All seven large counties in Indiana reported employment increases from March 2010 to March 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.) Elkhart County had the largest increase, up 6.2 percent, followed by Hamilton County, 2.5 percent, and Allen County, 2.1 percent. Regional Commissioner Charlene Peiffer noted that 3 of the state's 7 large counties experienced over-the-year employment increases greater than the national increase of 1.3 percent.

Nationally, employment grew 1.3 percent during this 12-month period, as 256 of the 322 large counties nationwide gained jobs. Elkhart County experienced the largest percentage increase in employment in both the state and nation, up 6.2 percent over the year. Sacramento, Calif., had the largest employment decrease with a loss of 1.6 percent.

Among the seven largest counties in Indiana, employment was highest in Marion County (542,200) in March 2011. Two other counties, Lake (181,100) and Allen (170,400), had employment levels above 150,000. Collectively, Indiana's seven large counties accounted for 48.7 percent of total employment within the state. Nationwide, the 322 largest counties made up 70.7 percent of total U.S. employment, which stood at 127.9 million in March 2011.

The average weekly wage in Hamilton County rose 6.6 percent from the first quarter of 2010 to the first quarter of 2011, the largest increase among Indiana's large counties. Marion County had the highest average weekly wage in the state at $987, followed by Hamilton ($924) and Lake ($791). (See table 1.) Nationally, the average weekly wage rose 5.2 percent over the year to $935 in the first quarter of 2011.

Employment and wage levels (but not over-the-year changes) are also available for the 85 counties in Indiana with employment below 75,000. Excluding the counties of Martin, Bartholomew, and Posey, all of these smaller counties had average weekly wages below the national average. (See table 2.)

Large county wage changes

Four of Indiana's large counties recorded wage growth above the national increase of 5.2 percent from the first quarter of 2010 to the first quarter of 2011. (See table 1.) As noted, Hamilton County experienced the state’s largest average weekly wage increase of 6.6 percent, ranking 43rd in the nation. Vanderburgh (5.7 percent, 73rd), Lake (5.6 percent, 77th), and Elkhart (5.4 percent, 82nd) Counties also reported wage growth above the national average. Conversely, St. Joseph (3.1 percent) County ranked in the bottom third nationally.

Of the 322 largest counties, 315 had over-the-year increases in average weekly wages. Peoria, Ill., led the nation in average weekly wage growth with an increase of 18.9 percent from the first quarter of 2010. Santa Clara, Calif., was second with a gain of 12.4 percent, followed by the counties of Macomb, Mich. (12.0 percent), Clayton, Ga. (11.9 percent), and Wayne, Mich. (11.3 percent).

Nationwide, three large counties recorded decreases in average weekly wages over the year. Williamson, Texas, had the largest decrease in wages with a decline of 3.8 percent from the first quarter of 2010. Smaller declines were reported in Hudson, N.J. (-1.5 percent) and Durham, N.C. (-0.5 percent).

Large county average weekly wages

Average weekly wages in only one of Indiana’s seven large counties was above the national average of $935 in the first quarter of 2011. As noted, Marion County ($987) had the highest average weekly wage in the state and ranked 69th among the 322 largest counties in the United States. Elkhart ($698) reported the lowest average weekly wage among Indiana’s largest counties and ranked 291st nationwide.

Nationwide, 94 large counties registered weekly wages above the U.S. average of $935 in the first quarter of 2011. New York, N.Y., held the top position among the highest-paid large counties with an average weekly wage of $2,634. Fairfield, Conn., was second at $1,888, followed by the counties of Somerset, N.J. ($1,867), Santa Clara, Calif. ($1,863), and San Francisco, Calif. ($1,723).

More than two-thirds of the largest U.S. counties (228) reported weekly wages below the national average. Horry County, S.C. reported the lowest wage ($534), followed by the counties of Cameron, Texas ($546), Hidalgo, Texas ($556), Lake, Fla. ($586), and Webb, Texas ($590). Wages in these lowest-ranked counties were less than one-fourth of the average weekly wage reported for the highest-ranked county, New York.

Average weekly wages in Indiana's smaller counties

With the exceptions of Martin ($1,135), Bartholomew ($933), and Posey ($948) Counties, all 85 counties in Indiana with employment below 75,000 had average weekly wages lower than the national average of $935. Among these smaller counties, Vermillion County had the 4th highest average weekly wage at $899 and Brown County had the lowest at $412. (See table 2.)

When all 92 counties in Indiana were considered, all but 4 had wages below the national average of $935. Thirteen reported average weekly wages under $550, 42 had wages from $550 to $649, 24 reported wages from $650 to $749, and 13 had wages of $750 or more. (See chart 1.)

Additional statistics and other information

QCEW 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/.

An annual bulletin, Employment and Wages Annual Averages, features comprehensive information by detailed industry on establishments, employment, and wages for the nation and all states. The 2009 edition of this bulletin contains selected data produced by Business Employment Dynamics (BED) on job gains and losses, as well as selected data from the first quarter 2010 version of the national news release. Tables and additional content from the 2009 Employment and Wages Annual Bulletin are now available online at www.bls.gov/cew/cewbultn09.htm. This web-only publication has replaced the annual print bulletin, Employment and Wages Annual Averages. The March 2010 issue of this annual bulletin was the final one to be issued on paper.

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.

For personal assistance or further information on the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages Program, as well as other Bureau programs, contact the Midwest Information Office in Chicago at (312) 353-1880 from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. ET.

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 9.1 million employer reports covered 127.9 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 at 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.

Table 1. Covered (1) employment and wages in the United States and the 7 largest counties in Indiana, first quarter 2011 (2)

Area	Employment			Average weekly wage (3)
	March 2011 (thousands)	Percent change, March 2010-11 (4)	National ranking by percent change (5)	Average weekly wage	National ranking by level (5)	Percent change, first quarter 2010-11 (4)	National ranking by percent change (5)
United States (6)	127,851.0	1.3	--	$935	--	5.2	--
Indiana	2,717.1	1.9	--	772	33	4.5	22
Allen, Ind.	170.4	2.1	56	747	248	4.0	165
Elkhart, Ind.	102.5	6.2	1	698	291	5.4	82
Hamilton, Ind.	107.8	2.5	35	924	100	6.6	43
Lake, Ind.	181.1	0.6	196	791	199	5.6	77
Marion, Ind.	542.2	1.0	158	987	69	3.6	188
St. Joseph, Ind.	114.9	0.7	188	723	272	3.1	226
Vanderburgh, Ind.	104.0	0.1	249	729	265	5.7	73
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.