Florida Labor Report

by Bruce Nissen
Center for Labor Research and Studies
Florida International University
Miami, Florida 33199
305-348-2616
nissenb@fiu.edu

This report is available on the web at http://www.fiu.edu/~clrs . Click on "publications", then click on the 2001 Labor Report on the State of Florida.

On Labor Day 2001, Florida's economy is doing somewhat better than that of the nation as a whole. The unemployment rate was 4.0% (seasonally adjusted) in June of 2001, up from the year before but still below the national average of 4.5%. Total non-agricultural employment for June increased 3.1% from a year earlier , placing Florida #1 in growth rate among the five most populous states.

Incomes of Florida residents have been rising, although not quite as rapidly as for the nation as a whole. 2000 Florida per capita income was $28,145, 94.8% of the U.S. average. This represents a 7.6% increase in real (inflation adjusted) income over 1990, which is less rapid growth than for the nation as a whole. Florida per capita income is still above average for the nation's southeast region, but it is losing ground on this measure also.

Median income for a family of four in Florida was $55,578 in 1999 (the latest year for which statistics are available), or 92.7% of the U.S. average. This placed Florida 35^nd out of the 50 states, down from 32^nd the year before.

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 2001, the Florida average yearly wage was $33,435, only 88% of the national average.

Similarly, the median hourly wage for all workers paid by the hour in the state in 2000 was $9.11/hour, or 91.9% of the U.S. average. This is also lower than the median hourly wage for the states of the South Atlantic Region, which was $9.66/hr. Adjusted for inflation, Florida median hourly rates in 2000 exceeded 1989 levels ( the peak year of the last business cycle) by only 2.4%. In constant 2000 dollars they changed from $8.90/hour to $9.11/hour in that eleven 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.

Florida has a large concentration of workers earning very low wages. As of 2000, 2.9% of the state's workers earned less than the national minimum wage ($5.15/hour). This compares with a national average of 2.5%; and a regional average of 2.9%.

The number of Florida workers earning less $8.00 per hour (well below the poverty level for a family of four) was also high. Fully 34.2% of Florida workers were at this level of the "working poor", compared to a national average of 29.9% and a regional one of 30.8%. An alternative measure of "working poverty" shows the same pattern: Florida's percentage is above both national and regional averages.

A January 2000 study of Florida 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. Since the late 1990s, lower and middle income workers have improved their lot, so the same calculation today would not be quite as stark, but the overall pattern would remain.

As one would expect given the high incidence of low wages, there is a high level of poverty in Florida. In 1998-1999 (the latest dates for which information is available), 12.8% of Florida's population lived in poverty, above the national average of 12.3% and tying the state for the 16^th -17^th highest in the nation. The 1989 level was 13.1%. A Supplemental Survey taken as part of the 2000 Census (whose data may not exactly correspond to other figures) shows a 2000 poverty rate of 13.5%, again 16^th highest in the nation. It thus appears that the long economic expansion in Florida in the 1990s produced essentially no drop in the poverty level.

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 number of worker protection statutes.

Health insurance is important to all workers and their families. In 1999 (latest year for which data are available), 19.2% of Florida residents had no coverage; only five states had a higher percentage. Florida private health insurance coverage is also low: 35.2% lacked such coverage, again placing the state 6^th highest in the nation on this score

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 2000, Florida's unionization rate was 6.8% of eligible workers, ranking the state 41^st out of the 50 states. In the private sector, the rate was 3.3%, 48^th in the nation. State public sector workers were 28.5% unionized, closer to the national average of 37.5%. 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 2000 tax burden was 88.4% of the U.S. average, 25^th of the 50 states. Total per capita taxes of $4,055 again put the state 25^th 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.

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.

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.

Structurally, the Florida economy is overly reliant on industries that pay below average wages. Three sectors have wages below the state's average wage: agriculture (average wage of $18,066, or 37.8% below the state's average ), retail trade (average wage of $17,836, or 38.6% below the state's average), and services (average wage of $27,980, or 3.7% below the state's average). If "services" is broken down into components, Florida has an unusually high number of low wage service jobs such as personal services, private household services, and entertainment and recreation services, due to its large tourism industry and its large retiree population. In 1999 Florida had 600,124 more workers (8.8% of the workforce) in these industries than it would were it a "normal" state for employment patterns.

These industries pay less than $7.00 per hour to a large percentage (between 33% and 40%) of their workers. (This is less than $14,560 per year even if one worked full time year round.) And between 14% and 23% of these workers earned less than $6.00 per hour, or less than $12,480 for full time work year round.

Locked in to certain low wage industries, the state could address the low wage problem by enacting a state minimum wage covering all workers , including those escaping coverage under the national minimum wage (agricultural workers, restaurant workers, workers in very small establishments, etc.). Were the state minimum wage set at $6.00 per hour, 14% to 23% of workers in the above mentioned industries would win pay increases to the new minimum wage, and a large majority of the 33-40% in those same industries making between $6.00 and $7.00 per hour would probably also win pay increases. And yet $6.00 per hour is a very low figure - so low that the danger of pricing significant numbers of unskilled workers "out of the market" is very minimal.

A similar but less far reaching legislative measure would be a state "living wage" law requiring the state to set a "public example" by legislating that its own employees and the employees of its service contractors be paid above the poverty level for a family of four, and that they be provided health insurance or its monetary equivalent.

Florida's overall economy is holding its own as of Labor Day 2001. Unemployment is low and is below national averages, and the state is faring better than are many others. Yet on a variety of measures the workers of this state are faring much worse than one might expect, given the overall state of the economy. Florida has a disproportionate number and percentage of low wage jobs, and it has poverty rates well above national averages.

Within the state, prosperity is also distributed unevenly. A majority of counties are faring worse than the state as a whole because a few populous and wealthier counties pull state averages up. Metropolitan areas likewise show uneven developments, with a majority lagging the state in wage growth.

Florida's public policies have not effectively addressed the state's dilemma of being a low wage state. Relatively simple measures, such as a state minimum wage and a state "living wage" law would begin to address the problem, but such measures appear unlikely in the present political climate. Yet the problem will persist and probably worsen unless active measures are taken.

On Labor Day 2001, Florida's economy is showing some signs of stress, but it appears to be weathering the economic turbulence somewhat better than the nation as a whole. The June 2001 unemployment rate (seasonally adjusted) was 4.0%, an increase of .4 percentage point over a year earlier. This rate was below the national average, which was 4.5% that month. The state's unemployment rate has been at or below national averages since March 1995 (July 19, 2001 FL Employment and Unemployment press releases, FL Agency for Workforce Innovation).

Total non-agricultural employment in the state rose 3.1% from June 2000 to June 2001, to 7,315,200. This percentage job growth placed the state #1 among the 5 most populous states in the nation, and #2 in the total number of jobs added. (July 19, 2001 FL Employment and Unemployment press releases, FL Agency for Workforce Innovation).

The reason for Florida's relative good fortune seems to be that it is dependent on industries that so far have not been strongly impacted by the downturn, such as tourism and housing. At the same time, it has little economic activity in the sectors that have turned down the most: manufacturing and technology (Gregg Fields, "Survey: South Florida not hit by downturn", Miami Herald, May 22, 2001).

Following a decade of uninterrupted and unprecedented economic expansion, this relative good news for the state would lead one to expect that workers in the state would be faring very well. Fairly low unemployment rates and expanding employment opportunities traditionally mean better wages and conditions for workers.

Per capita income levels in Florida have been growing. In 2000 (the latest year for which statistics are available), per capita income in Florida was $28,145, almost a 42% increase over 1990 levels. (These figures are not adjusted for inflation; if we do adjust for inflation and compute the real increase in purchasing power, the increase for the entire decade 1990-2000 is only 7.6%). Florida's 2000 per capita income is 94.8% of the U.S. average ($29,676) for that year (website: http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/regional/data.htm ) . Even though state per capita income was below U.S. averages, 26 other states had lower averages, placing Florida 24^th out of all 50 states on this measure.

Florida's per capita income was gaining on the U.S. average each decade until the 1990s. In that decade it fell backward, as shown in Table 1.

Source: Website http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/regional/data.htm (*note that 2000 figures are preliminary estimates)

While Florida did less well on per capita income in the 1990s than the nation as a whole, it finally did raise real incomes in the final years of that decade. By the end of the decade, Florida per capita incomes were 7.6% higher in 2000 than in 1990. This is an extremely poor showing, given the strong and uninterrupted economic growth for that decade, but it is better performance than was evident in the first half of the decade, when incomes actually dropped.

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 Southeast region, comprising twelve states: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia). This region has become the poorest in the nation, and yet Florida's per capita income advantage over the region is decreasing each decade. Table 2 shows the progression of Florida's per capita income, compared to its regional neighbors:

Source: Website http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/regional/data.htm (*Note that 2000 figures are preliminary estimates)

Median income for a Florida family of four (meaning income where half earn more and half earn less) was $55,578 in 1999, the latest year for which statistics are available. (Website: http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/4person.html ) This is 92.7% of the national average, which places the state 35^nd out of the nation's 50 states, dropping from 32^nd the year before.

Of the 12 states in the Southeast Atlantic region seven had lower family of four median incomes (Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee, and West Virginia). Four had a higher one: Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia. Thus, Florida is slightly above average (5^th out of 12) in the lowest waged region of the country, and below average for the country as a whole.

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 eleven years of 1989 through 1999.

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.

The degree to which per capita income figures distort the wage picture should be apparent from the state's rankings in the amount of per capita income it receives in dividends, interest, rent, and retirement income. In 1999 the state was second in the nation in per capita dividend income ($2,036 per capita vs. a national average of $1,358). It was first in the nation in per capita income from combined dividends, interest and rent ($7,298 vs. a national average of $5,414). And it was eighth highest in the nation in per capita retirement (and other) income ($3,859 vs. a national average of $3,269). ( http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/regional/data.htm )

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 $33,435.20 (Website: http://www.dismal.com/cgi/sql_state_test.asp?State=Florida&View=Income) This is only 88% of the national average, well below the state's 94.8% ratio of Florida 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 2000 (the latest year for which data are available), it was $9.11/hour, 91.9% of the national figure of $9.91/hour. Florida was also below the average for the South Atlantic region, which was $9.66/hour. (The South Atlantic region, which is not identical to the Southeast Region used by the Census Bureau in earlier figures, is used by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for comparisons. It is composed of: Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, and West Virginia). Detailed comparison with individual states in this region is impossible because most regional states are not large enough to produce samples big enough for statistically reliable results. Compared to the peak year of the last business cycle, 1989, median hourly wages in Florida for workers paid by the hour took until 1999 to catch up to and surpass their previous levels in real terms (after numbers are adjusted for inflation). Converting all wage rates to year 2000 dollars, Table 4 shows the wage changes from 1989-2000 for Florida, the South Atlantic Region, and the United States:

Hourly wage rates in constant 2000 dollars for workers paid by the hour, Florida, South Atlantic Region, and the United States, 1989-2000

Source: Calculations from U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, unpublished data from the Current Population Survey, Table A-21, relevant years. Consumer Price Index figures were used to adjust wages to 2000 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.

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 2000 2.9% of the state's workers earned less than the national minimum wage ($5.15/hour). The national average was 2.5%, and the region's average was identical to Florida's: 2.9%.

Percentage of workers earning below the minimum wage, Florida compared to the South Atlantic
Region and the U.S. as a whole, 2000

Workers can earn less than the national minimum wage because certain categories of workers (e.g., agricultural workers, waiters and waitresses, workers in extremely small businesses, etc.) are exempted from the minimum wage. Earning less than the minimum wage meant that someone working full time for a complete year would earn less than $10,700.

**STATE, REGION PERCENTAGE EARNING LESS THAN $5.15/HR**
FLORIDA	2.9%
SOUTH ATLANTIC REGION	2.9%
UNITED STATES	2.5%

If we add to these sub-minimum wage workers the other low wage workers earning less than $8.00 per hour, fully 34.2% of Florida workers in 2000 were at this level of the "working poor." The national average was 29.9%, and the region's was 30.8%. Data are given in Table 6.

Percentage of workers earning less than $8.00 per hour, Florida compared to the South Atlantic
Region and the U.S. as a whole, 2000

The more than one third of Florida workers who are earning less than $8.00 per hour are earning less than $16,620 a year, even if they work full time year round. The official U.S. poverty level for a family of four is $17,761 per year, more than $1,100 higher than the income of these workers.

**STATE, REGION PERCENTAGE EARNING $7.99/HR OR LESS**
FLORIDA	34.2%
SOUTH ATLANTIC REGION	30.8%
UNITED STATES	29.9%

An alternative way to determine the percentage of low wage workers earning a poverty level wage would be to compare people's earnings with their family size and status, and apply to each of them the standard used by the federal government to determine poverty. (In other words, the poverty level wage goes up as the size of the family goes up, and down as one's family size goes down.) Using this methodology, and calculating figures from a different source (the Current Population Survey Outgoing Rotation Group), the Economic Policy Institute in Washington D.C. has determined that 30.4% of Florida workers earn poverty-level wages or lower. This compares with a national rate of 25.1% and a southern regional one of 28.4%, showing the same pattern. Florida has a high percentage of low wage workers either way one measures it, and the two methods of calculation come up with remarkably similar results. (Data from the Economic Policy Institute, Table 18 "Share of workers earning poverty-level wages by state for the years 1979, 1989, and 2000.)

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 (inflation adjusted) 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):

As noted earlier, by the years 2000 and 2001, the situation had improved, and even low wage workers had made progress, but the pattern shown above of extreme growth in inequality remains true in the overall picture.

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 1998-1999 (the latest dates for which information is available) was 12.8% of the population. This was above the national average of 12.3%, and Florida is tied with Kentucky in having the 16^th - 17^th highest poverty rate of the 50 states. Of the twelve states in the Southeast region, seven (Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, and West Virginia) have higher poverty levels, while four have lower ones. (Website: http://www.census.gov/hhes/poverty/poverty99/pv99state.html) Figures are given in Table 7, from lowest poverty to highest poverty states..

All of the above statistics are conventional data obtained from U.S. government agencies or the Florida workforce website. In the year 2000 the Census Bureau conducted a "Supplementary Survey" throughout the year which also provides data concerning economic well being in the state. The survey is merely a sample and is subject to error, but it nevertheless provides useful and updated information. Its results are generally congruent with those presented above, although there are a few major departures from previous figures. But for our purposes here, results are similar. The survey found that median household income in the state in 2000 was $37,346 , placing the state 35^th in the 50 states of the nation on this measure. The percentage of people living in poverty was found to be 13.5%, well above the 12.8% for 1998-1999 given in Table 7 above. This was the 16^th highest state rate in the nation. Per capita income was found to be $21,121, well below the $28,145 given in Table 2. Whatever the sources of the discrepancies, the data from this survey comparatively show the same picture for Florida: it is relatively low wage, high poverty state, although not one of the very worst in the nation. (For a table presenting the results of the Supplementary Survey, see the website: http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/QTTa...d=04000US12&qr_name=ACS_C2SS_EST_G00_QT03.)

Thus it appears that how well one rates Florida on Labor Day 2001 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 has only sightly moved ahead in the past decade.

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. Florida's unemployment compensation laws are written very restrictively, preventing most unemployed from being eligible to collect benefits. A comparison of the June 2001 number of unemployed in the state with the number collecting unemployment benefits during the week ended July 7, 2001 shows that only 31.3% of the unemployed in Florida are receiving benefits. Only seven states had a lower percentage (Colorado, Louisiana, New Mexico, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming). (Statistics used for these calculations can be found on the following websites: http://www.ows.doleta.gov/unemploy/page8/072601.html and http://stats.bls.gov/news.release/laus.t04.htm ). The average coverage among all fifty states is approximately 46% of all unemployed, almost one and one half times higher than the Florida rate. Once a worker does qualify however, Florida appears to be about average in the amount of unemployment benefits given to each recipient. A check of figures for May 2001 shows an average payment of $224.93 per week, only slightly below the U.S. average of $234.64, and 25^th out of the 50 states. (Website: http://www.ows.doleta.gov/unemploy/claimssum.asp )

Permanent Disability. Florida's maximum weekly benefit for total disability is very close to the average for all states: $571 (23^rd of the 50 states).
(Website: http://www.dol.gov/dol/esa/public/regs/statutes/owcp/stwclaw/tables-html/table-7.htm )

Statutory Protections of Workers. Various other state protections of workers and their rights are possible. 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. While a measure of such measures is difficult to quantify, the small number of such laws in Florida show that on 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 1999 (the latest year for which data are available), 19.2% of those residing in Florida had no health insurance coverage of any kind, the sixth highest non-coverage rate among the 50 states. This is a deterioration in health care coverage since 1994, when 17.2% in the state were without coverage. Table 8 shows coverage for the years 1994 through 1999.

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 1999, 35.24% of Florida's residents lacked private health insurance coverage, putting the state 45^th out of the 50 states on this measure (Same source as for Table 8).

Unionization. Unions are perhaps the primary mechanism for U.S. workers to raise their living and working standards. On average, union members earn between 20-30% 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 comparatively.

For all Florida workers, the year 2000 unionization rate was 6.8% of eligible workers, slightly over half of the U.S. rate of 13.5%. This ranks Florida 41st out of the 50 states. In the private sector, union membership was 3.3% of eligible workers, slightly over one third of the U.S. rate of 9.0% and ranking the state 48^th out of 50. For private manufacturing workers, the state union membership rate was 4.3%, slightly more than one-third of the U.S. rate of 14.8%, and placing the state 49^th out of 50. (Barry Hirsch and David Macpherson, Union Membership and Earnings Data Book, 2001 edition)

Florida's year 2000 public sector unionization rates are much higher than those in the private sector. Twenty eight and a half percent of its public sector workers are union members, compared to a U.S. average of 37.5%. Clearly, public sector workers in Florida have larger and therefore stronger unions than do those in the private sector. (Hirsch and Macpherson, 2001)

Compared to 1990, Florida's 2000 unionization rates fell. For the workforce as a whole, unionization dropped from 1990 to 2000 from 8.1% to 6.8%; for private sector workers from 4.3% to 3.3%; for private manufacturing workers from 8.1% to 4.3%. For public sector workers the rate remained approximately the same. (Hirsch and Macpherson 2001)

The state government's public policies are not friendly to unions. 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. A little over one fifth (21.8%) of workers in Florida in the year 2000 covered by a union contract were "free riders." (This means that union coverage in Florida was 8.7% even though union membership was only 6.8%). Unions are hurt financially and are unable to represent members (and non-members) as effectively when one fifth 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 2000 Florida's tax burden on its citizens was 88.4% of the U.S. average, which placed the state 25^th out of the 50 states on this measure. Total per capita taxes were $4,055 in that year, also 25^th in the nation. The state's per capita tax rate was 14.4%, ranking it 28th 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. 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.) A 1996 study by Citizens for Tax Justice found that in 1995 low-income Floridians (bottom 20%) paid 3.9 times as high a percentage of their income as did the very highest income (top 1%) residents. And the middle income 20% paid 2.1 times as high a rate as the highest income. 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:

Florida has always been known for its low-wages, said John Haley, a vice president of business recruitment at Jacksonville's Chamber of Commerce. For years, these low-wages were used as a carrot to attract potential employers to Florida, he said.

"What Florida had done for many years was sell our poverty," he said. "We sold cheap labor, cheap land and no income tax."

While low pay attracted business to Florida, it also filled out its employment base with low-paying jobs.

Some economic development efforts in more recent years are focused on attracting higher wage jobs. But the historical legacy has a continuing impact.

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 1995-2001 show. Table 9 shows employment changes for the 67 counties, listing the counties in alphabetical order. The next to the last column ranks the counties in the order in which employment grew on a percentage basis. The 26 numbered in bold grew at a faster rate than Florida's six year growth rate of 14.9 percent, while 41 had slower growth rates. Thirteen of these forty one actually had negative growth rates. Twenty four of the forty one slow growth counties grew at less than half the state rate (.i.e., 7.4% or less) and fourteen of the twenty six fast growth counties grew at over one and one half times the state's pace (i.e., over 22.35%).

June Employment, 1995 and 2001, plus percentage changes and rankings, Florida and its counties

Source: Calculated from figures on website: http://lmi.floridajobs.org/laus/LAUS.HTM

Table 10 shows the June unemployment rates (not seasonally adjusted) for Florida and its counties (in alphabetical order) for 1995, 2000, and 2001, as well as the percentage change between the two earlier years and 2001. In the last two columns, numbers for counties that did better than the state as a whole (i.e., lowered unemployment more) are printed in bold . As is apparent, forty three of the state's sixty seven counties did not lower their unemployment rates as much as the state as a whole during 1995-12001, while twenty four did better. In the past year (last column), thirty six did better than the state, thirty one worse.

Table 10

June unemployment rates ( not seasonally adjusted) for Florida and its counties, various years

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 differ a bit 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, the data do show that most counties have done worse than the state over the past six years, although a slight majority has done slightly better than the state as a whole in the past year. Individual comparisons of counties can be easily done from the above table.

Despite the employment expansion throughout most of Florida, wages in most counties stayed far below the national average. In 1999--the most recent date for which county-level wage information is available-- the average wage for Florida was $28,622, which was 87.5 percent that of the U.S. Average earnings for most counties were considerably below this, however, as shown in the last two columns of table 11 below. In the next to last column the county's ranking in the state is given in bold if the county had average wages above those of the state. Only nine of the sixty seven counties did.

The final column show's the county's average wage as a percentage of the average wage in the United States as a whole. As noted, all but nine have a figure even lower than the state's 87.5%. It should also be noted that the very highest waged county (Palm Beach County) did not even achieve the U.S. average. Although no Florida county could achieve even average wages, it should be noted that many of the most populous counties (Palm Beach, Miami-Dade, Duval, Broward, Hillsborough, Orange, etc.) were the best in the state. Florida's general low age problem is most acute in the more rural and semi-rural parts of the state. Some of the largest metropolitan areas, while not in good shape, were better than the state's average.

Table 11

Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis, U. S. Department of commerce, "Average Wage Per Job, for Counties and Metropolitan Areas, Full- and Part-Time by Place of Work" , on a web site at: http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/regional/reis/ Hard copy data for 1989 available directly from Bureau of Economic Analysis, Washington, D.C.

The reader can note the change in ranking of individual county wages relative to those of the state as a whole since the peak of the last business cycle, 1989. To do so, compare the number in parenthesis in the second column (first one with numbers) with the number in the fifth column (next to last). Many counties were relatively unchanged, but some underwent extreme change like Gulf County's plunge from being 10th to number 37, or Sumter's rapid rise from #51 to #28. Sixteen counties moved up or down 10 or more ranks, indicating substantial changes in wage levels up or down relative to the state as a whole.

By analyzing the data in Table 11and adjusting for inflation, one determines that sixteen counties actually experienced real declines in wages in the 1989-1999 period. Most of the rest had growth rates below the national average. The five with real wage declines in excess of 10% (listed from the worst to the best) were: DeSoto (-20.0%), Hendry (-15.6%), Gulf (-12.9%), Highlands (-12.3%),and Hamilton (-10.6%). (Inflation was 34.4% between 1989 and 1999, so counties whose wages went up less that this percentage experienced declines in real wages.) The uninterrupted growth of the 1990s did not result in increased wages for these counties.

Because the most recent county-level wage data are for 1999, they underestimate the full impact of the economic expansion. More current data is likely to bring more positive news, but the good news for Florida's counties will probably fall short of that for the country as a whole because the ratio of Florida's average wage to that for the U.S. fell from 89 percent in 1997 to 87.5 percent for the first quarter of 2000, and one would expect that many county figures would deteriorate accordingly. Similarly, the 1989-to-1999 trends revealed above indicate that for much of the period and for many counties wages have been "playing catch-up"-edging back to their pre-recessionary levels--rather than rising to new heights as has been typical of past expansions. Updated figures are needed to determine changes by county for the last two years.

Statistics are collected for 20 metropolitan areas in Florida, known as Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs). For each of these 20 areas, this report first presents data on civilian employment growth from June 2000 to June 2001, growth (or shrinkage) of unemployment numbers, and the unemployment rateas of June 2001. Following that, we present wage data, comparing the data to the statewide average.

Table 12 shows the growth in civilian employment and civilian unemployment for each of the state's 20 MSAs from June 2000 to June 2001 (the latest period for which figures are available), and compares those figures to statewide growth figures. (Numbers for MSAs doing better than the state are in bold.) It also shows growth in unemployment numbers for the same period and the unemployment rate as of June 2001 in the last column.

Change in civilian employment and unemployment June 2000-June 2001, Florida and its MSAs; June 2001 unemployment rate (seasonally adjusted) for Florida and its MSAs

Source: U.S. Dept. of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics data; summarized on the "Dismal Scientist" website referenced earlier

The first numbered column of Table 12 allows the reader to determine how fast employment is growing in each MSA, and to compare those growth rates to each other. Column 2 compares the growth rates to statewide growth rates in employment. On these measures six of the MSAs grew more rapidly than the state, while 14 grew less rapidly in the past year. Ft. Pierce-Port St. Lucie and Naples had the highest civilian employment growth rates, while Panama City actually contracted in employment and Ocala had the second smallest growth rate.

The third numbered column shows the percentage change in unemployed from June 2000 to one year later. These percentages will be much more volatile than employment growth percentages, because the initial numbers are much smaller. Nevertheless, the percentage change does show whether the MSA was able to create jobs rapidly enough to absorb growth in the labor force, or if it is falling behind. Of the six MSAs showing a jump of over 20% in unemployment (Daytona Beach, Gainesville, Lakeland-Winter Haven, Orlando, Sarsasota-Bradenton, and Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater), all but Lakeland-Winter Haven still have unemployment rates well below the state's average, so the percentage jumps are not as worrisome as they might otherwise be.

The final column indicates the unemployment rate, one of the most important indicators of distress or well being for the existing labor force. Twelve of the twenty MSAs have lower unemployment rates than the state as a whole, with five (Ft. Myers-Cape Coral, Gainesville, Sarasota-Bradenton, and Tallahassee) having a very low rate below three percent. At the opposite extreme, Panama City (5.7%), Ft. Pierce/Port St. Lucie (5.9%), and Miami (5.9%) show unemployment rates well above the state average.

Strictly on the basis of employment and unemployment trends and rates, two MSAs stand out as doing exceptionally well comparatively: Naples and Punta Gorda. And three stand out as low performers: Lakeland-Winter Haven, Miami, and Pensacola.

Finally, Table 13 presents data on what is perhaps the single most important indicator of well being for the workforce: yearly wages. The table compares the year 1997 (the earliest year for which data are published for MSAs) and the annualized wages for the fourth quarter of 2000 (the latest period for which data are available), and shows percentage changes over that roughly four year period. State data are also included for comparative purposes. The percentages for those MSAs that increased wages at a faster pace than the state average are given in bold, as are the wages for MSAs that are above the state average.

Table 13

Annual Wages for Florida and its MSAs, 1997 and 4^th Quarter 2000, and % change during that period

Source: Florida Department of Labor and Employment Security website, ES-202 data. Percentage calculations by the author.

Table 13 shows that seven of the 20 MSA experienced more rapid wage growth than the state as a whole, while thirteen had less rapid growth. West Palm Beach-Boca Raton led the way, beating the state average by 4.2%, followed by Ft. Lauderdale (2.3% better), and Ft. Myers-CapeCoral (1.1% better). West Palm Beach and Ft. Lauderdale were better paid MSAs to begin with, and they have further increased their fortunate wage status within the state, as have all of the MSAs that began with above average wages except Jacksonville and Melbourne-Titusville-Palm Bay, to a slightly lesser extent. At the other extreme, Ft. Pierce-Port St. Lucie fell behind the average state wage gain by 7.7%, followed by Pensacola (falling back 5.6%). Both began as low wage MSAs, and their performance from 1997 to the beginning of 2000 put them even further behind the state average. In fact, the only two MSAs that began with a wage below the state average to make gains relative to the state were Daytona Beach and Tallahassee.

By utilizing Tables 12 and 13, the reader can evaluate and compare Florida's MSAs on a variety of measures. A few MSAs did badly on all fronts and a few did well on every measure, but the majority show a mixed record. As a generalization, one could say that Lakeland-Winter Haven and Pensacola consistently did poorly, and a couple of large MSAs, such as West Palm Beach and Ft. Lauderdale did consistently rather well. In making any comparisons, probably the wage levels and the unemployment levels are the most important measures to use in measuring worker welfare.

Because the state of Florida has below average wages and conditions for many of its workers, policymakers would do well to consider ways to improve the lot of Florida workers, particularly those with the lowest wages. While many ideas could be proposed and explored, the remainder of this section will consider the problem of how to reduce income inequality and raise the wages of those workers with the lowest wage.

A variety of measures are already being attempted with varying degrees of success and failure; these initiatives will not be further analyzed here. Such measures include attempts to attract more high wage jobs and industries to the state, and educational and training initiatives to improve the skills of Florida workers. Laudable though a number of these measures may be, they have not proven sufficient to remedy the problem, leaving many full time Florida workers and families toiling in full time jobs in poverty or near poverty.

One way to analyze the problem for the state is to note its structural features. The state of Florida may be overly reliant on industries that pay below average wages. To test this hypothesis, figures giving average Florida wages in the major sectors of the economy were examined for the year 1999. (ES-202 data, available from the website: http://lmi.floridajobs.org/es202.htm ) This examination showed that three sectors had wages below the state's average wage: agriculture (average wage of $18,066, or 37.8% below the state's average ), retail trade (average wage of $17,836, or 38.6% below the state's average ), and services (average wage of $27,980, or 3.7% below the state's average). This final figure is problematic, because the category "services" covers everything from high priced employment such as lawyering down to low priced employment such as house cleaning or yard work. It is, however, the low wage service work in the state that is of most interest here, particularly in the areas where Florida has an unusually high number of jobs due to its large tourism industry and its large retiree population: personal services, private household services, and entertainment and recreation services.

National data confirm that the industries referenced above are indeed low wage industries. For the year 2000, between 33% and 40% of the workers in these industries earned less than $7.00 per hour, or less than $14,560 per year even if one worked full time year round. And between 14% and 23% of these workers earned less than $6.00 per hour, or less than $12,480 for full time work year round. Table 14 shows the figures.

Source: Unpublished BLS data, Table A-9 (Hourly earnings of employed wage and salary workers paid hourly rates by class of worker, major industry, and sex, 2000 annual averages). Data can be obtained from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Dept. of Labor, Washington, D.C.

Given that these are low wage industries, is Florida more dependent on them for employment than is normal for the country as a whole? Superficial impressions that this is so are confirmed by rough calculations from federal data. Examining the three Florida categories that showed below average wages (agriculture, retail, and services), one can calculate how many of jobs in these sectors the state would have were it to match U.S. averages. Federal data from the year 1999 (available at website: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cfoi.t03.htm ) indicate that, were Florida a "normal" state, it would have 395,159 less service workers, 219,283 less retail workers, and 14,318 more agricultural workers. That means that the state has 600,124 more workers in these sectors than one would normally expect. (Given the fact that "service" jobs are not broken down into high paying and low paying service jobs, this is only a rough indicator of low wage status, but it is sufficient to show that the state is overly dependent on low wage sectors.)

In short, Florida's economy is unusually dependent on low wage industries, and therefore low wage jobs. The 600,1224 extra workers in these low wage industries represent 8.8% of the Florida labor force, displaced from higher wage industries into the low wage ones.

How can the state's public policies deal with this fact? No matter how much the state attempts to attract other types of business, it will certainly remain primarily oriented toward tourism and related personal services and retail industries for the foreseeable future, and agriculture is one of the state's natural industries.

Locked in to certain low wage industries, what can the state do? One simple solution would be a state minimum wage, written to cover all workers, including those escaping coverage under the national minimum wage (agricultural workers, restaurant workers, workers in very small establishments, etc.). This would create a wage floor, boosting the wages of all low wage workers in the state because even those making slightly above the state minimum wage would probably benefit from pay increases to prevent complete wage compression of differently qualified workers.

A suggested level to set the state minimum wage would be $6.00 per hour. As shown in Table 14, approximately 14% to 23% of workers in important low wage sectors of the Florida economy would win pay increases to the new minimum wage, and a large majority of the 33-40% in those same industries making between $6.00 and $7.00 per hour would probably also win pay increase. And yet $6.00 per hour is a very low figure - so low that the danger of pricing significant numbers of unskilled workers "out of the market" is very minimal.

Were such a state minimum wage to be enacted, Florida's comparative showing nationally in terms of wage inequality, low wages, and working poverty would certainly improve dramatically. Opponents of such a measure argue that a minimum wage increases unemployment, but the best empirical research on state minimum wage increases shows that such effects, at the wage levels being discussed, at very minimal or even non-existent. (See David Card and Alan Krueger, Myth and Measurement: The New Economics of the Minimum Wage. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1995)

The obstacle to carrying out simple measures to alleviate low wage status is overwhelmingly political, not technical. The many employers paying sub-poverty level wages in the state would certainly oppose a state minimum wage, and such a proposal is not even being contemplated. The political influence of these employers and industries is substantial within the state, and it would take widespread public awareness and organized political pressure to overcome such resistance. Yet, as demonstrated by passage of a "living wage" ordinance in Miami-Dade County and the city of Miami Beach (and current proposals to do the same in Broward County, Gainesville and Alachua County, Orlando, Jacksonville, and elsewhere), lawmakers do respond when the issue is highlighted and public pressure is brought to bear.

Living Wage ordinances that have been enacted in Florida set a "public example" by requiring the city or county to have its own employees and the employees of its service contractors paid above the poverty level for a family of four, plus health care coverage or its monetary equivalent. The state of Florida could set a public example by passing such a law applying to state government and state service contractors, and it could take the even more bold step of passing a state minimum wage covering all workers in the state. Measures like this would address a pressing state problem.

Florida's overall economy is holding its own as of Labor Day 2001. Unemployment is low and is below national averages, and the state is faring better than are many others. Employment in the state is growing rapidly. Real per capita income has been growing, albeit less rapidly than for the nation as a whole.

Yet on a variety of measures the workers of this state are faring much worse than one might expect, given the overall state of the economy. Comparatively, Florida's wage picture is far inferior to its income picture. On both measures the state is below national norms, but much more so on wages than on incomes, reflecting the "upward" bias in income figures from the state's many wealthy residents living on investments, rents, and the like. Florida has a disproportionate number and percentage of low wage jobs, and it has poverty rates well above national averages.

Within the state, prosperity is also distributed unevenly. A majority of counties are faring even worse than the state as a whole because a few populous and wealthier counties pull state averages up. Metropolitan areas likewise show uneven developments, with a majority lagging the state in wage growth.

	1970	1980	1990	2000*
Florida	$4,006	$10,049	$19,855	$28,145
USA	$4,095	$10,183	$19,584	$29,676
Florida/USA	97.8%	98.7%	101.4%	94.8%

	1970	1980	1990	2000*
Florida	$4,006	$10,049	$19,855	$28,145
SE Region	$3,336	$8,713	$17,408	$26,422
Florida/SE Region	120.1%	115.3%	114.1%	106.5%

Year	Florida	USA	Florida/USA
1989	$37,399	$40,763	91.7%
1990	$38,438	$41,451	92.7%
1991	$40,484	$43,056	94.0%
1992	$40,925	$44,615	91.7%
1993	$40,405	$45,161	89.5%
1994	$43,374	$47,012	92.3%
1995	$44,626	$49,687	89.8%
1996	$44,829	$51,518	87.0%
1997	$49,913	$53,350	93.6%
1998	$52,581	$56,061	93.8%
1999	$55,578	$59,981	92.7%

YEAR	FLORIDA	SOUTH ATLANTIC REGION	UNITED STATES
1989	$8.90	$9.34	$9.71
1990	$8.82	$9.17	$9.60
1991	$8.70	$9.06	$9.56
1992	$8.62	$9.01	$9.54
1993	$8.52	$8.99	$9.44
1994	$8.63	$9.03	$9.30
1995	$8.75	$9.09	$9.23
1996	$8.51	$8.74	$9.22
1997	$8.57	$8.96	$9.39
1998	$8.87	$9.40	$9.61
1999	$9.09	$9.48	$9.85
2000	$9.11	$9.66	$9.91

UNITED STATES	12.3%
VIRGINIA	8.4%
SOUTH CAROLINA	12.7%
TENNESSEE	12.7%
KENTUCKY	12.8%
FLORIDA	12.8%
GEORGIA	13.2%
NORTH CAROLINA	13.8%
ARKANSAS	14.7%
ALABAMA	14.8%
WEST VIRGINIA	16.8%
MISSISSIPPI	16.9%
LOUISIANA	19.1%

YEAR	% WITHOUT HEALTH INSURANCE
1994	17.2%
1995	18.3%
1996	18.9%
1997	19.6%
1998	17.5%
1999	19.2%

	June 1995	June 2001	% Change 1995-2001	Ranking in % Growth 1995-2001	Ranking in # Growth 1995-2001
	Employed	Employed
Florida	6,514,000	7,483,000	14.9%	NA	NA

Alachua County	96,873	103,960	7.3%	43-44	26 (7,087)
Baker County	7,987	9,076	13.6%	30	43 (1,089)
Bay County	61,655	63,130	2.4%	51	40 (1,475)
Bradford Cty	9,195	9,257	7/10 of 1%	53	53 (62)
Brevard County	190,389	208,085	9.3%	35	17 (17,696)
Broward Cty	685,437	778,112	13.5%	31	3 (92,675)
Calhoun Cty	4,497	4,309	-4.2%	59	57 (-188)
Charlotte Cty	42,171	51,881	2.3%	52	24 (9,710)
Citrus County	32,380	37,135	14.7%	27	31 (4,755)
Clay County	61,362	74,139	20.8%	20	19 (12,777)
Collier County	73,457	101,785	38.6%	1	10 (28,328)
Columbia Cty	21,654	23,439	8.2%	39	38 (1,785)
DeSoto County	8,685	8,167	-6.0%	61	63 (-518)
Dixie County	3,628	3,210	-11.5%	65	61 (-418)
Duval County	354,775	394,653	11.2%	34	7 (39,878)
Escambia Cty	116,381	119,664	2.8%	49	33 (3,283)
Flagler County	14,356	17,609	22.7%	14	34 (3,253)
Franklin Cty	4,722	4,676	-1.0%	55	55 (-46)
Gadsden Cty	18,112	19,669	8.6%	38	39 (1,557)
Gilchrist Cty	4,181	4,394	5.1%	46	52 (213)
Glades County	2,802	3,395	21.1%	18	50 (593)
June Employment	1995	2001	% Change 1995-2001	Ranking in % Growth	Ranking in # Growth

Gulf County	5,351	4,743	-11.4%	64	64 (-608)
Hamilton Cty	3,664	3,183	-13.1%	67	62 (-481)
Hardee County	8,860	8,654	-2.3%	57-58	58 (-206)
Hendry County	12,325	13,168	6.8%	45	46 (843)
Hernando Cty	40,264	49,658	23.3%	12-13	25 (9,394)
Highlands Cty	24,605	25,329	2.9%	48	48 (724)
Hillsborough	473,960	575,690	21.5%	17	1 (101,730)
Holmes County	6,624	6,648	4/10 of 1%	54	54 (24)
Indian River	36,384	42,324	16.3%	25	30 (5,940)
Jackson County	18,030	16,715	-10.3%	62	67 (-1,855)
Jefferson Cty	4,996	4,379	-12.3%	66	65 (-617)
Lafayette Cty	2,581	2,946	14.1%	28-29	51 (365)
Lake County	72,743	95,158	30.8%	2	13 (22,415)
Lee County	161,664	183,092	13.3%	32	14 (21,428)
Leon County	121,058	130,855	8.1%	40	23 (9,797)
Levy County	12,225	13,126	7.4%	42	45 (901)
Liberty County	2,379	2,128	-10.6%	63	59 (-251)
Madison Cty	7,191	7,831	8.9%	37	49 (640)
Manatee Cty	97,223	125,068	28.6%	4	11 (27,845)
Marion County	84,949	96,951	14.1%	28-29	21 (12,002)
Martin County	39,734	49,921	25.6%	7	22 (10,187)
Miami-Dade	958,137	1,028,024	7.3%	43-44	5 (69,887)
Monroe County	42,524	43,657	2.7%	50	42 (1,173)
Nassau County	25,032	29,778	19.0%	21	32 (4,747)
Okaloosa Cty	76,751	83,731	9.1%	36	29 (6,980)
Okeechobee Cty	13,587	14,638	7.7%	41	44 (1,051)
June Employment	1995	2001	% Change 1995-2001	Ranking in % Growth	Ranking in # Growth

Orange County	408,479	503,807	23.3%	12-13	2 (95,328)
Osceola County	67,599	87,268	29.2%	3	16 (19,709)
Palm Beach Cty	422,554	510,735	20.9%	19	4 (88,181)
Pasco County	114,877	142,325	23.9%	10	12 (27,448)
Pinellas County	422,284	488,355	15.6%	26	6 (66,071)
Polk County	179,397	199,991	11.5%	33	15 (20,594)
Putnam County	28,628	27,255	-4.8%	60	66 (-1,373)
Saint Johns Cty	51,420	64,098	24.7%	8	20 (12,678)
Saint Lucie Cty	61,741	76,759	24.3%	9	18 (15,018)
Santa Rosa Cty	45,571	53,052	16.4%	24	27 (7,481)
Sarasota Cty	124,035	156,478	26.1%	6	9 (32,443)
Seminole Cty	184,214	223,933	21.6%	16	8 (39,719)
Sumter County	11,807	14,601	23.7%	11	36 (2,794)
Suwannee Cty	13,405	13,138	-1.6%	56	60 (-267)
Taylor County	6,846	6,689	-2.3%	57-58	56 (-157)
Union County	3,904	3,177	18.6%	22	47 (727)
Volusia County	167,027	174,304	4.4%	47	28 (7,277)
Wakulla Cty	9,405	11,996	27.5%	5	37 (2,591)
Walton County	14,323	17,741	21.8%	15	35 (3,118)
Washington Cty	8,289	9,687	16.9%	23	41 (1,398)

	June 1995 unemployment rate	June 2000 unemployment rate	June 2001 unemployment rate	% Change 1995-2001	% Change 2000-2001
Florida	5.8%	4.0%	4.3%	-26%	+7.5%

Alachua County	3.0%	2.1%	2.7%	-10%	+28.6%
Baker County	5.5%	3.6%	3.9%	-29.1%	+8.3%
Bay County	5.3%	5.5%	4.7%	-11.3%	-14.5%
Bradford Cty	3.6%	2.7%	3.1%	-13.9%	+14.8%
Brevard County	6.8%	3.6%	3.5%	-48.5%	-2.7%
Broward Cty	6.0%	4.2%	4.3%	-28.3%	+2.4%
Calhoun Cty	4.8%	5.4%	4.8%	0%	-11.1%
Charlotte Cty	4.9%	2.8%	2.7%	-44.9%	-3.6%
Citrus County	7.4%	5.9%	5.8%	-21.6%	-1.7%
Clay County	3.3%	3.2%	3.4%	+3.0%	+6.3%
Collier County	8.3%	4.6%	3.5%	-57.8%	-23.9%
Columbia Cty	5.8%	4.9%	7.1%	+22.4%	+44.9%
DeSoto County	7.3%	5.5%	5.1%	-30.1%	-7.3%
Dixie County	7.4%	5.5%	6.7%	-9.5%	+21.8%
Duval County	4.0%	3.9%	4.2%	+5.0%	+7.7%
Escambia Cty	4.6%	4.5%	4.9%	+6.5%	+8.9%
Flagler County	3.5%	2.9%	4.0%	+14.3%	+37.9%
Franklin Cty	2.6%	3.0%	2.2%	-15.4%	-26.7%
Gadsden Cty	4.3%	4.2%	4.4%	+2.3%	+4.8%
Gilchrist Cty	3.5%	4.1%	5.6%	+60.0%	+36.6%
Glades County	11.7%	8.9%	9.5%	-18.8%	+6.7%
June Unemployment rate	1995	2000	2001	% Change 1995-2001	% Change 2000-2001

Gulf County	5.3%	7.3%	4.4%	-17.0%	-39.7%
Hamilton Cty	7.0%	5.8%	10.6%	+51.4%	+82.8%
Hardee County	15.7%	9.7%	8.6%	-45.2%	-11.3%
Hendry County	20.7%	15.3%	13.9%	-32.9%	-9.2%
Hernando Cty	5.5%	3.5%	3.5%	-36.4%	0%
Highlands Cty	10.8%	5.4%	5.2%	-51.9%	-3.7%
Hillsborough	4.4%	3.0%	3.2%	-27.3%	+6.7%
Holmes County	6.3%	5.9%	6.5%	+3.2%	+10.2%
Indian River	13.3%	8.8%	8.3%	-37.6%	-5.7%
Jackson County	5.6%	5.0%	4.2%	-25.0%	-16.0%
Jefferson Cty	5.2%	5.4%	7.0%	+34.6%	+29.6%
Lafayette Cty	3.6%	2.3%	2.9%	-19.4%	+26.1%
Lake County	6.5%	3.0%	3.4%	-47.7%	+13.3%
Lee County	4.3%	2.9%	3.0%	-30.2%	+3.4%
Leon County	3.2%	2.9%	3.0%	-6.3%	+3.4%
Levy County	4.9%	4.4%	5.5%	+12.2%	+25.0%
Liberty County	2.0%	2.7%	3.6%	+80.0%	+33.3%
Madison Cty	4.2%	5.0%	3.9%	-7.1%	-22.0%
Manatee Cty	4.0%	2.5%	2.8%	-30.0%	+12.0%
Marion County	5.8%	4.1%	4.6%	-10.7%	+12.2%
Martin County	7.8%	4.6%	4.6%	-41.0%	0%
Miami-Dade	7.7%	5.8%	6.3%	-18.2%	+8.6%
Monroe County	2.5%	1.9%	2.0%	-10.0%	+5.3%
Nassau County	4.4%	4.1%	3.8%	-13.6%	-7.3%
Okaloosa Cty	3.8%	3.6%	3.1%	-18.4%	-13.9%
Okeechobee Cty	11.4%	7.6%	6.5%	-19.0%	-14.5%
June Unemployment rate	1995	2000	2001	% Change 1995-2001	% Change 2000-2001

Orange County	4.7%	2.9%	3.3%	-29.8%	+13.8%
Osceola County	4.9%	3.2%	3.5%	-28.6%	+9.4%
Palm Beach Cty	7.7%	5.2%	5.4%	-29.9%	+3.8%
Pasco County	5.4%	3.1%	3.7%	-31.5%	+19.4%
Pinellas County	4.2%	2.7%	3.3%	-21.4%	+18.5%
Polk County	9.0%	5.5%	5.9%	-34.4%	+7.3%
Putnam County	5.1%	5.1%	5.0%	-2.0%	-2.0%
Saint Johns Cty	3.5%	2.9%	3.1%	-11.4%	+6.9%
Saint Lucie Cty	16.9%	9.0%	8.4%	-50.3%	-6.7%
Santa Rosa Cty	4.0%	4.5%	5.0%	+25%	-11.1%
Sarasota Cty	3.7%	2.1%	2.4%	-35.1%	+14.3%
Seminole Cty	3.9%	2.9%	3.3%	-15.4%	+13.8%
Sumter County	5..5%	2.8%	3.6%	-34.5%	+28.6%
Suwannee Cty	5.2%	3.9%	6.1%	+17.3%	+56.4%
Taylor County	9.8%	7.9%	9.5%	-3.1%	+20.3%
Union County	3.5%	4.3%	5.0%	+42.9%	+16.3%
Volusia County	4.9%	3.0%	3.7%	-24.5%	+23.3%
Wakulla Cty	3.8%	4.2%	3.5%	-7.9%	-16.7%
Walton County	3.8%	3.3%	2.5%	-34.2%	-24.2%
Washington Cty	5.0%	3.9%	4.3%	-14.0%	+10.3%

Average wage per job for Florida and its counties, in current dollars, state ranking of counties,
and ratio of average wages for Florida and counties versus U.S., 1989, 1995, and 1999

	1989 Average Wage (Rank)	1995 Average Wage	1999 Average Wage	1999 County rank in State	1999 % U.S. Average Wage
Florida	$20,225	$24,674	$28,622	NA	87.50%

Alachua Cty	$18,476 (19-20)	$21,812	$24,932	25	76.2%
Baker County	$15,420 (53)	$18,247	$20,992	51	64.2%
Bay County	$17,211 (30)	$21,587	$24,730	27	75.6%
Bradford Cty	$15,438 (52)	$19,520	$23,543	39	72.0%
Brevard Cty	$22,641 (2)	$27,001	$29,711	7	90.8%
Broward Cty	$21,301 (7)	$25,878	$30,665	4	93.7%
Calhoun Cty	$14,825 (59)	$17,343	$23,475	40	71.8%
Charlotte Cty	$17,008 (31)	$20,653	$22,744	45	69.5%
Citrus County	$16,863 (34)	$21,100	$23,766	34	72.7%
Clay County	$16,601 (40)	$19,589	$21,198	50	64.8%
Collier County	$17,903 (23)	$22,834	$27,674	12	84.6%
Columbia Cty	$16,500 (42)	$20,474	$24,194	28	74.0%
DeSoto Cty	$16,636 (38-39)	$15,177	$17,893	66	54.7%
Dixie County	$16,723 (36)	$18,263	$20,802	56	63.6%
Duval County	$21,576 (5)	$26,903	$31,334	3	95.8%
Escambia Cty	$19,548 (11)	$23,680	$26,200	16	80.1%
Flagler County	$16,582 (41)	$19,869	$21,743	47	66.5%
Franklin Cty	$13,380 (67)	$17,035	$19,509	59	59.6%
Gadsden Cty	$15,714 (49)	$18,810	$21,826	46	66.7%
Gilchrist Cty	$15,310 (54)	$18,381	$20,629	55	63.1%
Glades County	$13,684 (62)	$16,076	$18,462	65	56.4%
Gulf County	$20,094 (10)	$23,941	$23,521	37	71.9%
Hamilton Cty	$24,120 (1)	$24,744	$28,978	9	88.6%
Hardee Cty	$13,405 (65-66)	$16,327	$19,323	60	59.1%
County	1989 Average wage	1995 Average wage	1999 Average wage	1999 County rank in State	1999 % U. S. Average Wage
Hendry County	$16,636 (38-39)	$16,913	$18,882	64	57.7%
Hernando Cty	$16,415 (43)	$20,199	$22,783	43	69.6%
Highlands Cty	$15,029 (57)	$17,315	$17,711	67	54.1%
Hillsborough	$20,663 (9)	$25,660	$29,961	5	91.6%
Holmes County	$13,435 (64)	$17,034	$19,302	61	59.0%
Indian River	$18,560 (18)	$21,947	$25,530	22	78.0%
Jackson County	$15,216 (55)	$18,925	$21,210	49	64.8%
Jefferson Cty	$13,493 (63)	$17,114	$20,030	57	61.2%
Lafayette Cty	$13,405 (65-66)	$17,070	$19,231	62	58.8%
Lake County	$16,400 (44)	$19,958	$22,899	41	70.0%
Lee County	$18,429 (21)	$22,264	$26,247	15	80.2%
Leon County	$18,928 (19-20)	$22,458	$27,790	11	85.0%
Levy County	$14,476 (60)	$17,039	$20,054	56	61.3%
Liberty County	$15,637 (50)	$19,572	$23,582	36	72.1%
Madison Cty	$15,200 (56)	$18,088	$18,998	63	58.1%
Manatee Cty	$17,363 (28)	$19,785	$23,966	31	73.3%
Marion County	$16,930 (32)	$21,037	$23,832	33	72.9%
Martin County	$19,232 (13)	$23,286	$25,933	17	79.3%
Miami-Dade	$22,349 (3)	$27,224	$31,552	2	96.5%
Monroe County	$17,573 (27)	$21,689	$25,014	24	76.5%
Nassau County	$20,983 (8)	$23,910	$26,612	14	81.4%
Okaloosa Cty	$18,369 (22)	$22,401	$25,646	20	78.4%
Okeechobee County	$15,807 (47)	$19,357	$20,964	53	64.1%
Orange Cty	$21,464 (6)	$25,716	$29,745	6	90.9%
Osceola County	$16,280 (45)	$19,858	$22,673	45	69.3%
Palm Beach Cty	$22,339 (4)	$27,625	$32,008	1	97.9%
Pasco County	$16,218 (46)	$20,433	$22,841	42	69.8%
County	1989 Average wage	1995 Average wage	1999 Average wage	1999 County rank in State	1999 % U. S. Average Wage
Pinellas County	$19,452 (12)	$24,709	$29,297	8	89.6%
Polk County	$18,636 (17)	$23,294	$26,631	13	81.4%
Putnam County	$17,635 (26)	$21,752	$23,731	35	72.5%
Saint John Cty	$16,689 (37)	$21,369	$25,796	18	48.3%
Saint Lucie Cty	$17,846 (24)	$22,011	$24,150	30	73.8%
Santa Rosa Cty	$17,637 (25)	$21,056	$23,917	32	73.1%
Sarasota Cty	$18,651 (16)	$22,261	$25,560	21	78.1%
Seminole Cty	$19,041 (15)	$24,071	$28,563	10	87.3%
Sumter County	$15,487 (51)	$19,512	$24,703	28	75.5%
Suwannee Cty	$14,830 (58)	$17,420	$19,799	58	60.5%
Taylor County	$19,156 (14)	$22,795	$24,800	26	75.8%
Union County	$17,316 (29)	$20,229	$25,229	23	77.1%
Volusia County	$16,896 (33)	$20,496	$23,519	38	71.9%
Wakulla Cty	$16,811 (35)	$19,200	$25,720	19	78.6%
Walton County	$13,758 (61)	$17,832	$20,980	52	64.1%
Washington Cty	$15,756 (48)	$19,198	$21,696	48	66.3%

	% change in civilian employment	civilian emp. growth as a % of state civ. emp. growth	% change in civilian unemployment	June 2000 unemployment rate
FLORIDA	+3.2%	100%	+15.8%	4.0%

Daytona Beach.	+2.4%	75%	+36.6%	3.7%
Ft. Lauderdale	+3.2%	100%	+13.3%	4.0%
Ft. Myers - Cape Coral	+2.8%	88%	+9.2%	2.9%
Ft. Pierce - Port St. Lucie	+6.7%	209%	+7.1%	5.9%
Ft. Walton Beach	+1.9%	59%	-10.7%	3.1%
Gainesville	+1.9%	59%	+39.1%	2.4%
Jacksonville	+3.2%	100%	+13.3%	3.6%
Lakeland - Winter Haven	+2.3%	72%	+20.6%	5.1%
Melbourne - Titusville - Palm Bay	+3.1%	97%	+2.7%	3.3%
MSA	% change in civilian employment	civilian employment change compared to state change	% change in civilian unemp.	June 2001 unemp. rate
Miami	+2.5%	78%	+17.0%	5.9%
Naples	+6.4%	200%	-11.0%	3.3%
Ocala	+0.7%	22%	+18.3%	4.4%
Orlando	+3.6%	113%	+23.5%	3.1%
Panama City	-1.0%	-31%	-9.9%	5.7%
Pensacola	+2.4%	75%	+17.6%	4.6%
Punta Gorda	+5.1%	159%	+12.6%	2.8%
Sarasota - Bradenton	+3.0%	94%	+21.1%	2.6%
Tallahassee	+1.9%	59%	+15.6%	2.8%
Tampa - St. Petersburg - Clearwater	+4.3%	134%	+26.2%	3.2%
W. Palm Beach - Boca Raton	+3.6%	113%	+16.6%	4.9%

	1997	4^th Quarter of 2000	% Change
FLORIDA	$26,707	$32,516	21.8%

Daytona Beach.	$21,925	$26,716	21.9%
Ft. Lauderdale	$28,535	$35,404	24.1%
Ft. Myers - Cape Coral	$24,152	$29,684	22.9%
Ft. Pierce - Port St. Lucie	$24,801	$28,304	14.1%
Ft. Walton Beach	$22,319	$26,392	18.2%
Gainesville	$23,597	$27,812	17.9%
Jacksonville	$28,258	$33,488	18.5%
Lakeland - Winter Haven	$25,051	$29,480	17.7%
Melbourne - Titusville - Palm Bay	$28,403	$33,672	18.6%
Miami	$29,429	$35,888	21.9%
Naples	$25,844	$31,360	21.3%
Ocala	$22,371	$26,236	17.3%
Orlando	$26,292	$31,912	21.4%
Panama City	$22,622	$26,728	18.2%
Pensacola	$23,807	$27,672	16.2%
Punta Gorda	$22,244	$26,860	20.8%
Sarasota - Bradenton	$23,529	$28,624	21.7%
Tallahassee	$25,187	$30,824	22.4%
Tampa - St. Petersburg - Clearwater	$26,803	$32,692	22.0%
W. Palm Beach - Boca Raton	$29,873	$37,648	26.0%

INDUSTRY	% BELOW $6/HR	% BELOW $7/HR
Agriculture	13.9%	36.4%
Wholesale and Retail Trade	19.9%	38.9%
Private household services	23.0%	39.8%
Personal services (not private household)	15.2%	33.9%
Entertainment and recreation services	17.9%	36.6%