I. Florida Economy Doing Well

On Labor Day 2000, Florida’s economy continues to do well. The unemployment rate was 3.8% (seasonally adjusted) in June of 2000, falling from 8.3% in 1992 and 5.5% in 1995. Total non-agricultural employment for June increased 4.4% from a year earlier, placing Florida #1 in growth rate among the ten most populous states in this area.

II. Florida incomes

Coupled with nine years of economic expansion, incomes of Florida residents have been rising, although not quite as rapidly as for the nation as a whole. 1999 Florida per capita income was $28,023, 98.3% of the U.S. average. This represents a 4.4% increase over the previous year, and is 9.0% above the average for the eight states in the South Atlantic Region (Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware).

Median income for a family of four in Florida was $52,581 in 1998 (the latest year for which statistics are available), or 93.8% of the U.S. average. This placed Florida 32^nd out of the 50 states, unchanged from the year before. Of the southeastern states only South Carolina and West Virginia had a lower median.

III. Wages in Florida

For working people in Florida, the trend in wages is more important than trends in income. This is because income figures also include non-wage forms of payment such as returns from investments and pensions. Looking at wages, Florida appears comparatively worse than it does in income terms. As of the first quarter of 2000, the Florida average yearly wage was $31,203, only 87.5% of the national average.

Similarly, the median hourly wage for all workers paid by the hour in the state in 1999 was $8.79/hour, or 92.2% of the U.S. average. This is also lower than the median hourly wage for the states of the Southeast Region, which was $9.17/hr. Adjusted for inflation, Florida median hourly rates in 1999 finally caught up to and slightly surpassed 1989 levels ( the peak year of the last business cycle). In constant 1999 dollars they changed from $8.61/hour to $8.79/hour in that ten year period.

This stagnant wage growth is unprecedented in times of such steady expansion and wealth creation. The combination of stagnant wages with slowly growing incomes can be explained by a combination of factors: more people now work two jobs, more family members work, more of the state's income takes the form of return on investment rather than wages for work performed.

IV. Low Income Workers, Inequality, and Poverty

Florida has a large concentration of workers earning very low wages. As of 1999, 5.3% of the state's workers earned the national minimum wage ($5.15/hour) or less. This compares with a national average of 4.6%; and a regional average of 4.9%. In the decade 1989-1999, Florida’s percentages on this measure actually went up, while they went down in the region and the nation.

The number of Florida workers earning less than the wage needed to keep a family of four above the poverty level (approximately $8.00/hour in 1999) was also high. Fully 38.8% of Florida workers were at this level of the "working poor", compared to a national average of 34% and a regional one of 35.2%.

Meanwhile, Florida’s rich are getting richer and its poor are getting poorer. A January 2000 study found that inequality grew from the late-1980s to the late-1990s, when the state’s families in the lowest 20% of the income distribution lost 3% of their real income, the middle 20% gained only 2%, and the state’s richest 20% increased their real income by 13%. The richest 5% increased their incomes by a substantial 21% in that period.

As one would expect given the high incidence of low wages, there is a high level of poverty in Florida. In 1997-1998 (the latest dates for which information is available), 13.7% of Florida’s population lived in poverty, above the national average of 13.0% and tying the state for the 17^th-18^th highest in the nation. Only West Virginia and Georgia have higher rates in the eight South Atlantic region states. Even if poverty has dropped further by the year 2000, it is unclear if Florida has succeeded in getting back to its 1989 level of 13.1% (we await further data). Even if true, it would be unprecedented for such a long economic expansion to have produced no drop in the poverty level, only a return to previous levels.

V. Workplace Conditions and Government Worker Protections

Income is not the only measure of worker well-being. Also important is the way employees are treated in the workplace and government policies which protect workers. On this score, Florida rates poorly. The state is one of only seven in the nation that has no minimum wage for workers not covered by the national minimum wage. Florida’s unemployment laws are written so restrictively that it has among the lowest percentage of unemployed qualifying for benefits in the nation. The state ranks in the bottom thirteen states nationally in the number of other worker protection statutes.

Health insurance is important to all workers and their families. Seventeen and a half percent of Florida residents have no coverage, placing the state 40^th of the nation’s 50 states. Florida private health insurance coverage is also low: 33.4% lacked such coverage, again placing the state 40^th in the nation.

Unions are perhaps the primary mechanism for U.S. workers to raise their living and working standards. Therefore, the condition of unions within a state is another indicator of worker well-being. For all workers in 1999, Florida’s unionization rate was 6.5% of eligible workers, ranking the state 45^th out of the 50 states. In the private sector, the rate was 3.4%, 47^th in the nation. State public sector workers were 25.4% unionized, closer to the national average of 37.3%. State government policy is generally hostile to unions – a "right-to-work" provision in Florida’s constitution ensures that workers covered by a union contract need not pay their union dues.

The state’s 1999 tax burden was 90.6% of the U.S. average, 24^th of the 50 states. Total per capita taxes of $3,822 again put the state 24^nd highest in the nation. But working people pay a disproportionate share of the state’s taxes, because the structure is highly regressive (meaning the wealthy pay less as a share of their income than lower income taxpayers). Several studies have found the state’s taxes to be among the most regressive in the nation.

Florida’s public policies are much less favorable than those of most states with regard to workers. This is part of a longer term history in the state, where "cheap land, low taxes, and low wages" have been used to sell the state to investors.

VI. How Florida’s Counties are Faring

Data for Florida’s counties show a sharp discrepancy in wages. While a relatively small group of large, mostly urban counties are doing quite well, average wages for most of the other counties are far below the state average. The full report provides data on recent employment, unemployment, and wage trends for each of Florida’s 67 counties.

VII. How Florida’s Metropolitan Areas are Faring

Florida’s Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) also exhibit uneven patterns of employment growth, unemployment, and wages. The full report allows the reader to compare all 20 MSAs on a number of indices of worker well being.

VIII. Conclusion

Despite a booming economy, Florida’s workers are not sharing fully in the prosperity, and are not a priority of the state’s public policies. 1999 average hourly wage rates finally caught up to 1989 levels; incomes rose slightly largely due to longer hours, multiple job holding, additional bread-earners per family, and growing non-wage income.

Compared to the nation and the other states of the South Atlantic Region, on many measures of worker well-being Florida is not holding its own. On this Labor Day we should take notice that workers in our state often labor under standards and conditions well below national or regional norms. In short, our state, our workers, and our policy makers could be doing better.
 
 

I. Florida Economy Doing Well

On Labor Day 2000, Florida’s economy continues to do very well, continuing the state’s longest post World War II expansion. The June 2000 unemployment rate (seasonally adjusted) was 3.8%, unchanged from a year earlier and one of the lowest rates in the past twenty-six years. This rate is also below the national average, which was 4.0% that month. This low unemployment rate continues a falling trend: in 1992 the state unemployment rate was 8.3%, falling to 5.5% by 1995; and then falling below 4.0% in the second half of 1999. The state’s unemployment rates have been below national averages since May 1998. (July 16, 1999 and July 21, 2000 FL Employment and Unemployment press releases, FL Dept. of Labor and Employment Security)

Coupled with a falling unemployment rate, total non-agricultural employment in the state continued to rise. The state’s 7,171,100 workers in June represents an increase of 4.4% over a year earlier. This percentage job growth placed the state #1 among the 10 most populous states in the nation, and #2 in the total number of jobs added. (July 21, 2000 FL Employment and Unemployment press release)

Given such sustained and vigorous economic growth, one would expect that workers in the state would be faring very well. Tight job markets and expanding employment opportunities traditionally mean better wages and conditions for workers.

II. Incomes in Florida

Given nine years of continued expansion, the income of Florida residents should be rising considerably. Indeed, per capita income levels have been growing. In 1999 (the latest year for which statistics are available), per capita income in Florida was $28,023, a 4.4% increase over 1998 levels. This is 98.3% of the U.S. average ($28,518) for that year. (Website: http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/regional/spi/pcpi.htm).  Even though state per capita income was slightly below U.S. averages, 32 other states had lower averages, placing Florida 18^th out of all 50 states on this measure.

Florida’s per capita income has remained fairly steady as a percentage of U.S. average figures, showing a very small loss in the last two years. Table 1 shows the figures for the five years of 1995 through 1999.
 
 

Source: Website http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/regional/spi/pcpi.htm (*note that 1999 figures are preliminary estimates)
 

While Florida state per capita income growth rates from 1996 through 1999 were slightly less rapid than in the nation as a whole, they nevertheless grew more rapidly than the inflation rate. Income outstripped inflation by 1.2% 1996 to 1997 and by 1.4% from1997 to 1998 and by 2.8% from 1998 to 1999. (For inflation figures for the relevant years, see the website: ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/cpi/cpiai.txt).  Thus real per capita income has been rising in the state in the second half of this decade, albeit slightly less rapidly than in the nation as a whole.

While it is slightly below national averages, the Florida per capita personal income is higher than the averages for the region of the country to which it belongs (the South Atlantic region, comprising the eight states: Florida, Georgia, North and South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware). Table 2 shows the comparisons.
 
 

Source: Website http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/regional/spi/pcpi.htm (*Note that 1999 figures are preliminary estimates)
 

If states such as Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi were added for comparative purposes, Florida’s per capita income figures would look even better comparatively, since these three states have incomes even lower than the Southeast Region averages.

Median income for a Florida family of four (meaning income where half earn more and half earn less) was $52,581 in 1998, the latest year for which statistics are available. (Website: http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/4person.html).  This is 93.8% of the national average, which places the state 32^nd out of the nation’s 50 states, an unchanged ranking from the year before.

Of the 8 states in the South Atlantic region (Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, North and South Carolina, and Georgia), only South Carolina and West Virginia had a lower 4 person family median income. These comparisons are relatively unchanged from 1989, the peak of the previous business cycle, when the state also ranked 32^nd among the nation’s 50 states and only South Carolina and West Virginia ranked lower in the region.

Again, if Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi are added for comparative purposes, Florida looks better in comparison to its neighbors, since all three states have quite low 4-person family income statistics, and nationally rank 37^th, 45^th, and 48^th respectively in this statistic. For this "augmented region", Florida stands right in the middle of its neighbors in 4-person family income statistics: five states have higher figures, five have lower.

Over the long run, Florida’s median 4-person family income has been relatively steady compared to the U.S. as a whole. This is an improvement over what had been occurring from 1991 through 1996, when the state was slipping noticeably relative to the United States. Table 3 shows the relevant figures for the ten years of 1989 through 1998.
 
 

Source: Website http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/4person.html
 

Florida remains below both national and regional averages in income for a family of four. It is also slightly below national averages in per capita income, although it exceeds the regional average on this score, probably due to the large number of wealthy retirees in the state compared to other states in the region.

III. Wages in Florida

For working people in Florida, the trends in wages and salaries are more important than trends in income. Simple income figures include retirement, investment, and other non-wage forms of payment, thereby obscuring the actual conditions of those working for a living. This is especially true in Florida, because of the disproportionate share of the state’s population composed of wealthy retirees living off pensions and investment income (dividends, interest, and rents). Therefore income figures tend to overstate well being compared to the living standards of working individuals and families.

Turning to wages, Florida looks comparatively worse than it does in income terms. As of the first quarter of 2000, the Florida estimated average yearly wage was $31,203.40 (Website: http://www.dismal.com/cgi/sql_state_test.asp?State=Florida&View=Income) This is only 87.5% of the national average, much less than the state’s over 98% ratio of per capita income compared to the national average.

A similar picture emerges from looking at the median hourly wage for workers paid by the hour. In 1999 (the latest year for which data are available), it was $8.79/hour, 92.2% of the national figure of $9.53/hour. Florida is also below the average for the South Atlantic region, which is $9.17/hour. Detailed comparison with individual states in this region is impossible because most regional states are not large enough to have big enough samples from the survey producing these data to produce statistically reliable results. Compared to the year of the last business cycle peak, 1989, median hourly wages in 1999 for Florida workers paid by the hour finally caught up to and surpassed their previous levels in real terms (after numbers are adjusted for inflation), although just barely. Converting all wage rates to 1999 dollars, Table 4 shows the wage changes from 1989-199 for Florida, the South Atlantic Region, and the United States:
 
 

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, data from the Current Population Survey, Table A-21, relevant years. Consumer Price Index figures were used to adjust wages to 1999 dollars.
 

As is apparent from Table 4, Florida shared wage trends with the South Atlantic Region and the United States as a whole in the 1990s: falling real wages through 1997 or 1998, only catching up to previous wage levels in 1999. Given the rapid expansion and growing wealth of the decade, this is an unparalleled poor showing for hourly workers. Virtually all of the wealth created in that decade went to other sectors than hourly workers.

Florida’s per capita income level, and its income level for a family of four have grown more rapidly in the 1990s than have wage levels. How can we explain this? The explanation lies in a combination of factors: more of the state’s income is taking the form of return on investment rather than wages for work performed, people are working longer hours, more family members are working, and more people are working two jobs. All of these trends are harmful to working people due to the increased stress from more/longer work hours and the transfer of wealth from workers to investors.

IV. Low-income Workers and Inequality

One of the major problems for Florida workers is the state’s extreme inequality of wage levels. A disproportionate share of the state’s workers earn very low wages. As of 1999 5.3% of the state’s workers earned the national minimum wage ($5.15/hour) or less; the national average was 4.6%, and the region’s average had 4.9% of its workers earning such extremely low wages. Data are given in Table 5.
 
 

Source: unpublished data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, CPS Table A-21
 

If we add to these minimum and sub-minimum wage workers the other low wage workers earning less than the approximate wage needed to keep a family of four above the poverty level (approximately $8.00/hr) fully 38.8% of Florida workers in 1999 were at this level of the "working poor." The national average was 34.0%, and the region’s was 35.2%. Data are given in Table 6.
 
 

Source: unpublished data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, CPS Table A-21
 

While low-wage workers have been losing ground nationally in the 1990s, Florida in most respects has been doing worse than even national averages. For example, in 1989 (the peak year of the last business cycle), Florida had only 4.9% of its workers earning at or below the (then) minimum wage of $3.35/hr. (Florida is now up to 5.3% at or below the current minimum wage). At that time both the nation and the region had higher numbers working at these low wages (5.1% and 5.5%), not lower. The nation and the region improved in this respect in the decade 1989-1999, while Florida went backward. Table 7 shows the data.
 
 

Source: unpublished data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, CPS Table A-21
 

A January 2000 study by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and the Economic Policy Institute found that inequality in the state had been increasing for two decades. The state’s poorest 20% of families lost almost 3% of their real income from the late 1980s to the late1990s. The middle 20% gained only 2% in that period, while the state’s richest 20% increased their real income by approximately 13%. The richest 5% increased their incomes by a substantial 21% in the same period. (Website: http://www.cbpp.org/1-18-00sfp-fl.pdf) Despite some short term gains, low-income workers and even middle income workers did not share in the prosperity of the 1990s. Chart 1 shows the trends in real wages (i.e., adjusted for inflation):
 
 

Source: website http://www.cbpp.org/1-18-00sfp-fl.pdf (Note that changes are adjusted for inflation, to denote real change in income).
 

Given the high incidence of low-wage work in Florida, one would expect the state to have a high poverty rate. And indeed it does. The average poverty level for the state in 1997-1998 (the latest dates for which information is available) was 13.7% of the population. This is above the national average of 13.0%, and Florida is tied with North Dakota in having the 17^th - 18^th highest poverty rate of the 50 states. Of the eight states in the South Atlantic region, only West Virginia and Georgia have a higher poverty level. Again, if Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi are added, Florida does not appear quite as bad comparatively: all three have poverty levels higher than Florida. Nevertheless, Florida still ranks in the bottom half of this "augmented" region. (Website: http://www.census.gov/hhes/poverty/poverty98/pv98state.html)  Figures are given in Table 8.
 
 

Source: Website http://www.census.gov/hhes/poverty/poverty98/pv98state.html
 

The comparable percentages for Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi a re 15.1%, 17.7%, and 17.1% respectively.

It is true that Florida’s poverty level dropped in the second half of the 1990s. But as of 1997-1998 it had not dropped back to the level during the 1988-89 period, when it was 13.1%. (Lawrence Mishel, Jared Bernstein, and John Schmitt, The State of Working America, 1998-1999, p. 348) Perhaps, with continued prosperity, it has dropped closer to that level by 2000, but the figures are not yet available to tell us. Even if that were to be true, it would be unprecedented for such a long economic expansion to have produced no drop in the poverty level, only a return to previous levels.

Thus it appears that how well one rates Florida on Labor Day 1999 depends on where one is positioned economically. If you are wealthy and live primarily from investment income, the state is performing wonderfully. But if you are a worker, the performance is less stellar. An average or a low wage worker in the state is likely to be merely recovering to the wage and prosperity levels of a decade ago, not moving ahead.

V. Workplace Conditions and Government Worker Protections

Income is not the only measure of worker well-being. Also important are the way employees are treated in the workplace and government policies which protect workers. Therefore in this section we rate the state of Florida on a number of other dimensions. For many of these the material facts have not changed appreciably since last year’s Labor Report; in those cases we merely repeat earlier findings, while in other cases we update the figures or facts.

Minimum Wage. One measure of a state’s public policy toward workers is the level at which it sets the state minimum wage, the wage required in the state for those escaping coverage under the federal minimum wage law. Here Florida ranks dead last in the nation: together with six other states, it has no minimum wage law whatsoever. Employers in federally exempt industries like agriculture, or in very small workplaces, are legally free to set wages as low as one cent per hour or less.

Unemployment compensation. Another important measure is how well a state treats its unemployed. A study appearing in Southern Changes magazine ("The Climate for Workers in the United States 1997") found that Florida’s unemployment compensation laws are written very restrictively, preventing most unemployed from being eligible for unemployment compensation benefits. In a typical week, only 25.6% would qualify, which is a lower percentage than in all but eight other states. Once a worker does qualify however, Florida was no worse than the average in the amount of unemployment benefits given to each recipient.

Permanent Disability. The same study found Florida’s maximum weekly benefit for total disability to be almost exactly average for the U.S. as a whole.

Statutory Protections of Workers. The Southern Changes article developed a measure rating states on the degree to which they protect workers. Subjects include anti-discrimination, drug testing, family leave, anti-AIDS discrimination, sexual harassment, right-to-work, time off to vote, minimum wage, pay for overtime, equal pay, maximum hours, right-to-know, whistle blower protection, and anti-smoking. Florida did not fare well, ranking 37th out of the 50 states. Such important protective legislation in the state is clearly inferior to national norms.

Health Insurance Coverage. One of the most basic needs of workers and their families is health insurance coverage. Therefore, the percentage of a state’s residents with such coverage is a basic measure of their well-being. Florida fares very poorly by this measure. In 1998 (the latest year for which data are available), 17.5% of those residing in Florida had no coverage, placing the state 40^th of the 50 states; only ten had a higher degree of non-coverage. This is a deterioration in health care coverage since 1994, when 17.2% in the state were without coverage. But it is an improvement over 1997 when 19.6% lacked such coverage. Table 9 shows trends from 1994 - 1998.
 
 

Source: Website http://www.dismal.com/cgi/sql_state_test.asp?State=Florida&View=Socioeconomic plus previous years editions of this website. Original source of data is the U.S. Census Bureau, Department of Commerce, Current Population Survey.
 

If we turn to private health insurance coverage, the state ranks equally poorly. In 1998, 33.4% of Florida’s residents lacked private health insurance coverage, putting the state 40^th out of the 50 states on this measure.

Unionization. Unions are perhaps the primary mechanism for U.S. workers to raise their living and working standards. On average, union members earn between 30-40% more than non-union workers. They also exert greater influence over their working conditions, and they have contractual guarantees against arbitrary or discriminatory treatment. Therefore the condition of unions within a state is another indicator of worker well-being. In this regard, states can be measured in two ways: the size and strength of unions, and public policies toward unions which either encourage or inhibit their existence. On both fronts, Florida fares very poorly compared to U.S. norms.

For all Florida workers, the 1999 unionization rate was 6.5% of eligible workers, slightly under half of the U.S. rate of 13.9%. This ranks Florida 45^th out of the 50 states. In the private sector, union membership was 3.4% of eligible workers, again less than half the U.S. rate of 9.4% and ranking the state 47^th out of 50. For private manufacturing workers, the union membership rate in the state was 3.7%, slightly more than one-third of the U.S. rate of 15.6%, and placing the state 48^th out of 50. (Barry Hirsch and David Macpherson, Union Membership and Earnings Data Book, 2000 edition)

Florida’s public sector unionization rates are much higher than those in the private sector. Its public sector workers are 25.4% union members, compared to a U.S. average of 37.3%. Clearly, public sector workers in Florida have larger and therefore stronger unions than do those in the private sector. (Hirsch and Macpherson, 2000)

Compared to 1989, Florida’s 1999 unionization rates fell in every category. For the workforce as a whole, unionization dropped from 1989 to 1999 from 7.2% to 6.5%; for private sector workers from 3.6% to 3.4%; for private manufacturing workers from 5.5% to 3.7%. For public sector workers the drop was from 26.4% to 25.4%. (Hirsch and Macpherson 2000)

The state government’s public policies aim to keep unions weak. Florida is one of only two states with a ban on negotiated requirements of union membership for employees in unionized establishments (also known as a "right-to-work" provision) built into the state constitution. Twenty- one states have such provisions, but most are merely state laws, not constitutional requirements which are much harder to change.

"Right-to-work" provisions of this nature hurt unions by allowing workers covered by a union contract to not pay their union dues, i.e., be "free riders" accepting the benefits of union coverage without paying for it. Just over one quarter (25.3%) of workers in Florida covered by a union contract are "free riders." (This means that union coverage in Florida is 8.7% even though union membership is only 6.5%). Unions are hurt financially and are unable to represent their members and non-members as effectively when one quarter of those they represent do not pay their dues, as is the case in Florida.

Tax Burden. Florida is traditionally considered a "low tax" state. In 1999 Florida’s tax burden on its citizens was 90.6% of the U.S. average, which placed the state 24^th out of the 50 states on this measure. Total per capita taxes were $3,822 in that year, also 24^th in the nation. The state’s per capita tax rate was 13.6%, ranking it 30th of the 50 states. (Website: http://www.dismal.com/cgi/sql_state_test.asp?State=Florida&View=Income)

But working people and those in the lower income brackets pay a disproportionate percentage of the taxes that are collected. Both Southern Changes magazine and the Citizens for Tax Justice have found that Florida has one of the most regressive tax structures in the nation. ("Regressive" means lower income people pay a higher percentage of their income for state and local taxes than do their wealthier counterparts.) For example, in 1995 low-income Floridians (bottom 20%) paid 3.9 times as high a percentage of their income as did the high-income (top 20%) residents. Thus, the tax burden on low and middle income Florida workers is actually quite high--simply because it is not distributed equitably among the wealthier and poorer segments of the population. On this measure, Florida is at the extreme fringe among U.S. states.

Thus, we find that Florida’s public policies toward workers and the workplace conditions in the state are, on average, inferior to those of the country as a whole. From minimum wage to unemployment compensation, health insurance coverage to union rights and protections, statutory protection of workers’ rights to distribution of the tax burden, Florida has rather consistently been among the very least worker-friendly states in the nation.

This is part of a longer term history of the state. In the past conscious strategies employed to attract businesses to the state have resulted in the low-wages and substandard conditions for workers. Some political leaders and economic development officials have viewed (and view) Florida’s low-wages as a positive feature of the state. An article in the January 11, 1998 issue of The Florida Times-Union in Jacksonville notes this:

VI. How Have Florida's Counties Fared?

As in other large states, employment opportunities and earnings in Florida vary greatly across geographical areas and labor markets. To provide a more detailed picture of how workers fared during the current economic expansion throughout Florida, we examined trends in the employment, unemployment, and earnings for Florida's 67 counties.

Job creation is a vital part of all economic expansions, providing employment for large portions of job seekers. Florida's employment growth in recent years has been quite rapid, as data for 1995-2000 show. Table 10 shows employment changes for the 67 counties, listing the counties in alphabetical order. As these tabulations show, 31 counties had growth rates that exceeded Florida’s five year growth rate of 9.1 percent. Thirty six had growth rates slower than the state’s. Twelve of these thirty six actually had negative growth rates. (To determine five year growth rates for individual counties, use the next to the last column in Table 10.) Twenty two of the thirty six slow growth counties grew at less than half the state rate (.i.e., 4.5% or less) and fifteen of the 31 fast growth counties grew at over twice the state’s pace (i.e., over 18.2%).
 
 

Source: Data from the Florida Department of Labor and Employment Security, LAUS files.
 

Utilizing data from Table 10, listing in order Florida’s counties from the fastest growing to the slowest in the past five years yields the following rank order (those growing faster than the state average are in bold): (1) Manatee (29%), (2) Collier (28.1%), (3) Lake (27.7%), (4) Lafayette (27.3%), (5) Sarasota (27.2%), (6) Osceola (26.5%), (7) Orange (23.2%), (8) Sumter (21.9%), (9) Seminole (20.9%), (10-11) Pasco and Hernando (20.0%), (12) Wakulla (19.5%), (13) Martin (19.1%), (14) Flagler (18.6%), (15) St. Lucie (18.3%), (16), St. Johns (17.6%), (17) Hillsborough (17.4%), (18-19) Palm Beach and Glades (17.0%), (20) Washington (16.2%), (21) Marion (15.4%), (22) Santa Rosa (14.7%), (23) Clay (14.2%), (24) Indian River (13.7%), (25) Pinellas (13.6%), (26) Nassau (12.7%), (27-28) Lee and Columbia (11.7%), (29) Charlotte (11.2%), (30) Broward (11.0%), (31) Alachua (9.2%), (32) Polk (9.0%), (33) Brevard (8.7%), (34-35) Monroe and Okaloosa (8.3%), (36) Duval (7.8%), (37) Baker (7.6%), (38) Walton (7.1%), (39) Leon (6.9%), (40-41) Bay and Gadsden (6.8%), (42-44) Citrus, Gilchrist, and Okeechobee ((5.4%), (45) Hendry (5.2%), (46) Miami-Dade (4.8%), (47) Escambia (4.4%), (48) Bradford (4.1%), (49) Volusia (3.8%), (50) Calhoun (3.4%), (51) Franklin (2.1%), (52) Highlands (1.6%), (53) Levy (1.3%), (54) Madison (1.1%), (55-56) Suwanee and Taylor (.7%), (57) Holmes (-2.4%), (58) Dixie (-4.6%), (59)Putnam (-6.1%), (60) Jackson (-6.8%), (61) Gulf (-7.2%), (62) Jefferson (-8.0%), (63) Liberty (-9.0%), (64) DeSoto (-9.6%), (65) Hamilton (-10.7%), (66) Hardee (-14.0%), and (67) Union (-14.6%). The final column in Table 10 helps the reader understand how much of the employment change over the last five years is due to the last year alone.

Mirroring employment growth, joblessness for almost all of Florida’s counties declined between 1995 and 2000. Table 11 shows the June unemployment rates (not seasonally adjusted) for Florida and its counties (in alphabetical order) for 1995, 1999, and 2000, as well as the percentage change between the two earlier years and 2000. As is apparent from the next to last column in Table 11, forty one of the state’s sixty seven counties did not lower their unemployment rates as much as the state as a whole, while twenty six did better. The Table as a whole allows comparisons, county by county.
 
 

Source: Data from the Florida Department of Labor and Employment Security, LAUS files.
 

The reader is cautioned that the figures given above are for the month of June only, and thus may have certain distortions or variations from long term unemployment rates. They should be used only as general indicators of comparative unemployment, not precise longer term rates for counties or the state. Nevertheless, it is interesting that ten counties (Bay, Calhoun, Franklin, Gilchrist, Gulf, Jefferson, Liberty, Santa Rosa, Union, and Wakulla) actually increased their unemployment rates in the past five years, while one’s (Putnam’s) remained unchanged, even with the uninterrupted economic expansion which this state (and the nation) has experienced throughout the 1990s. The improvements in the unemployment situation have been unevenly dispersed.

Despite the employment expansion throughout most of Florida, wages in most counties stayed far below the national average. In 1998--the most recent date for which county-level wage information is available-- the average wage for Florida was $27,863, which was 89 percent that of the U.S. Average earnings for most counties were considerably below this, however, as shown in the last column of table 12 below. In 1998 the average wages for well over half of Florida's counties (38) were 75 percent or less than that for the U.S. as a whole.