Employment declined in three of Alabama’s five large counties 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.) Regional Commissioner Janet S. Rankin noted that Montgomery County experienced the largest drop, down 2.8 percent, followed by the counties of Mobile (-1.9 percent) and Madison (-1.3 percent). Employment growth was largest in Tuscaloosa County, up 1.6 percent. (See table 1.)

Nationally, employment rose 0.9 percent during the 12-month period, as employment increased in 215 of the 322 largest U.S. counties. Ottawa, Mich., posted the largest over-the-year percentage increase with a gain of 4.7 percent. Montgomery, Texas, had the next largest increase (4.1 percent), followed by Utah, Utah (4.0 percent). San Joaquin, Calif., experienced the largest employment decline with a loss of 4.0 percent.

Among the five large counties in Alabama, employment was highest in Jefferson (332,400) in June 2011, while Tuscaloosa had the smallest employment base (82,600). Together, Alabama’s large counties accounted for 48.7 percent of total employment within the state. Nationwide, the 322 largest counties made up 70.5 percent of total U.S. employment, which stood at 130.5 million in June 2011.

The average weekly wage in Tuscaloosa County rose 4.9 percent from the second quarter of 2010 to the second quarter of 2011, the largest increase among Alabama’s five large counties. Alabama’s four other large counties posted wage increases of at least 2.3 percent. Average weekly wages for the nation rose 3.0 percent. Madison had the highest average weekly wage among the five largest counties at $997, followed by Jefferson ($883). Nationally, the average weekly wage was $891. (See table 1.)

Employment and wage levels (but not over-the-year changes) are also available for the 62 counties in Alabama with employment below 75,000. Among these, Washington County ($920) was the only small county to have an average weekly wage above the national average. (See table 2.)

Large county wage changes

Tuscaloosa County’s 4.9-percent wage growth from the second quarter of 2010 to the second quarter of 2011 ranked 30th among the 322 largest counties in the U.S. Wage growth in Mobile County (4.0 percent, 65th) and Madison County (3.3 percent, 101st) also placed in the top one-third of the ranking. (See table 1.)

Nationwide, 307 large counties experienced growth in average weekly wages. Williamson, Texas, ranked first with an increase of 18.0 percent from the second quarter of 2010. Middlesex, Mass., ranked second with a gain of 10.2 percent, followed by the counties of Harford, Md. (8.8 percent), Santa Clara, Calif. (8.5 percent), and Butler, Pa. (7.5 percent).

Among the 322 largest counties, 11 experienced over-the-year decreases in average weekly wages. Champaign, Ill., had the largest decrease in the nation (-3.6 percent), followed by the counties of Benton, Ark. (-2.7 percent), Rutherford, Tenn. (-2.2 percent), New York, N.Y. (-1.1 percent), and Elkhart, Ind. (-1.0 percent).

Large county average weekly wages

Average weekly wages in 2 of Alabama’s 5 large counties placed in the top half of the national ranking among the 322 largest counties in the United States in the second quarter of 2011. Madison County ($997) recorded a wage higher than the national average of $891, ranking 53rd nationwide, while Jefferson County ($883, 111th) was close to the national average. The average weekly wages in Alabama’s three other large counties placed in the bottom half of the national ranking.

Nationally, average weekly wages were higher than average in 107 of the 322 largest counties. Santa Clara, Calif., recorded the highest average weekly wage at $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).

There were 215 large counties with an average weekly wage below the U.S. average in the second quarter of 2011. Horry, S.C. ($526), reported the lowest wage, followed by the counties of Hidalgo, Texas ($571), Cameron, Texas ($572), Yakima, Wash. ($610), and Webb, Texas ($616).

Average weekly wages in Alabama’s smaller counties

Among the 62 counties in Alabama with employment below 75,000, Washington ($920) was the only county with an average weekly wage above the national level of $891, while Dale County was close to the national average at $887. (See table 2.) Fayette and Geneva Counties reported the lowest weekly wages among all counties in the state, averaging $532 each in the second quarter of 2011.

When all 67 counties in Alabama were considered, 21 reported average weekly wages under $600, 28 reported wages from $600-$699, 12 had wages from $700-$799, and 6 had wages above $800. (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/.

An annual bulletin, Employment and Wages, 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 the 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. 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. Tables and additional content from the 2009 Employment and Wages Annual Bulletin are now available online at www.bls.gov/cew/cewbultn09.htm.

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 Southeast Information Office in Atlanta at 404-893-4222.

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 cover 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 Bureau’s 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.

Last Modified Date: January 31, 2012