Rhode Island’s only large county, Providence, reported an employment decline of 0.1 percent from June 2010 to June 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.) Employment in Rhode Island’s largest county accounted for 59 percent of statewide employment in June 2011. 

Nationally, employment increased 0.9 percent during the 12-month period, as 215 of the 322 large counties nationwide had net job gains from June 2010. The largest over-the-year percentage gain in employment in the nation was recorded in Ottawa, Mich.; San Joaquin, Calif. experienced the largest over-the-year decrease in employment among the large counties in the U.S. with a loss of 4.0 percent.

The average weekly wage in Providence County was $898 in the second quarter of 2011, 4.8 percent higher than it was one year earlier. (See table 1.) Nationally, weekly wages averaged $891, increasing 3.0 percent over the year.

Employment and wage levels (but not over-the-year changes) are also available for the four counties in Rhode Island with employment below 75,000. None of these counties registered an average weekly wage above the national average in the second quarter of 2011. Newport ($863) had the highest average weekly wage among the smaller counties while Bristol County had the lowest average weekly wage at $687. (See table 2.)

Large county wage changes

Providence County’s 4.8-percent wage gain ranked 35th among the 322 largest U.S. counties. Nationwide among largest counties, 307 experienced over-the-year increases in average weekly wages from the second quarter of 2010 to the second quarter of 2011. Of the counties that had over-the-year increases in average weekly wages, 130 posted gains that were greater than or equal to the national average (3.0 percent).

Nationwide, Williamson, Texas, ranked first in average weekly wage growth, with an increase of 18.0 percent from the second quarter of 2010. Middlesex, Mass. was second with a gain of 10.2 percent, followed by the counties of Harford, Md. (8.8 percent) and Santa Clara, Calif. (8.5 percent).

Among the 322 largest counties, 11 experienced over-the-year declines in average weekly wages in the second quarter. The largest decrease in the nation was in Champaign, Ill, with a decline of 3.6 percent over the year. Benton, Ark., had the second largest overall decline among the counties, followed by Rutherford, Tenn.; New York, N.Y.; and Elkhart, Ind.

Large county average weekly wages

Providence County, with an average weekly wage of $898 in the second quarter of 2011, was among 107 large counties nationwide with wages above the U.S. average and ranked 99th among all 322 large U.S. counties. Santa Clara, Calif. held the top position among the highest-paid counties with an average weekly wage of $1,743. New York, N.Y., was second with an average weekly wage of $1,645, followed by Arlington, Va. ($1,553), Washington, D.C. ($1,541), and Fairfield, Conn. ($1,469).

Two-thirds of the largest U.S. counties (215) reported average weekly wages below the national average in the second quarter of 2011. The lowest wage was reported in Horry, S.C. ($526), followed by the Texas counties of Hidalgo ($571) and Cameron ($572). Wages in these lowest-ranked counties were less than one-third of the average weekly wage reported for the highest-ranked county, Santa Clara, Calif. ($1,743).

Average weekly wages in Rhode Island's smaller counties

All four counties in Rhode Island with employment below 75,000 had average weekly wages lower than the national average of $891. Bristol County’s wage, at $687, was nearly 23 percent below the U.S. average. (See table 2.)

When all five counties in Rhode Island were considered, only Providence reported wages above the national average. Overall, one county reported wages below $700, one reported wages ranging from $700 to $799, and three reported wages of $800 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 www.bls.gov/cew/. QCEW data in this release are based on the 2012 North American Industry Classification System. Data for 2011 are preliminary and subject to revision.

An annual bulletin, 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 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 news release. Tables and additional content from Employment and Wages Annual Averages 2010 are now available online at www.bls.gov/cew/cewbultn10.htm.

Information in this release will be made available to sensory impaired individuals upon request. Voice phone: (617) 565-2072; Federal Relay Services; 1-800-877-8339.

For personal assistance or further information on the QCEW program, as well as other Bureau programs, contact the New England Information Office at (617) 565-2327. This release is available in PDF and HTML format on the New England BLS Web site at www.bls.gov/ro1/riqcew.htm.

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 130.5 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.