Employment rose 2.7 percent in each of the two large counties in Nevada--Clark and Washoe--from September 2012 to September 2013, 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 2012 annual average employment.) Regional Commissioner Richard J. Holden noted that the over-the-year employment increases in both counties exceeded the national increase of 1.7 percent. (See table 1.)

Nationwide, employment advanced in 286 of the 334 large U.S. counties from September 2012 to September 2013. Fort Bend, Texas, posted the largest increase with a gain of 6.0 percent over the year. Peoria, Ill., experienced the largest over-the-year decrease in employment with a loss of 3.7 percent.

Employment in Clark County (843,300) and Washoe County (191,500) in September 2013 accounted for 88.5 percent of total employment within the state. Nationwide, the 334 largest counties made up 71.4 percent of total U.S. employment, which stood at 135 million in September 2013.

Average weekly wages increased over the year in both Washoe (up 2.5 percent to $847) and Clark (up1.9 percent to $819). Nationally, the average weekly wage increased 1.7 percent over the year to $922 in the third quarter of 2013. (See table 1.)

Employment and wage levels (but not over-the-year changes) are also available for the 15 counties in Nevada with employment below 75,000. Average weekly wages in these counties ranged from $1,665 to $690 during the third quarter of 2013. (See table 2.)

Large county wage changes

Washoe County’s 2.5-percent wage increase ranked 77th nationally among the nation’s 334 largest counties. Clark County’s 1.9-percent wage increase placed 138th. Average weekly wages advanced over the year in 291 of the 334 large U.S. counties. San Mateo, Calif., had the largest wage gain at 9.9 percent. Dane, Wis., was second with wage growth of 9.3 percent, followed by Collier, Fla. (8.0 percent). Wage decreases were recorded in 40 large counties nationwide; Pinellas, Fla., experienced the largest over-the-year wage loss at 4.3 percent.

Large county average weekly wages

Average weekly wages in both of Nevada’s large counties placed near the middle of the national ranking in the third quarter of 2013. Washoe County ($847) ranked 173rd and Clark County ($819) placed 198th. Nationwide, 101 large counties registered weekly wages at or above the U.S. average of $922 in the third quarter of 2013. Santa Clara, Calif., held the top position among the highest-paid large counties with an average weekly wage of $1,868. San Mateo, Calif., was second at $1,698, followed by New York, N.Y. ($1,667), Washington D.C. ($1,560), and San Francisco, Calif. ($1,549).

Among the 232 large counties with an average weekly wage below the U.S. average in the third quarter of 2013, 3 had wages below $600. Horry, S.C. ($564) reported the lowest wage, followed by Cameron, Texas ($587) and Hidalgo, Texas ($595).

Average weekly wages in Nevada’s smaller counties

Of the 15 counties in Nevada with employment below 75,000, Eureka recorded the highest average weekly wage at $1,665. Lincoln reported the lowest weekly wage in the state with an average of $690 in the third quarter of 2013. (See table 2.)

When all 17 counties in Nevada were considered, 6 had average weekly wages of $900 or more and all were above the U.S. average of $922. Six counties had average weekly wages from $800 to $899. Four counties reported average weekly wages from $700 to $799, and one had wages below $700.

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 https://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 2012 edition of this publication, which was published in September 2013, contains selected data produced by Business Employment Dynamics (BED) on job gains and losses, as well as selected data from the first quarter 2013 version of the national news release. Tables and additional content from Employment and Wages Annual Averages 2012 are now available online at https://www.bls.gov/cew/publications/employment-and-wages-annual-averages/2012/home.htm. The 2013 edition of Employment and Wages Annual Averages Online will be available in September 2014.

Information in this release will be made available to sensory impaired individuals upon request. Voice phone: 202-691-5200; Federal Relay Service: 1-800-877-8339.

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 9.3 million employer reports cover 135.0 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 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.
 

Table 1. Covered (1) employment and wages in the United States and the two large counties in Nevada, third quarter 2013 (2)

Area	Employment			Average Weekly Wage (3)
	September 2012 (thousands)	Percent change, September 2011-12 (4)	National ranking by percent change (5)	Average weekly wage	National ranking by level (5)	Percent change, third quarter 2011-12 (4)	National ranking by percent change (5)
United States (6)	134,957.5	1.7	--	$922	--	1.9	--
Nevada	1,169.4	2.5	--	836	27	2.0	26
Clark, Nev.	843.3	2.7	68	819	198	1.9	138
Washoe, Nev.	191.5	2.7	68	847	173	2.5	77
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.

 

Table 2. Covered (1) employment and wages in the United States and all counties in Nevada, 3rd quarter 2013 (2)

Area	Employment September 2013	Average Weekly Wage (3)
United States (4)	134,957,493	$922
Nevada	1,169,412	836
Churchill	7,701	808
Clark	843,348	819
Douglas	18,137	795
Elko	22,762	897
Esmeralda	376	1,029
Eureka	4,644	1,665
Humboldt	8,563	975
Lander	3,670	1,297
Lincoln	1,171	690
Lyon	11,986	732
Mineral	1,304	788
Nye	10,925	930
Pershing	1,918	899
Storey	3,972	798
Washoe	191,516	847
White Pine	4,306	947
Carson City	27,394	865
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) Totals for the United States do not include data for Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands.
SOURCE: Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages

 

Table 3. Covered (1) employment and wages by state, third quarter 2013 (2)

State	Employment		Average weekly wage (3)
	September 2013 (thousands)	Percent change, September 2012-13	Average weekly wage	National ranking by level	Percent change, third quarter 2012-13	National ranking by percent change
United States (4)	134,957.5	1.7	$922	--	1.9	--
Alabama	1,847.6	0.8	794	34	1.3	43
Alaska	345.0	0.4	990	9	3.0	7
Arizona	2,490.9	2.2	859	22	1.5	36
Arkansas	1,156.5	0.1	723	47	2.1	21
California	15,526.4	2.7	1,057	6	2.1	21
Colorado	2,355.7	3.1	952	12	1.7	31
Connecticut	1,650.3	0.7	1,109	3	1.9	28
Delaware	416.8	2.1	941	14	2.1	21
District of Columbia	726.2	1.5	1,560	1	3.0	7
Florida	7,501.8	2.6	808	31	1.1	46
Georgia	3,928.2	2.3	867	21	1.5	36
Hawaii	617.7	1.7	839	25	1.6	33
Idaho	644.7	2.3	703	50	2.3	19
Illinois	5,731.7	0.7	959	11	1.5	36
Indiana	2,883.6	1.2	784	38	1.6	33
Iowa	1,512.0	1.5	772	40	2.1	21
Kansas	1,347.6	1.8	776	39	2.0	26
Kentucky	1,794.5	1.0	760	43	1.1	46
Louisiana	1,893.4	1.4	827	28	2.9	10
Maine	601.5	0.7	735	46	1.8	30
Maryland	2,546.4	0.6	1,011	8	0.4	51
Massachusetts	3,318.3	1.2	1,131	2	2.6	11
Michigan	4,069.7	2.1	875	20	1.5	36
Minnesota	2,724.2	1.7	938	15	2.6	11
Mississippi	1,099.1	0.8	688	51	2.5	15
Missouri	2,661.0	1.3	805	32	1.4	40
Montana	446.7	1.2	705	49	2.3	19
Nebraska	937.5	1.3	766	41	3.4	3
Nevada	1,169.4	2.5	836	27	2.0	26
New Hampshire	624.5	0.6	895	18	2.4	17
New Jersey	3,851.9	1.2	1,068	5	1.3	43
New Mexico	793.7	0.5	766	41	0.7	49
New York	8,724.8	1.3	1,108	4	1.7	31
North Carolina	4,006.4	1.7	817	30	1.4	40
North Dakota	436.7	3.4	921	16	5.5	1
Ohio	5,147.5	1.4	837	26	1.2	45
Oklahoma	1,572.6	1.4	797	33	2.4	17
Oregon	1,709.8	2.4	856	23	2.6	11
Pennsylvania	5,622.4	0.3	913	17	1.6	33
Rhode Island	465.2	1.3	878	19	2.6	11
South Carolina	1,859.3	2.3	751	44	1.9	28
South Dakota	408.9	0.9	706	48	3.4	3
Tennessee	2,712.8	1.5	819	29	0.6	50
Texas	11,091.9	2.8	952	12	2.5	15
Utah	1,265.5	2.9	791	36	3.1	6
Vermont	302.5	0.0	788	37	3.4	3
Virginia	3,650.1	0.6	971	10	1.1	46
Washington	3,017.9	2.4	1,044	7	2.1	21
West Virginia	710.3	-0.7	751	44	3.7	2
Wisconsin	2,752.7	1.1	793	35	3.0	7
Wyoming	286.1	0.2	840	24	1.4	40
Puerto Rico	910.9	-2.5	501	(5)	-0.6	(5)
Virgin Islands	37.9	-1.9	706	(5)	-0.6	(5)
(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) Totals for the United States do not include data for Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands. (5) Data not included in the national ranking.