New England Information Office

News Release Information

14-764-BOS

Tuesday, May 6, 2014

Contacts

Further information:
Media contact:

County Employment and Wages in New Hampshire — Third Quarter 2013

Employment in Rockingham County rose 0.7 percent from September 2012 to September 2013, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Hillsborough, New Hampshire’s other large county, saw an employment gain of 0.5 percent. (Large counties are defined as those with employment of 75,000 or more as measured by 2012 annual average employment.) Regional Commissioner Deborah A. Brown noted that employment growth in both counties was below the 1.7-percent national average.

Nationwide, employment increased in 286 of the 334 largest U.S. counties. The largest over-the-year percentage increase in employment was recorded in Fort Bend, Texas (6.0 percent); Peoria, Ill., experienced the largest over-the-year decrease (-3.7 percent).

Among New Hampshire’s two large counties, employment was higher in Hillsborough County (190,690) in September 2013. Together, both large counties accounted for 52.9 percent of total employment within the state. Nationwide, the 334 largest counties made up 71.4 percent of total U.S. employment.

The average weekly wage in Rockingham rose 2.6 percent to $866 from the third quarter of 2012 to the third quarter of 2013. While average weekly wages were higher in Hillsborough, at $989, it experienced a smaller wage increase of 1.9 percent. (See table 1.) Nationally, the average weekly wage increased 1.9 percent over the year to $922.

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

Large county wage changes

The 2.6-percent wage gain in Rockingham County ranked 70th among the 334 largest U.S. counties. Hillsborough’s 1.9-percent wage increase ranked 138th. Nationwide, San Mateo, Calif, had the largest over-the-year increase in average weekly wages with a gain of 9.9 percent in the third quarter of 2013. Across the country, 291 large counties experienced over-the-year increases in average weekly wages.

Of the 334 largest counties, 40 experienced decreases in average weekly wages. Pinellas, Fla. had the largest percentage decrease in average weekly wage, with a loss of 4.3 percent. Rockland, N.Y., had the second largest percentage decrease in average weekly wages, followed by Harford, Md.; Douglas, Colo.; and Mercer, N.J.

Large county average weekly wages

Hillsborough County’s average weekly wage of $989 placed 71st in the national ranking, putting it in the top quarter of all large counties. Rockingham County’s $866 weekly wage was in the top half of large counties (159th) but was below the U.S. average of $922.

Among the 232 counties with average weekly wages below the national average, Horry, S.C. ($564), reported the lowest wage, followed by the counties of Cameron, Texas ($587), Hidalgo, Texas ($595), Pasco, Fla. ($635), and Webb, Texas, ($636).

Nationally, average weekly wages were equal to or greater than the national average in 102 of the largest U.S. counties. 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 with an average weekly wage of $1,698, followed by New York, N.Y. ($1,667), and Washington, D.C. ($1,560).

Average weekly wages in New Hampshire's smaller counties

All eight of the counties in New Hampshire with employment below 75,000 had average weekly wages lower than the national average of $922. Among these counties, Grafton reported the highest average weekly wage in the third quarter of 2013 at $910, while Carroll reported the lowest at $611.

When all 10 counties in New Hampshire were considered, all but 1 had wages below the national average. Three reported average weekly wages at or below $699, 2 reported wages from $700 to $799, 3 had wages from $800 to $899, and 2 had wages above $900. The lowest-paid counties were generally located in the northeastern part of the state. (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 Wages 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 www.bls.gov/cew/cewbultn12.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 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/nhqcew.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 9.2 million employer reports cover 135.1 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 2 largest counties in New Hampshire, third quarter 2013 (2)
Area Employment Average Weekly Wage (3)
September
2013
(thousands)
Percent change,
September
2012-13 (4)
National
ranking by
percent change (5)
Average
weekly
wage
National
ranking by
level (5)
Percent change,
third quarter
2012-13 (4)
National
ranking by
percent change (5)

United States (6)

134,957.5 1.7 -- $922 -- 1.9 --

New Hampshire

624.5 0.6 -- 895 18 2.4 17

Hillsborough

190.7 0.5 255 989 71 1.9 138

Rockingham

139.5 0.7 239 866 159 2.6 70

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 of the counties in New Hampshire, third quarter 2013(2)
Area Employment September 2013 Average Weekly Wage(3)

United States(4)

134,957,493 $922

New Hampshire

624,525 895

Belknap

26,017 689

Carroll

20,647 611

Cheshire

32,243 763

Coos

12,928 647

Grafton

52,554 910

Hillsborough

190,690 989

Merrimack

73,902 831

Rockingham

139,460 866

Strafford

45,875 869

Sullivan

13,859 736

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.




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)

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.
(5) Data not included in the national ranking.


Average weekly wages by county in New Hampshire, third quarter 2013

Last Modified Date: May 6, 2014