, Ohio (4.9 percent), Snohomish, Wash. (3.0 percent) and Westmoreland, Pa (2.9 percent).

Large county average weekly wages

Douglas County’s $858 average weekly wage was below that of the nation, placing it near the middle of the national ranking at 182nd in the fourth quarter of 2011. Lancaster County ranked 278th in the nation with an average weekly wage of $763.

Nationally, New York, N.Y., recorded the highest average weekly wage at $1,889, followed by Santa Clara, Calif. ($1,836), Washington, D.C. ($1,668), Suffolk, Mass. ($1,599), and San Francisco, Calif. ($1,597).

There were 219 large counties with an average weekly wage below the U.S. average in the fourth quarter of 2011. Horry, S.C. ($569), reported the lowest wage, followed by the counties of Cameron, Texas ($597), Hidalgo, Texas ($601), and Yakima, Wash. ($648).

Average weekly wages in Nebraska's smaller counties

Among counties with employment below 75,000, Stanton ($924) and Washington ($922) had average weekly wages above those in the state’s two largest counties. Stanton County also registered the highest average weekly wage of all 93 counties in the state. Arthur County reported the lowest weekly wage in the state, averaging $375 in the fourth quarter of 2011. (See table 2.)

As noted, none of the state’s 93 counties reported wages above the national average of $955. Nine counties reported average weekly wages under $500, 27 reported wages from $500 to $599, 40 reported wages from $600 to $699, 13 reported wages from $700 to $799, and 4 reported wages of $800 or more. (See chart 1.)

Additional statistics and other information

Quarterly data for states have been included in this release in table 3. For additional information about quarterly employment and wages data, please read the Technical Note or visit the QCEW Web site at www.bls.gov/cew/.

Employment and Wages Annual Averages Online features comprehensive information by detailed industry on establishments, employment, and wages for the nation and all states. The 2010 edition of this publication, which was published in November 2011, contains selected data produced by Business Employment Dynamics (BED) on job gains and losses, as well as selected data from the first quarter 2011 version of the national news release. Tables and additional content from the Employment and Wages Annual 2010 are now available online at www.bls.gov/cew/cewbultn10htm. The 2011 edition of Employment and Wages Annual Averages Online will be available later in 2012.

Technical Note

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 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 9.2 million employer reports covered 131.3 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 of those covered by UI programs. The result is then 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 www.bls.gov/cew/; however, data in QCEW press releases have been revised and may not match the data contained on the BLS Web site.

QCEW data are not designed as a time series. QCEW data are simply the sums of individual establishment records reflecting 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—some reflecting economic events, others reflecting administrative changes.

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. These potential differences result from the states’ 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.

Information in this release will be made available to sensory impaired individuals upon request. Voice phone: 202-691-5200; TDD message referral phone number: 1-800-877-8339.

Table 1. Covered (1) employment and wages in the United States and the 2 largest counties in Nebraska, fourth quarter 2011 (2)

Area	Employment			Average weekly wage (3)
	December 2011 (thousands)	Percent change, December 2010-11 (4)	National ranking by percent change (5)	Average weekly wage	National ranking by level (5)	Percent change, fourth quarter 2010-11 (4)	National ranking by percent change (5)
United States (6)	131,254.2	1.4	--	$955	--	-1.7	--
Nebraska	910.5	0.8	--	762	45	-1.3	21
Douglas, Neb.	315.7	0.1	256	858	182	-2.6	224
Lancaster, Neb.	156.2	1.2	130	763	278	-0.9	88
Footnotes: (1) Includes workers covered by Unemployment Insurance (UI) and Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees (UCFE) programs. (2) Data are preliminary. (3) Average weekly wages were calculated using unrounded data. (4) Percent changes were computed from quarterly employment and pay data adjusted for noneconomic county reclassifications. (5) Ranking does not include the county of San Juan, Puerto Rico. (6) Totals for the United States do not include data for Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands.