Department of Labor Logo United States Department of Labor
Dot gov

The .gov means it's official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

News Release Information

15-45-CHI
Wednesday, January 21, 2015

Contacts Technical information: Media contact:
  • (312) 353-1138

County Employment and Wages in South Dakota – Second Quarter 2014

South Dakota’s only large county, Minnehaha, reported employment growth of 2.4 percent from June 2013 to June 2014, 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 2013 annual average employment.) Regional Commissioner Charlene Peiffer noted that in June 2014, Minnehaha County’s employment level of 122,900 accounted for 29.1 percent of total employment within the state. (See table 1.)

Nationally, employment rose 2.0 percent during this 12-month period, as 305 of the 339 largest U.S. counties gained jobs. Nationwide, the 339 largest counties made up 71.8 percent of total U.S. employment, which stood at 137.8 million in June 2014.

The average weekly wage in Minnehaha County was $796 in the second quarter of 2014, gaining 3.2 percent from the previous year. Nationally, the average weekly wage rose 2.1 percent over the year to $940 in the second quarter of 2014.

Employment and wage levels (but not over-the-year changes) are also available for the 65 counties in South Dakota with employment below 75,000. All 65 of these smaller counties had average weekly wages below the national average. (See table 2.)

Large county wage changes

Minnehaha County’s 3.2-percent wage growth from the second quarter of 2013 to the second quarter of 2014 ranked 49th nationally. (See table 1.) Among the 339 largest counties in the U.S., 312 had over-the-year increases in average weekly wages in the second quarter of 2014. Midland, Texas, had the largest wage increase (9.0 percent). Twenty-two large counties experienced over-the-year decreases in average weekly wages, of which Williamson, Texas, had the largest decrease (-2.7 percent).

Large county average weekly wages

Minnehaha County’s $796 average wage placed in the third quartile among the 339 large counties, ranking 249th. Nationally, Santa Clara, Calif., held the top position among the 339 large counties with an average weekly wage of $1,886. San Mateo, Calif. was second at $1,740, followed by New York, N.Y. ($1,732) and San Francisco, Calif. ($1,593).

Average weekly wages in South Dakota’s smaller counties

All 65 counties in South Dakota with employment below 75,000 had average weekly wages lower than the national average of $940. Among these smaller counties, Union County had the highest average weekly wage at $899 and Mellette County had the lowest at $452. (See table 2.)

When all 66 counties in South Dakota were considered, none had wages above the national average of $940. Thirteen reported average weekly wages under $549, 22 had wages from $550 to $599, 12 reported wages from $600 to $649, and 19 reported wages of $650 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.

Employment and Wages Annual Averages Online features comprehensive information by detailed industry on establishments, employment, and wages for the nation and all states. The 2013 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 2014 version of the national news release. Tables and additional content from Employment and Wages Annual Averages 2013 are now available online at www.bls.gov/cew/cewbultn13.htm. The 2014 edition of Employment and Wages Annual Averages Online will be available in September 2015.

The County Employment and Wages release for third quarter 2014 is scheduled to be released on Thursday, March 19, 2015, at 9:00 a.m. (CT).


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 9.4 million employer reports cover 137.8 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.

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.

Table 1. Covered employment and wages in the United States and the largest county in South Dakota, second quarter 2014
AreaEmploymentAverage Weekly Wage (1)
June 2014 (thousands)Percent change, June 2013-14 (2)National ranking by percent change (3)Average weekly wageNational ranking by level (3)Percent change, second quarter 2013-14 (2)National ranking by percent change (3)

United States (4)

137,776.42.0--$940--2.1--

South Dakota

422.91.4--712493.34

Minnehaha, S.D.

122.92.41087962493.249
 

Footnotes:
(1) Average weekly wages were calculated using unrounded data.
(2) Percent changes were computed from quarterly employment and pay data adjusted for noneconomic county reclassifications.
(3) Ranking does not include data for Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands.
(4) Totals for the United States do not include data for Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands.
 

NOTE: Data are preliminary. Covered employment and wages includes workers covered by Unemployment Insurance (UI) and Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees (UCFE) programs.
 

Table 2. Covered employment and wages in the United States and all counties in South Dakota, 2nd quarter 2014
AreaEmployment June 2014Average weekly wage (1)

United States (2)

137,776,364$940

South Dakota

422,861712

Aurora

942558

Beadle

8,706654

Bennett

841507

Bon Homme

1,884573

Brookings

17,573739

Brown

21,164699

Brule

1,960537

Buffalo

533643

Butte

2,922587

Campbell

485565

Charles Mix

3,736552

Clark

1,085550

Clay

5,701643

Codington

16,276681

Corson

833649

Custer

3,147566

Davison

12,729662

Day

1,996527

Deuel

1,541625

Dewey

2,135676

Douglas

1,214586

Edmunds

1,314665

Fall River

2,587581

Faulk

613595

Grant

4,040730

Gregory

1,485522

Haakon

776617

Hamlin

1,900597

Hand

1,347573

Hanson

565644

Harding

448746

Hughes

10,991741

Hutchinson

2,667570

Hyde

526698

Jackson

825497

Jerauld

1,664622

Jones

510468

Kingsbury

2,006565

Lake

4,756677

Lawrence

11,878588

Lincoln

19,230782

Lyman

1,491477

Marshall

1,793643

McCook

1,424569

McPherson

659516

Meade

6,837645

Mellette

353452

Miner

751593

Minnehaha

122,905796

Moody

2,402663

Pennington

58,003692

Perkins

1,173538

Potter

944549

Roberts

3,602563

Sanborn

676527

Shannon

3,700749

Spink

2,472601

Stanley

1,427592

Sully

603577

Todd

2,720636

Tripp

2,185584

Turner

2,196582

Union

9,475899

Walworth

2,434545

Yankton

12,605678

Ziebach

294608

Footnotes:
(1) Average weekly wages were calculated using unrounded data.
(2) Totals for the United States do not include data for Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands.
 

NOTE: Includes workers covered by Unemployment Insurance (UI) and Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees (UCFE) programs.
Data are preliminary.
 

Table 3. Covered employment and wages by state, second quarter 2014
StateEmploymentAverage weekly wage (1)
June 2014 (thousands)Percent change, June 2013-14Average weekly wageNational ranking by levelPercent change, second quarter 2013-14National ranking by percent change

United States (2)

137,776.42.0$940--2.1--

Alabama

1,872.90.7806361.638

Alaska

344.90.51,01484.62

Arizona

2,486.01.9888211.343

Arkansas

1,168.11.5745471.541

California

15,905.62.81,07262.415

Colorado

2,439.33.4960142.98

Connecticut

1,676.60.61,15532.513

Delaware

429.02.5976111.244

District of Columbia

732.61.01,5691-0.551

Florida

7,628.63.1839282.123

Georgia

4,036.33.1882221.735

Hawaii

624.61.1845262.710

Idaho

659.22.5697512.222

Illinois

5,836.91.5988101.932

Indiana

2,916.91.8784421.244

Iowa

1,547.81.6780433.07

Kansas

1,372.81.7797382.320

Kentucky

1,820.81.7798372.027

Louisiana

1,921.61.4843272.415

Maine

610.40.8746462.123

Maryland

2,594.40.91,02071.638

Massachusetts

3,407.01.41,15822.415

Michigan

4,164.72.3897202.320

Minnesota

2,782.01.3947161.932

Mississippi

1,101.10.5705502.027

Missouri

2,703.21.3818311.932

Montana

453.41.1734482.415

Nebraska

956.21.4756452.710

Nevada

1,210.13.4833300.650

New Hampshire

637.21.2955154.33

New Jersey

3,944.80.81,09751.244

New Mexico

801.00.6794401.735

New York

8,965.21.81,14642.415

North Carolina

4,080.72.4818311.244

North Dakota

453.04.4936175.51

Ohio

5,233.81.4846252.123

Oklahoma

1,578.01.0816332.612

Oregon

1,748.42.4874232.98

Pennsylvania

5,719.81.0933181.638

Rhode Island

472.91.6898192.027

South Carolina

1,916.42.7765442.513

South Dakota

422.91.4712493.34

Tennessee

2,755.71.8836292.027

Texas

11,402.83.0973133.15

Utah

1,297.52.9796391.735

Vermont

307.01.0813350.749

Virginia

3,710.80.7976110.848

Washington

3,109.63.299092.123

West Virginia

711.3-0.3792411.442

Wisconsin

2,809.11.3816332.027

Wyoming

295.31.6871243.15

Puerto Rico

897.0-2.0504(3)0.6(3)

Virgin Islands

37.8-2.2728(3)2.8(3)

Footnotes:
(1) Average weekly wages were calculated using unrounded data.
(2) Totals for the United States do not include data for Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands.
(3) Data not included in the national ranking.
 

NOTE: Data are preliminary. Covered employment and wages includes workers covered by Unemployment Insurance (UI) and Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees (UCFE) programs.
 

 

Last Modified Date: Wednesday, January 21, 2015