13-31-DAL
Thursday, January 17, 2013
Employment rose in Oklahomas two large counties from June 2011 to June 2012, 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 2011 annual average employment.) Regional Commissioner Stanley W. Suchman
noted that employment in Oklahoma County increased 2.8 percent, while Tulsa County rose at a slower
1.6-percent pace. (See table 1.)
Employment nationwide advanced 1.8 percent during the 12-month period as 287 of the 328 largest
U.S. counties registered increases. Yakima, Wash., recorded the fastest employment gain in the country,
up 8.2 percent, with the natural resources and mining sector making the largest contribution to the
increase. Three counties Madison, Ill., St. Clair, Ill., and Clay, Mo. experienced the largest over-the-year
decreases among the largest counties with losses of 2.0 percent each.
Oklahomas two large counties accounted for half of the states total employment, with 432,300 in
Oklahoma County and 335,700 in Tulsa County in June 2012. Nationwide, the 328 largest counties
made up 70.9 percent of U.S. total employment.
From the second quarter of 2011 to the second quarter of 2012, average weekly wages rose 2.7 percent
in Tulsa County and were little changed in Oklahoma County, up 0.1 percent. (See table 1.)
Tulsa County had the higher of the two average weekly wages at $837 per week, closely followed by
Oklahoma at $832. Nationally, average weekly wages increased 1.3 percent over the year to $903.
Employment and wage levels (but not over-the-year changes) are also available for the 75 counties in
Oklahoma with employment below 75,000. Wage levels in all of these counties were below the national
average. (See table 2.)
Tulsa Countys 2.7-percent rise in average weekly wages from the second quarter of 2011 to the second
quarter of 2012 ranked 66th among the nations largest counties and was more than twice the U.S.
average rate of increase (1.3 percent). In contrast, average weekly wages in Oklahoma County edged up
only 0.1 percent, ranking 228th. (See table 1.)
Nationally, 233 of the 328 largest counties registered over-the-year wages increases. Washington, Ore.,
experienced the largest wage gain in the nation, up 8.5 percent. Within Washington County, the
manufacturing industry had the largest impact on the countys over-the-year increase in average weekly
wages. Washington County, Pa. had the second largest overall increase (7.8 percent), followed by
McLean, Ill. and San Mateo, Calif. (7.2 and 7.1 percent, respectively).
Nationwide, 86 of the largest counties registered wage declines during the period. Williamson, Texas,
experienced the largest decrease in average weekly wages with a loss of 17.0 percent over the year. A
large decline in total wages within the trade, transportation, and utilities sector was a major contributor;
the decline reflected a return to previously seen pay levels following a big payout in the second quarter
of 2011. Kitsap, Wash., had the second largest overall decline, followed by Arlington, Va., Durham,
N.C., and Benton, Wash.; declines in each of these counties were less than 5.0 percent.
Although well below the national average of $903, average weekly wages in the states two large
counties ranked in the middle of the 328 largest U.S. counties. In the second quarter of 2012, Tulsa
County's average wage of $837 ranked 164th and Oklahoma Countys wage of $832 ranked 169th.
(See table 1.)
Nationwide, average weekly wages were higher than the U.S. average ($903) in 109 of the 328 largest
counties. Santa Clara, Calif., held the top position among the highest-paid large counties with an average
weekly wage of $1,754. New York, N.Y., was second with an average weekly wage of $1,646,
followed by Washington, D.C. ($1,544), and San Mateo, Calif. ($1,515).
Two-thirds of the largest U.S. counties (219) reported average weekly wages below the national average
in the second quarter of 2012. The lowest wage was reported in Horry, S.C. ($532), followed by the
Texas counties of Cameron ($571) and Hidalgo ($583). Wages in these lowest-ranked counties were
one-third of the average weekly wage reported for the highest-ranked county, Santa Clara, Calif.
($1,754).
All 75 of Oklahomas smaller counties those with employment of less than 75,000 reported weekly
wages below the national average of $903 in the second quarter of 2012. Among these counties,
Woodward posted the highest wage ($856), while Cimarron reported the lowest average weekly wage in
the state ($482). (See table 2.)
When all 77 counties in Oklahoma were considered, 20 reported average wages under $600 per week, 20
registered wages from $600 to $649, 13 had wages from $650 to $699, 9 had wages from $700 to $749,
and 15 had wages of $750 or more. (See chart 1.) The higher-paying counties
were concentrated around the larger metropolitan areas of Oklahoma City and Tulsa, as well as smaller
cities including Duncan, Elk City, and Woodward. The lower-paying counties, those with weekly wages
under $600, were generally located in the eastern third of the state.
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/.
Employment and Wages Annual Averages Online features comprehensive information by detailed
industry on establishments, employment, and wages for the nation and all states. The 2011 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 2012 version of the news release. Tables and
additional content from Employment and Wages Annual Averages 2011 are now available online at
www.bls.gov/cew/cewbultn11.htm.
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.
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
132.9 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 (see
Technical Note below) and may not match the data contained on the Bureaus 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 reasonssome
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.
| Area | Employment | Average Weekly Wage (3) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| June 2012 (thousands) |
Percent change, June 2011-12 (4) |
National ranking by percent change (5) |
Average weekly wage |
National ranking by level (5) |
Percent change, second quarter 2011-12 (4) |
National ranking by percent change (5) |
|
United States (6) |
132,896.0 | 1.8 | -- | $903 | -- | 1.3 | -- |
Oklahoma |
1,543.4 | 1.9 | -- | 768 | 39 | 2.7 | 6 |
Oklahoma, Okla. |
432.3 | 2.8 | 64 | 832 | 169 | 0.1 | 228 |
Tulsa, Okla. |
335.7 | 1.6 | 158 | 837 | 164 | 2.7 | 66 |
|
Footnotes: |
|||||||
| Area | Employment June 2012 |
Average Weekly Wage (3) |
|---|---|---|
United States (4) |
132,896,015 | $903 |
Oklahoma |
1,543,355 | 768 |
Adair |
4,812 | 565 |
Alfalfa |
1,573 | 753 |
Atoka |
3,328 | 578 |
Beaver |
1,725 | 747 |
Beckham |
11,592 | 833 |
Blaine |
2,908 | 606 |
Bryan |
14,342 | 614 |
Caddo |
7,149 | 672 |
Canadian |
29,179 | 782 |
Carter |
23,076 | 732 |
Cherokee |
14,658 | 602 |
Choctaw |
4,091 | 561 |
Cimarron |
683 | 482 |
Cleveland |
73,697 | 676 |
Coal |
1,179 | 647 |
Comanche |
42,003 | 678 |
Cotton |
1,346 | 570 |
Craig |
5,686 | 602 |
Creek |
17,707 | 717 |
Custer |
12,854 | 751 |
Delaware |
8,847 | 558 |
Dewey |
1,401 | 704 |
Ellis |
1,249 | 758 |
Garfield |
26,171 | 746 |
Garvin |
9,301 | 737 |
Grady |
12,264 | 680 |
Grant |
1,292 | 756 |
Greer |
1,316 | 609 |
Harmon |
774 | 587 |
Harper |
1,165 | 638 |
Haskell |
3,358 | 529 |
Hughes |
3,022 | 567 |
Jackson |
9,633 | 620 |
Jefferson |
1,115 | 591 |
Johnston |
2,610 | 604 |
Kay |
18,686 | 692 |
Kingfisher |
5,683 | 791 |
Kiowa |
2,324 | 614 |
Latimer |
3,752 | 844 |
LeFlore |
12,840 | 612 |
Lincoln |
6,872 | 624 |
Logan |
6,737 | 590 |
Love |
4,431 | 594 |
Major |
2,505 | 714 |
Marshall |
4,356 | 596 |
Mayes |
11,649 | 692 |
McClain |
8,260 | 611 |
McCurtain |
10,686 | 594 |
McIntosh |
4,253 | 517 |
Murray |
5,976 | 643 |
Muskogee |
29,587 | 692 |
Noble |
4,157 | 734 |
Nowata |
1,711 | 550 |
Okfuskee |
2,176 | 578 |
Oklahoma |
432,257 | 832 |
Okmulgee |
9,717 | 621 |
Osage |
6,425 | 634 |
Ottawa |
12,016 | 563 |
Pawnee |
3,561 | 667 |
Payne |
32,111 | 696 |
Pittsburg |
17,160 | 745 |
Pontotoc |
17,276 | 664 |
Pottawatomie |
21,949 | 627 |
Pushmataha |
2,699 | 529 |
Roger Mills |
1,048 | 773 |
Rogers |
25,696 | 778 |
Seminole |
7,459 | 649 |
Sequoyah |
9,167 | 507 |
Stephens |
15,761 | 772 |
Texas |
9,582 | 668 |
Tillman |
1,976 | 608 |
Tulsa |
335,675 | 837 |
Wagoner |
7,602 | 637 |
Washington |
20,899 | 849 |
Washita |
2,258 | 698 |
Woods |
3,728 | 665 |
Woodward |
10,368 | 856 |
|
Footnotes: |
||
| State | Employment | Average weekly wage (3) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| June 2012 (thousands) |
Percent change, June 2011-12 |
Average weekly wage |
National ranking by level |
Percent change, second quarter 2011-12 |
National ranking by percent change |
|
United States (4) |
132,896.0 | 1.8 | $903 | -- | 1.3 | -- |
Alabama |
1,841.7 | 0.9 | 783 | 34 | 2.0 | 20 |
Alaska |
342.9 | 2.1 | 955 | 8 | 1.5 | 29 |
Arizona |
2,393.9 | 2.6 | 862 | 18 | 2.1 | 17 |
Arkansas |
1,157.4 | 1.1 | 717 | 47 | 2.1 | 17 |
California |
15,045.8 | 2.4 | 1,034 | 6 | 1.8 | 24 |
Colorado |
2,291.8 | 2.5 | 918 | 14 | 2.0 | 20 |
Connecticut |
1,650.0 | 1.2 | 1,111 | 2 | -0.4 | 50 |
Delaware |
409.3 | 0.2 | 948 | 11 | 2.4 | 13 |
District of Columbia |
717.9 | 0.9 | 1,544 | 1 | 0.3 | 44 |
Florida |
7,233.7 | 2.0 | 805 | 30 | 0.4 | 42 |
Georgia |
3,854.7 | 1.4 | 848 | 22 | 1.9 | 22 |
Hawaii |
603.7 | 2.1 | 812 | 28 | 1.8 | 24 |
Idaho |
626.1 | 1.5 | 673 | 51 | 0.9 | 38 |
Illinois |
5,698.0 | 1.1 | 953 | 9 | 1.6 | 27 |
Indiana |
2,832.6 | 2.3 | 763 | 41 | 1.9 | 22 |
Iowa |
1,502.7 | 1.5 | 743 | 43 | 2.5 | 12 |
Kansas |
1,334.4 | 1.7 | 763 | 41 | 1.1 | 35 |
Kentucky |
1,780.7 | 1.6 | 772 | 38 | 1.6 | 27 |
Louisiana |
1,877.2 | 1.6 | 806 | 29 | 1.5 | 29 |
Maine |
601.8 | 1.2 | 719 | 45 | 1.0 | 37 |
Maryland |
2,550.2 | 1.5 | 992 | 7 | 0.7 | 39 |
Massachusetts |
3,301.5 | 1.9 | 1,109 | 3 | -1.2 | 51 |
Michigan |
3,984.0 | 2.1 | 859 | 19 | 1.7 | 26 |
Minnesota |
2,695.1 | 1.5 | 907 | 15 | 1.1 | 35 |
Mississippi |
1,087.4 | 0.6 | 681 | 49 | 2.9 | 3 |
Missouri |
2,629.1 | 0.4 | 791 | 32 | 2.2 | 15 |
Montana |
442.0 | 2.0 | 700 | 48 | 2.6 | 8 |
Nebraska |
930.9 | 2.0 | 719 | 45 | 0.7 | 39 |
Nevada |
1,141.7 | 1.6 | 815 | 27 | -0.1 | 48 |
New Hampshire |
623.8 | 1.4 | 891 | 17 | 0.3 | 44 |
New Jersey |
3,884.0 | 1.4 | 1,056 | 5 | 0.0 | 47 |
New Mexico |
791.9 | 0.4 | 783 | 34 | 2.6 | 8 |
New York |
8,701.2 | 1.5 | 1,096 | 4 | 0.4 | 42 |
North Carolina |
3,919.1 | 1.5 | 787 | 33 | 0.5 | 41 |
North Dakota |
420.3 | 9.9 | 854 | 21 | 11.1 | 1 |
Ohio |
5,104.0 | 1.9 | 817 | 25 | 2.8 | 4 |
Oklahoma |
1,543.4 | 1.9 | 768 | 39 | 2.7 | 6 |
Oregon |
1,663.9 | 1.6 | 837 | 24 | 2.3 | 14 |
Pennsylvania |
5,645.9 | 0.7 | 893 | 16 | 2.1 | 17 |
Rhode Island |
463.1 | 0.9 | 859 | 19 | -0.3 | 49 |
South Carolina |
1,830.7 | 1.5 | 736 | 44 | 1.4 | 31 |
South Dakota |
412.8 | 1.9 | 677 | 50 | 3.2 | 2 |
Tennessee |
2,669.1 | 2.0 | 816 | 26 | 2.8 | 4 |
Texas |
10,779.5 | 3.0 | 922 | 13 | 2.6 | 8 |
Utah |
1,225.8 | 3.6 | 766 | 40 | 1.3 | 34 |
Vermont |
300.2 | 1.0 | 792 | 31 | 2.6 | 8 |
Virginia |
3,659.9 | 1.2 | 952 | 10 | 0.3 | 44 |
Washington |
2,948.3 | 2.4 | 947 | 12 | 2.2 | 15 |
West Virginia |
712.3 | 1.4 | 776 | 37 | 1.4 | 31 |
Wisconsin |
2,749.7 | 1.4 | 778 | 36 | 1.4 | 31 |
Wyoming |
288.9 | 1.6 | 842 | 23 | 2.7 | 6 |
Puerto Rico |
933.3 | 1.8 | 499 | (5) | 0.6 | (5) |
Virgin Islands |
40.2 | -8.6 | 819 | (5) | 9.8 | (5) |
|
Footnotes: |
||||||