The State of Working New

York 2010

High Unemployment Persists

but Most States Fare
Far Worse than New York

Fiscal Policy Institute

www.fiscalpolicy.org

September 2010
 The State of Working New York 2010
High Unemployment Persists but Most States Fare Far Worse than New York

I. Recession job losses end, but job growth remains weak

Net job losses from the Great Recession tapered off at the end of 2009 in New York State and in
the United States as a whole. From the start of the recession, December of 2007 for the U.S. and
March 2008 for New York State, through December 2009, 8.4 million jobs (6.1 percent) were
lost nationally while 372,000 (4.2 percent) were lost in the Empire State. Since many very high
wage financial sector jobs were lost in the New York City area, New York State had a steeper
decline in total personal income in 2009 (4.2 percent), than did the country overall (1.7 percent).1

Through the first seven months of 2010, U.S. employment increased by 0.5 percent. This gain of
654,000 jobs amounted to less than one out of every 12 jobs lost during the recession. New
York’s job growth from December 2009 to July 2010 was 0.9 percent, restoring 73,400 jobs,
about one in five of the job losses sustained in the Empire State. Most of New York’s job growth
in 2010 has taken place in New York City. The city experienced a 1.9 percent job growth
(67,300 jobs) for the first seven months of 2010, while it is estimated that the rest of the state—
the New York City suburbs and upstate—saw only a 0.1 percent increase in employment (6,200
jobs). (See Figures 1A and 1B.2)

Because monthly payroll employment data are not available for all of New York’s counties or
metropolitan areas on a seasonally adjusted basis, it is difficult to pinpoint precisely the extent of
job recovery on a local area basis during the first part of 2010. Figure 2 shows the change in
employment by metro area and non-metropolitan counties for the first half of 2010 compared to
the first half of 2009. Through this lens one can see that Long Island (the Nassau-Suffolk
Metropolitan Division), and the metro areas of Glens Falls, Kingston, Ithaca and Utica-Rome
have had very minor net job losses, or a small net job gain in the case of the Glens Falls metro
area. On the other hand, the northern New York City suburbs (Putnam-Rockland-Westchester
counties) and the Binghamton metro area have had net job declines of two percent or more.

The Western and Northern New York non-metropolitan counties as a group had 1.5 percent
fewer jobs in the first half of 2010 than in the first half of 2009. The Hudson Valley counties of
Columbia and Sullivan both had 1.7 percent job declines over this period.

For New York State as a whole, its smaller relative job decline through the end of 2009 and its
slightly better job growth during the first seven months of 2010 leave it ranking fairly well
overall compared to most other states. From December 2007 to July 2010, New York State lost
250,000 jobs but this 2.8 percent job decline meant that 40 states had even worse job
performance over that period. North Dakota and Alaska were the only two states to gain jobs
over that period (the District of Columbia did as well). The other states doing better than New
                                                            
1
New York and U.S. personal income estimates for 2009 from New York State Division of the Budget, Enacted
Budget, August 20, 2010. The Division of the Budget forecasts that personal income growth in New York will
exceed that in the U.S. in 2010 (4.6 percent vs. 3.4 percent).
2
The data charted in Figures 1A and 1B include government as well as private employment. Some of the
employment increase occurring in the spring and early summer months of 2010 resulted from the hiring of tens of
thousands of temporary federal government workers needed to compile the 2010 Census enumeration. The sharp
upward blip in July and August 2009 in the New York City line in Figure 1B reflects the hiring of 50,000 temporary
workers through the Summer Youth Program.

FPI September 5, 2010 1 

 The State of Working New York 2010
High Unemployment Persists but Most States Fare Far Worse than New York

York were mainly mineral resource-rich states (Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, and West
Virginia), heavily agricultural states (South Dakota, Nebraska), and Massachusetts. Twenty
states, including such major states as Florida, Michigan, California, Ohio, Illinois, and New
Jersey had net job declines between December 2007 and July 2010 of more than twice New
York’s 2.8 percent job decline. (See Figure 3.)

II. Unemployment has started to decline but remains very high

While there has been recent job growth in New York City, unemployment is still extremely high
in the city and throughout the state. This protracted high unemployment is likely to lead to long-
term damage to the economy—and to people’s lives.

Although unemployment rates have declined this year, they are still much higher in New York
than before the recession began. The unemployment rate in New York City in December, 2007,
was 4.7 percent, and in the New York City suburbs and upstate it was 4.6 percent. These rates
peaked in late 2009 at 10.5 percent (New York City) and 7.9 percent (suburbs and upstate), and
have declined since, but are still extremely high, at 9.5 percent for the city—more than double
the rate before the recession—and 7.3 percent for the rest of the state (the New York City
suburbs and upstate). (See Figures 4A and 4B.)

Hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers have been direct casualties of increased unemployment.
Between the first half of 2008 and the first half of 2010, the number of unemployed persons in
New York State increased by three-fourths, rising from 473,600 to 831,500. An additional
205,000 New York City residents were jobless, and an additional 153,000 residents in the rest of
the state either lost jobs or could not find a job. During the first half of 2010 a total of 391,000
people were unemployed in the city, 233,000 in the Eastern New York State region (the suburbs
and the Hudson Valley region up to Albany and Glens Falls), and 207,600 in Western and
Northern New York.

Job losses were most severe in the ten-county downstate area (the city plus Nassau, Suffolk,
Westchester, Putnam, and Rockland counties), where the number of unemployed nearly doubled.
The 93 percent increase in unemployment in the downstate area between the first half of 2008
and the first half of 2010 slightly exceeded the 89 percent unemployment increase in the U.S.
overall during this period. But the 52-county upstate New York area suffered as well, with a 50
percent increase in the number of unemployed. (See Figure 5.)

In both New York City and the city suburbs and upstate, unemployment is highest for black and
Hispanic residents, and higher for men than for women. In the city, while the overall
unemployment rate was 9.8 percent on average for the first six months of 2010, among blacks,
unemployment was 13.6 percent, and for Hispanics 12.6 percent. Non-Hispanic whites and the
Asian and other category, on the other hand, had unemployment rates of 6.1 percent and 7.6
percent, respectively. (See Figure 6A.)

In the rest of New York—the city suburbs and upstate—while overall unemployment was lower
at 7.8 percent during the first half of 2010, it was higher for blacks, at 16.7 percent, than in New

FPI September 5, 2010 2 

 The State of Working New York 2010
High Unemployment Persists but Most States Fare Far Worse than New York

York City. Unemployment in the balance of the state is higher for Hispanics (12.1 percent) than
for non-Hispanic whites (6.7 percent) or for Asians and others (4.5 percent). (See Figure 6B.)
Unemployment in New York is about two percentage points higher for men than for women.
Among men in New York City, first half 2010 unemployment was 10.9 percent, while for
women it was 8.6 percent. In the rest of the state, the rates were 8.6 percent for men and 6.9
percent for women. (See Figures 6A and 6B.)

The standard unemployment rates cited here do not count as unemployed all those who want to
work but have given up on finding work, or those who have taken part-time jobs because full-
time ones were not available. A broader unemployment rate would include these hundreds of
thousands of people who are directly affected by the downturn in the economy. For New York
City, this more inclusive definition yields an unemployment rate of 16.2 percent during the first
half of 2010, and for the rest of the state it was 14.2 percent.

As with the standard rate, broader unemployment is highest among blacks and Hispanics, and
higher for men than for women. In New York City, the inclusive unemployment rate for the first
half of 2010 was 20.6 percent for blacks and 21.2 percent for Hispanics, compared with 11.2
percent for non-Hispanic whites and 11.9 percent for Asians and others. In the city suburbs and
upstate, broader unemployment was 24.6 percent for blacks and 22.0 percent for Hispanics,
compared with 12.7 percent for non-Hispanic whites and 9.3 percent for Asians and others. The
broader unemployment rate among men in the city was 17.2 percent, and 15.0 percent for
women. In the rest of the state, the rates were 14.6 percent for men and 13.8 percent for women.
For the entire state, nearly one and a half million residents are unemployed or underemployed by
this definition—approximately 635,000 in New York City and 842,000 in the city suburbs and
upstate. (See Figures 7A and 7B.)

Another indication of crisis in the job market is continuing job losses, as measured by initial
claims for unemployment. While initial claims are now lower than they were a year ago, they are
still higher than before the recession. The 12-week moving average for initial claims (used to
smooth normal week-to-week fluctuations) for New York City3 was 10,900, a 30 percent
increase over two years before, shortly after the recession hit New York, when it was 8,300. For
the New York City suburbs and upstate, initial claims went from 11,750, two years ago, to
15,300 for the 12-week period through the end of July 2010, also a 30 percent increase. (See
Figure 8.)

The Great Recession is also characterized by persistently high long-term unemployment,

considered to be a period without work exceeding six months. The median duration of
unemployment has reached record levels during the post-World War II period for the U.S. While
the data needed to make this type of long-term assessment is not readily accessible for New
York, data for the past 15 years show the dramatic rise in the median duration of unemployment.
In New York City, the median duration of unemployment surged to 19 weeks at the end of the
2001-to-2003 recession and ensuing period of very slow growth. However, by mid-2010, the
median duration of unemployment spells in New York City surpassed six months. (See Figure
9A.)
                                                            
3
12 weeks ending July 23, 2010, compared with 12 weeks ending July 25, 2008.

FPI September 5, 2010 3 

 The State of Working New York 2010
High Unemployment Persists but Most States Fare Far Worse than New York

In the rest of New York State—the city suburbs and upstate—the median duration of
unemployment doubled from 11 weeks to 22 weeks. (See Figure 9B.)

These dramatic increases in long-term unemployment among New Yorkers are likely to lead to
long-term financial ills for many. In a recent Pew Research Center survey,4 most of those
unemployed six months or longer reported that their family incomes had declined significantly
during the recession. People unemployed six months or longer were more likely to say that the
recession would have a “big impact” on their ability to achieve their career goals, and more
likely to have to accept new jobs with lower pay than those they had left. While clearly affecting
these families’ financial health, extended periods of unemployment have the potential for severe
emotional and social effects as well. The report found that unemployment for six months or
longer increases the chances of losing self-respect, of straining family relationships, of losing
contact with close friends, and of having depression severe enough to seek professional help.
These stresses are bound to lead to higher rates of divorce, family violence, and suicide, as the
employment picture continues to be bleak.
 
Unemployment among the youngest New Yorkers (ages 16-19) is more than double the average,
both in the city and throughout the state, and unemployment in the next cohort (ages 20-24) is
much higher than the overall average as well.5 Research has shown that delayed entry into the
labor force, or starting with jobs that are lower-paying than one is qualified for because they are
the only ones available, can have life-long repercussions in poorer employment prospects and
lower incomes.6 Thus the dearth of job possibilities for young people may make life for this
generation harder into the indefinite future.

III. Wage trends during the Great Recession

Many workers still holding jobs have felt the effects of the recession as the real value of their
weekly wages has declined. High unemployment lessens the ability of workers to negotiate
higher wages, and recession conditions reduce the number of hours worked each week for many
hourly-paid workers. These trends have not been uniform within the state, with variations by
occupation, gender, and geography.

Within New York City, workers’ wage earnings have fared very differently depending on the
kind of job they hold. There has been a sharp divergence between the changes in median weekly
wages of those in managerial/professional occupations and those in non-managerial/non-
professional positions. People in managerial/professional occupations as a group saw median
wage growth of 9.5 percent between the first half of 2007 and the first half of 2010. New York

                                                            
4
Pew Research Center, The Impact of Long-term Unemployment: Lost Income, Lost Friends—and Loss of Self-
Respect, July, 2010, at http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1674/poll-impact-long-term-unemployment.
5
Fiscal Policy Institute analysis of Current Population Survey data. Note that these unemployment rates do not
include full-time students unavailable for work.
6
See, for example, David Ellwood, Teenage Unemployment: Permanent Scars or Temporary Blemishes, NBER
Working Paper No.399, October, 1979, and Kahn, L. 2009, The Long-Term Labor Market Consequences of
Graduating from College in a Bad Economy, Princeton, N.J.: Yale School of Management.

FPI September 5, 2010 4 

 The State of Working New York 2010
High Unemployment Persists but Most States Fare Far Worse than New York

City workers in non-managerial/non-professional jobs, on the other hand, experienced a 4.3

percent decline in their wages during this same period. (See Figure 10A.7)

Within the New York City managerial/professional worker category, the strong growth in
median wages was even more pronounced for males, registering 13.7 percent, as compared with
7.5 percent for females. Wages in the male-dominated finance sector are not driving this gender
disparity since the wages of highly-paid finance professionals—near the top of the wage
distribution—do not exert a large influence on the median. Changes in weekly hours worked
may help explain the greater increase in the wages of men in managerial/professional jobs than
of women in such jobs. An analysis of average weekly hours worked by gender and broad
occupational category found a much larger increase in that hours worked by males in
managerial/professional occupations than in the hours worked by women in this group.

The decline in the median weekly wages of New York City workers in non-managerial/non-
professional occupations was borne by males as a group. While the median wage of females in
these occupations actually increased by 4.1 percent, men in these occupations saw their median
wages drop by 7.3 percent. Some explanation for these outcomes may be found in the
concentration of males in industries such as construction and manufacturing that have been hit
hard during the recession and a decline in their average weekly hours worked. Females,
meanwhile, are more prevalent in occupations such as healthcare support that are often low-wage
but in which there has nonetheless been a continued expansion of employment.

The significance of the divergence in wage growth between the two broad occupational groups is
heightened when one considers the distribution of New York City residents among these
categories. Non-managerial/non-professional occupations represent the majority of jobs held by
the city’s residents—56.9 percent.

The wage growth pattern is different for the areas of the state outside New York City. In the
balance of the state, there has been decline in median wages in both the managerial/professional
and the non-managerial/non-professional occupational groupings, with one exception: females in
managerial/professional jobs saw a small increase of 2 percent in their median wages. In contrast
with New York City, managerial/professional males in the rest of the state saw their median
wages decline by 6.8 percent. (Note, though, that this category includes many highly-paid
workers who commute into New York City. A sharp decline in finance sector jobs held by male
commuters helps explain the drop in median wages.) Still, the decrease in the median wage of
non-New York City managerial/professional workers overall—1 percent—was very small
compared with the 5.9 percent drop in median weekly earnings for those in non-managerial/non-
professional positions. (See Figure 10B.)

In the rest of the state excluding New York City, there was a 2 percent shift in the distribution of
jobs from managerial/professional occupations to non-managerial/non-professional ones. As in
New York City, the majority (55.6 percent) of residents in the suburban and upstate areas hold
non-managerial/non-professional jobs.
                                                            
7
For the data used in Figures 10A and 10B, including median weekly earnings levels for the first half of 2007 and
the first half of 2010, see the Appendix Figure.

FPI September 5, 2010 5 

 The State of Working New York 2010
High Unemployment Persists but Most States Fare Far Worse than New York

Growth in median wages is only one part of this picture. While females as a group fared better
than did their males counterparts within the non-managerial/non-professional occupations both in
New York City and the balance of state and within the managerial/professional occupations in
the balance of state with respect to growth in median wages, they started (and ended) with lower
absolute median wages across the board. The gender wage gap is smallest within
managerial/professional jobs in New York City. During the first half of 2010, the median wage
of females in this group was 87 percent that of that of their male counterparts. In the rest of the
state, the median wage of females in this broad occupational grouping was only 76 percent that
of males. In the non-managerial/non-professional positions, women’s median wages are 77
percent those of men’s in New York City and only 65 percent those of men’s in the balance of
the state. Whatever the wage trends resulting from the Great Recession, the gender wage gap is a
persistent feature across the booms and busts of the economic cycle.

IV. New York’s greatest job losses occurred in manufacturing, finance and construction

Measured from July 2008 to July 2010, New York State’s net job loss was 285,000. That net
number reflects the job growth that has occurred in 2010, and as noted earlier, most of the state’s
2010 job growth has taken place in New York City. Among all sectors, manufacturing lost the
most jobs (70,000) in the Empire State. On a percentage basis, New York’s 13.1 percent decline
in manufacturing employment was slightly greater than the 12.9 percent national decline. (See
Figure 11.)

The finance and insurance sector was the second greatest contributor to New York’s job losses,
with a decline of 50,000. This 9.3 percent decline was much greater than the 6.4 percent decline
for the nation as a whole. While construction was the third greatest source of job losses statewide
(46,000), New York’s rate of decline in construction jobs was well below the national decline
(12.9 percent vs. 22.2 percent.) The housing bubble of 2005-2007, which helped fuel an
unsustainably high level of construction activity, was more pronounced in certain parts of the
country.

Most of the state’s job losses from July 2008 to July 2010 occurred in blue collar and lower-
wage white collar industries. New York’s job losses in construction, manufacturing, wholesale
and retail trade, transportation, and administrative and support services totaled 230,000,
compared to 106,000 for the predominantly higher-paid white collar sectors of finance,
information, professional services, real estate, and management of companies. (Note: these two
losses sum to more than the overall statewide job loss because, as discussed below, there were
job gains in a few sectors.)

In the suburban and upstate areas, job losses in the blue collar/lower-wage white collar sectors
were four times greater than in the predominantly higher-paid white collar sectors (148,000 vs.
37,000). Even in New York City, job losses in the higher-wage white collar sectors were less
than in the blue collar/lower-wage white collar sectors (68,000 vs. 80,000).

State and local government has also been a significant source of job loss in New York over the
past two years. Statewide, 40,000 state and local government jobs have been lost, making it the

FPI September 5, 2010 6 

 The State of Working New York 2010
High Unemployment Persists but Most States Fare Far Worse than New York

fourth greatest source of job losses in the state. This 2.9 percent decline in state and local
government employment in New York is nearly twice the overall national pace of decline in state
and local government employment. New York City has lost 25,000 state and local government
jobs and suburban and upstate areas have lost 15,000. (See Figure 11.8)

Both in New York and nationally, educational services (private primary and secondary, higher
education and trade schools) and health care and social assistance have seen increased
employment over the past two years. Nearly 50,000 jobs have been added in the Empire State in
these two sectors since July 2008. New York’s statewide growth rates in these two broad sectors
have been virtually identical with national growth trends.

In three sectors—arts and entertainment, accommodation and food services, and other services—
New York has bucked the national trend over the past two years. In each of these sectors, New
York has seen moderate job growth while nationally these sectors have all lost jobs since mid-
2008. Within New York, both New York City and the suburban/upstate areas have seen roughly
comparable growth rates in each of these sectors.

V. Upstate metro areas have fared better than most metro areas in the U.S. over the past
four years

Partly because the housing bubble largely bypassed upstate New York, the 11 upstate New York
metropolitan areas experienced smaller employment losses between July 2008 and July 2010
than most of the 365 metro areas in the U.S. This certainly does not mean that upstate New York
areas were spared the recession’s devastating effects, only that New York was hit a lot less hard
than most parts of the country.

Among all New York metro areas, only the downstate suburban Putnam-Rockland-Westchester
metropolitan division had a job loss greater than the national average for all 365 metro areas (5.9
percent vs. 5.0 percent). In ranking metro areas by job growth or decline, the Ithaca metro area
ranked 36th among all U.S. metro areas, Utica-Rome ranked 42nd, the Kingston metro area
ranked 46th, and the Glens Falls area was 50th. Syracuse ranked 81st, Buffalo-Niagara Falls
97th, and Rochester 135th. (See Figure 12).

Ranking metro areas by per capita income growth yields similar results, showing upstate New
York’s metro areas performing relatively better than most of their counterparts around the
country. Figure 13 shows per capita income growth rates for the last two years of the expansion
(2005 to 2007), the first two years of the Great Recession (2007 to 2009), and the combined
four-year period. During the last two years of the expansion, all of New York’s metro areas
except Glens Falls had per capita income growth rates above the 11.3 percent average for all
metro areas in the U.S. (Per capita income growth in this analysis is calculated based on current

                                                            
8
Temporary hiring by the federal government of workers to help conduct the 2010 Census enumeration significantly
boosted federal government employment in the spring months of 2010. As of July 2010, there were still nearly
200,000 temporary Census workers on the Federal payroll. This largely accounts for the increase in federal
government employment from July 2008 to July 2010 shown in Figure 11.

FPI September 5, 2010 7 

 The State of Working New York 2010
High Unemployment Persists but Most States Fare Far Worse than New York

dollars, not adjusted for inflation.) With a growth rate of 10.8 percent, Glens Falls was only
slightly below the national average.

During the two-year recession period (2007 to 2009), all of New York’s metro areas except the
New York City area performed much better than the 1.2 percent decline in per capita income that
was the average across all U.S. metro areas. All of New York’s metro areas had per capita
income growth except for the broad metro area category that includes New York City and the
downstate suburban areas (as well as parts of Northern New Jersey and Pennsylvania), which
had a 2.8 percent per capita income decline over this period.

Taking the four-year 2005-to-2009 period as a whole, per capita income growth among all New
York metro areas ranged from 14 to 20.7 percent and far surpassed the 9.9 percent national
average for all metro areas. Seven upstate New York metro areas, including Buffalo and
Syracuse, ranked among the top 50 metro areas in terms of per capita income growth over this
four-year period. Even the greater New York City metro area, which ranked 116th and lowest
among all New York metro areas, would fall in the top third among the 366 metro areas analyzed
by the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. (See Figure 13.9)

VI. Additional federal action is needed to boost job growth and create a sustained recovery

Despite some tentative glimmerings of rebound, unemployment remains extraordinarily high in

both New York and in the nation overall. Factoring in discouraged workers and those who are
underemployed (working part-time because full-time employment is not available), there are
24.3 million persons unemployed or underemployed nationally, and 1.5 million unemployed or
underemployed in New York State. Thus, for both the state and the nation, one out of every six
workers is directly affected by a lack of work.

The outlook is for a historically weak rebound in Gross Domestic Product and for unemployment
to remain well above pre-recession levels for many months to come. The August 2010 forecast
by the Congressional Budget Office projects an average national unemployment rate of 9.0
percent for 2011, and the consensus among forecasters surveyed in August by Blue Chip
Economic Indicators foresees a slightly higher 9.1 percent rate for next year.

While New York State has seen slightly better job growth than the nation so far in 2010, it is not
clear that New York City—where most of the state’s 2010 job growth has occurred—can sustain
that growth if national economic and employment growth remain tepid.10 Job growth in the
downstate suburbs and upstate has been slower than the very moderate national grate over the
past year.

A number of commentators have pointed to New York State’s budget deficit and the state’s tax
burden as reasons for the state’s weak economic performance. Along with most states around the

                                                            
9
 The data for the U.S. metropolitan average was corrected from an earlier version of this report.
10
In the August update to its New York economic forecast, the state’s Division of the Budget forecasts payroll
employment growth of only 1.0 percent for New York State for 2011.

FPI September 5, 2010 8 

 The State of Working New York 2010
High Unemployment Persists but Most States Fare Far Worse than New York

country, New York faces significant budget challenges.11 Tax revenues have been very slow to
recover, in New York and in almost every state in the nation.12 However, New York’s budget
situation is certainly not unique. And as the analysis of relative job growth performance in recent
years compared to other states and metro areas around the country indicates, New York and the
upstate metro areas have not fared as badly as most states and metro areas in the United States.
Make no mistake, the recession has hit New York and its residents extremely hard; it’s just that
New York has not been as devastated as much of the country by the Great Recession. Claims that
state and local spending patterns are holding back New York’s economic growth are often just
that, claims that are not substantiated by credible economic analysis.

In the wake of the September 2008 financial market collapse, the economy contracted sharply
and job losses rapidly mounted in New York and around the country. Anticipating a profoundly
severe contraction, businesses everywhere slashed their payrolls. A double digit decline in sales
tax collections in late 2008 and early 2009 reflected a steep falloff in consumer retail spending. It
was in this context that the $860 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), was
enacted in February 2009. By now it is clear to serious economic analysts that the economic
stimulus that ARRA provided helped rescue an economy that was headed off a cliff. By itself,
ARRA has not been sufficient to generate at sustained recovery. But it was critical in halting the
precipitous freefall in consumer and business spending.

While a precise accounting is not possible, given the magnitude and diversity in the forms of
ARRA spending and tax cuts, it is likely that ARRA saved or created 200,000 jobs in New York
State.13 ARRA’s impact helps explain why the Great Recession was not as severe as expected by
many economists in late 2008.

With a total price tag representing roughly five percent of one year’s national GDP, ARRA’s
various funding streams were meant to stimulate different segments of the economy, retaining
and creating jobs in a range of sectors, providing aid to the unemployed and vulnerable
individuals and families, providing fiscal relief to states to avert damaging budget cuts, and
funding strategic investments to increase long-term growth potential as well as encouraging
energy efficiency and development. Now that the economy has largely stopped hemorrhaging
jobs, it is time for a booster shot of stimulus to pave the way toward recovery.

Policy makers need to focus on spurring aggregate demand, averting economy-shrinking cuts in
state budgets, and investing in productivity-enhancing infrastructure, particularly such areas as
mass transit. Also critical are measures to ensure that the fruits of productivity growth are
broadly shared; data showing income polarization at its greatest since the eve of the 1929 crash
demonstrate that growth has not been so shared, to our collective economic and social detriment.
                                                            
11
Michael Leachman, Erica Williams, and Nicholas Johnson. “Failing to Extend Fiscal Relief to States Will Create
New Budget Gaps, Forcing Cuts and Job Loss in at least 34 States: More Cuts in Health, Education, and Other Areas
Could Stall Nation’s Economic Recovery.” Center for Budget and Policy Priorities. August 13, 2010.
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3207.
12
The Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government. State Revenue Flash Report. August 30, 2010.
http://www.rockinst.org/government_finance/.
13
Executive Office of the President, Council of Economic Advisers, The Economic Impact of the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Fourth Quarterly Report, July 14, 2010, p. 49.

FPI September 5, 2010 9 

 The State of Working New York 2010
High Unemployment Persists but Most States Fare Far Worse than New York

Federal, state, and local governments should keep one final issue clearly in mind as they take
actions to move the economy out of the recession. Occupational projections indicate that a
disproportionate number of new jobs in the United States will be low-wage, paying less than 150
percent of the poverty level. While there is no doubt that individual workers are likely to achieve
more success in the labor market with a college education, it is far from clear that the economy
on its current track will produce a sufficient supply of high quality jobs to accommodate all who
receive post-secondary schooling. Public policies and private practices are needed to raise the
skill requirements of jobs, and to increase the pay for the large majority of jobs that will not
require a college degree.

New York’s economy has a lot going for it. For most major sectors in the state’s economy,
output per worker leads most large industrial states and is well above the national average.14 The
state will do well once a sustained national economic recovery gets underway.

                                                            
14
See Figure 5.9, Fiscal Policy Institute, The State of Working New York 2009: Unemployment and Economic
Insecurity in the Great Recession, p. 41.

FPI September 5, 2010 10 

 Since the start of the recession in December 2007, New York State's job loss
has been much less than that of the United States as a whole.
1.0%

0.0%

-1.0%
Cumulative percent changes

-2.0%

-3.0%

-4.0%
4.0%
U.S.

-5.0% New York State

-6.0%

-7.0%
Dec-07 Feb-08 Apr-08 Jun-08 Aug-08 Oct-08 Dec-08 Feb-09 Apr-09 Jun-09 Aug-09 Oct-09 Dec-09 Feb-10 Apr-10 Jun-10

Source: FPI analysis of NYS Department of Labor and Bureau of Labor Statistics payroll employment data (seasonally adjusted).

FIGURE 1A
 Since the start of the recession in December 2007, job losses in the rest of New
York have been proportionally higher than in New York City, and there has
been little recovery outside the city.
2.0%

1.0%

0.0%
Cumulative percent changes

-1.0%

-2.0%

-3.0% New York City

Rest of state

-4.0%

-5.0%
Dec-07 Feb-08 Apr-08 Jun-08 Aug-08 Oct-08 Dec-08 Feb-09 Apr-09 Jun-09 Aug-09 Oct-09 Dec-09 Feb-10 Apr-10 Jun-10

Source: FPI analysis of NYS Department of Labor and Bureau of Labor Statistics payroll employment data (seasonally adjusted).

FIGURE 1B
Across New York State, the number of payroll jobs remained considerably below the level of two
years ago.
First 6 months average Absolute changes in first 6 Percent changes in first 6 months
employment months average employment average employment
First half First half First half
2008 2009 2010 2008-2009 2009-2010 2008-2010 2008-2009 2009-2010 2008-2010

United States 137,149.5 131,441.2 129,573.0 -5,708.3 -1,868.2 -7,576.5 -4.2% -1.4% -5.5%
New York State 8,760.6 8,553.8 8,461.6 -206.8 -92.2 -299.0 -2.4% -1.1% -3.4%
New York City 3,782.8 3,695.5 3,653.5 -87.3 -42.0 -129.3 -2.3% -1.1% -3.4%

Eastern New York 2,723.6 2,647.7 2,621.4 -75.9 -26.3 -102.2 -2.8% -1.0% -3.8%
Nassau-Suffolk, NY Metropolitan Division 1,260.5 1,223.7 1,222.6 -36.8 -1.1 -37.9 -2.9% -0.1% -3.0%
Putnam-Rockland-Westchester 578.4 557.2 541.1 -21.2 -16.1 -37.3 -3.7% -2.9% -6.5%
Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY MSA 450.5 443.6 438.3 -6.9 -5.3 -12.2 -1.5% -1.2% -2.7%
Glens Falls, NY MSA 54.1 53.1 53.4 -1.0 0.3 -0.7 -1.8% 0.5% -1.2%
Kingston, NY MSA 63.2 61.3 61.2 -1.9 -0.1 -1.9 -3.0% -0.1% -3.1%
Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-Middletown, NY MSA 254.5 248.4 245.0 -6.1 -3.4 -9.5 -2.4% -1.4% -3.7%
Columbia County 21.2 20.4 20.0 -0.9 -0.3 -1.2 -4.0% -1.7% -5.7%
Greene County 15.1 14.6 14.8 -0.5 0.2 -0.3 -3.4% 1.6% -1.9%
Sullivan County 26.2 25.6 25.1 -0.7 -0.4 -1.1 -2.5% -1.7% -4.1%

Western and Northern New York 2,324.2 2,271.5 2,250.6 -52.7 -20.9 -73.6 -2.3% -0.9% -3.2%
W&N NY Metropolitan Areas 1,765.0 1,726.1 1,713.5 -38.9 -12.6 -51.5 -2.2% -0.7% -2.9%
Binghamton, NY MSA 114.8 111.8 109.6 -3.0 -2.2 -5.3 -2.6% -2.0% -4.6%
Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY MSA 548.1 535.8 532.8 -12.2 -3.0 -15.2 -2.2% -0.6% -2.8%
Ithaca, NY MSA 132.5 130.4 130.4 -2.1 -0.1 -2.2 -1.6% -0.1% -1.6%
Rochester, NY MSA 514.4 502.3 497.4 -12.1 -4.9 -17.0 -2.4% -1.0% -3.3%
Syracuse, NY MSA 322.7 315.3 313.1 -7.3 -2.3 -9.6 -2.3% -0.7% -3.0%
Utica-Rome, NY MSA 132.5 130.4 130.4 -2.1 -0.1 -2.2 -1.6% -0.1% -1.6%
W&N NY Non-metropolitan areas 559.2 545.4 537.1 -13.8 -8.3 -22.1 -2.5% -1.5% -4.0%

Source: Non-farm payroll employment, Bureau of Labor Statisitcs and NYS Department of Labor (not seasonally adjusted).
Note: Absolute and percent changes are from the first half of the first year to the first half of the second year.

FIGURE 2
Forty states have experienced greater job losses than New
York State since December 2007.
December July Number Percent State
2007 2010 change change ranking

UNITED STATES 137,951 130,242 -7,709 -5.6%

North Dakota 362 374 11 3.1% 1

Alaska 319 327 8 2.4% 2
South Dakota 408 405 -3 -0.8% 3
Texas 10,526 10,400 -125 -1.2% 4
Louisiana 1,934 1,907 -27 -1.4% 5
Nebraska 963 947 -16 -1.7% 6
Oklahoma 1,575 1,544 -31 -2.0% 7
West Virginia 761 743 -18 -2.4% 8
Massachusetts 3,289 3,198 -91 -2.8% 9
New York 8,780 8,530 -250 -2.8% 10
Maryland 2,612 2,531 -81 -3.1% 11
Arkansas 1,207 1,170 -38 -3.1% 12
Wyoming 293 284 -9 -3.2% 13
New Hampshire 648 627 -21 -3.2% 14
Iowa 1,524 1,475 -49 -3.2% 15
Virginia 3,767 3,641 -126 -3.3% 16
Pennsylvania 5,810 5,607 -203 -3.5% 17
Kansas 1,385 1,336 -49 -3.5% 18
Minnesota 2,770 2,661 -109 -3.9% 19
Maine 620 594 -26 -4.2% 20
Montana 447 427 -20 -4.4% 21
Missouri 2,800 2,666 -134 -4.8% 22
Delaware 439 418 -21 -4.9% 23
Connecticut 1,704 1,620 -84 -4.9% 24
Utah 1,264 1,200 -64 -5.1% 25
Vermont 309 293 -16 -5.1% 26
Washington 2,961 2,809 -152 -5.1% 27
Kentucky 1,870 1,772 -98 -5.2% 28
Hawaii 628 594 -34 -5.4% 29
Wisconsin 2,886 2,730 -155 -5.4% 30
Indiana 2,987 2,814 -173 -5.8% 31
New Mexico 849 799 -50 -5.9% 32
New Jersey 4,087 3,842 -245 -6.0% 33
South Carolina 1,946 1,829 -117 -6.0% 34
Colorado 2,349 2,205 -144 -6.1% 35
Illinois 5,984 5,602 -383 -6.4% 36
North Carolina 4,170 3,895 -274 -6.6% 37
Mississippi 1,158 1,080 -78 -6.7% 38
Alabama 2,011 1,873 -139 -6.9% 39
Ohio 5,422 5,047 -375 -6.9% 40
Tennessee 2,804 2,603 -202 -7.2% 41
Idaho 657 608 -49 -7.4% 42
Rhode Island 489 452 -37 -7.5% 43
Georgia 4,151 3,826 -325 -7.8% 44
Oregon 1,738 1,597 -141 -8.1% 45
California 15,181 13,875 -1,306 -8.6% 46
Michigan 4,246 3,876 -370 -8.7% 47
Florida 7,953 7,239 -715 -9.0% 48
Arizona 2,674 2,402 -271 -10.2% 49
Nevada 1,293 1,117 -176 -13.6% 50

Note: All figures are in thousands except percent change.

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics national and state and Metro Area Employment data (seasonally
adjusted).

FIGURE 3
 Although unemployment rates have declined in 2010, they are still
much higher in New York and the U.S. than before the recession
began.
11.0%

10.0%

9.0%
e (seasonally adjusted)

U.S.
8.0%
New York State

7.0%
Unemployment rate

6.0%

5.0%

4.0%
Jan. Mar. May Jul. Sep. Nov. Jan. Mar. May Jul. Sep. Nov. Jan. Mar. May Jul. Sep. Nov. Jan. Mar. May
2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2010 2010 2010

Source: NYS Department of Labor and U.S Bureau of Labor Statistics.

FIGURE 4A
 Although unemployment rates have declined in 2010, they are still
much higher throughout New York than before the recession began.
In New York City, the rate has doubled.
11.0%

10.0%

9.0%
e (seasonally adjusted)

8.0%

New York City

7.0%
Rest of state
Unemployment rate

6.0%

5.0%

4.0%
Jan. Mar. May Jul. Sep. Nov. Jan. Mar. May Jul. Sep. Nov. Jan. Mar. May Jul. Sep. Nov. Jan. Mar. May
2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2010 2010 2010

Source: NYS Department of Labor and U.S Bureau of Labor Statistics.

FIGURE 4B
For the first half of 2010, the number of unemployed persons remained
much higher than in the first half of 2008, particularly in New York City.

First half First half Absolute Percent Rate

2008 2010 change change June 2010
United States 8,082,833 15,279,833 7,197,000 89% 9.6%
New York State 473,567 831,467 357,900 76% 8.2%
New York City 185,700 390,867 205,167 110% 9.5%
Eastern New York 148,750 233,017 84,267 57% 6.9%
Nassau-Suffolk, NY Metropolitan Division 66,833 106,583 39,750 59% 6.7%
Putnam-Rockland-Westchester 30,633 48,167 17,533 57% 6.7%
Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY MSA 21,833 32,233 10,400 48% 6.6%
Glens Falls, NY MSA 3,750 5,750 2,000 53% 6.8%
Kingston, NY MSA 4,633 7,133 2,500 54% 7.5%
Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-Middletown, NY MSA 15,983 25,500 9,517 60% 7.6%
Columbia County 1,467 2,350 883 60% 6.9%
Greene County 1,367 2,067 700 51% 7.8%
Sullivan County 2,250 3,233 983 44% 8.1%
Western and Northern New York 139,250 207,567 68,317 49% 7.8%
Metropolitan Areas 98,083 146,733 48,650 50% 7.6%
Binghamton, NY MSA 6,550 10,617 4,067 62% 7.9%
Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY MSA 33,683 48,617 14,933 44% 7.7%
Elmira, NY MSA 2,150 3,483 1,333 62% 7.9%
Ithaca, NY MSA 2,133 3,283 1,150 54% 6.1%
Rochester, NY MSA 28,333 42,333 14,000 49% 7.5%
Utica-Rome, NY MSA 7,750 11,083 3,333 43% 7.1%
Syracuse, NY MSA 17,483 27,317 9,833 56% 7.8%
Non-Metropolitan Areas 41,167 60,833 19,667 48% 8.3%
Allegany County 1,567 2,233 667 43% 9.3%
Cattaraugus County 2,533 3,767 1,233 49% 8.1%
Cayuga County 2,200 3,550 1,350 61% 7.4%
Chautauqua County 3,567 5,850 2,283 64% 7.9%
Chenango County 1,567 2,267 700 45% 8.1%
Clinton County 2,567 3,967 1,400 55% 9.7%
Cortland County 1,500 2,233 733 49% 8.3%
Delaware County 1,350 1,950 600 44% 8.1%
Essex County 1,283 1,767 483 38% 7.8%
Franklin County 1,617 2,083 467 29% 7.9%
Fulton County 1,767 2,750 983 56% 9.0%
Genesee County 1,917 2,567 650 34% 6.4%
Hamilton County 200 267 67 33% 6.1%
Jefferson County 3,333 4,733 1,400 42% 8.1%
Lewis County 867 1,217 350 40% 7.5%
Montgomery County 1,783 2,367 583 33% 8.5%
Otsego County 1,783 2,433 650 36% 6.8%
St. Lawrence County 3,450 5,133 1,683 49% 10.1%
Schuyler County 583 850 267 46% 7.1%
Seneca County 967 1,367 400 41% 7.0%
Steuben County 2,717 4,517 1,800 66% 9.0%
Wyoming County 1,367 2,017 650 48% 7.9%
Yates County 683 950 267 39% 6.2%
10-county downstate area 283,167 545,617 262,450 93% 8.5%
52-county upstate area 190,533 285,833 95,300 50% 7.6%

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics and NYS Department of Labor MSA and County Level unemployment data.

FIGURE 5
 Unemployment in New York City was higher for men, blacks and
Hispanics in the first half of 2010.
16.0%

13.6%
14.0%
12.6%

12.0%
10.9%

9.8%
10.0%
8.6%
Percent

7.6%
8.0%

6.1%
6.0%

4.0%

2.0%

0.0%
All Males Females White Black Hispanic Asian & other
Source: FPI analysis of Current Population Survey data for first five months of 2010; adjusted to NYS Department of Labor
Local Area Unemployment Statistics data.

FIGURE 6A
 Likewise, unemployment in the rest of the state was higher for men,
blacks and Hispanics in the first half of 2010.
18.0%
16.7%

16.0%

14.0%

12.1%
12.0%

10.0%
Percent

8.6%
7.8%
8.0%
6.9% 6.7%

6.0%
6 0%
4.5%
4.0%

2.0%

0.0%
All Males Females White Black Hispanic Asian & other

Source: FPI analysis of Current Population Survey data for first five months of 2010; adjusted to NYS Department of
Labor Local Area Unemployment Statistics data.

FIGURE 6B
 NYC unemployment is even higher—in all categories—when
discouraged workers and involuntary part-timers are included.
25.0%

21.2%
20.6%
20.0%

17.2%
16.2%
15.0%
15.0%
Percent

11.9%
11.2%

10.0%

5.0%

0.0%
All Males Females White Black Hispanic Asian and other

Source: FPI analysis of Current Population Survey data for first five months of 2010; adjusted to NYS Department of
Labor Local Area Unemployment Statistics data.
Note: U-6 is an alternative unemployment rate specified by the Bureau of Labor Statistics th

FIGURE 7A
 Unemployment in the rest of the state is higher—in all categories—
when discouraged workers and involuntary part-timers are included.
30.0%

24.6%
25.0%

22.0%

20.0%
Percent

14.2% 14.6%
15.0% 13.8%
12.7%

10.0% 9.3%

5.0%

0.0%
All Males Females White Black Hispanic Asian and other
Source: FPI analysis of Current Population Survey data for first five months of 2010; adjusted to NYS Department of
Labor Local Area Unemployment Statistics data.
Note: U-6 is an alternative unemployment rate specified by the Bureau of Labor Statistics th

FIGURE 7B
 Initial unemployment claims in NYC and the rest of the state are
down from a year ago but still greater than before the recession.
26,000

24,000

22,000
Rest of New York State
20,000

18,000
ek moving average

16,000

14,000

12,000
12-wee

10,000
New York City
8,000

6,000

4,000

2,000

Source: New York State Department of Labor. The recession started later in New York than in the rest of the US, in
Spring-Summer of 2008.

FIGURE 8
 The median period of unemployment in New York City has reached six
months, a significant jump from previous recessions.
27

25

23

21
Weeks unemployed

19

17

15

13

11

5
Jun-96

Dec-96

Jun-97

Dec-97

Jun-98

Dec-98

Jun-99

Dec-99

Jun-00

Dec-00

Jun-01

Dec-01

Jun-02

Dec-02

Jun-03

Dec-03

Jun-04

Dec-04

Jun-05

Dec-05

Jun-06

Dec-06

Jun-07

Dec-07

Jun-08

Dec-08

Jun-09

Dec-09

Jun-10
Source: FPI analysis of Economic Policy Institute Current Population Survey data, June 1996 - June 2010.

FIGURE 9A
 In the rest of New York State, the median duration of unemployment has increased
dramatically during the Great Recession.

25
Median weeks unemployed, six-month moving average

20

15

10

Source: FPI analysis of Economic Policy Institute Current Population Survey data, June 1996 - June 2010.

FIGURE 9B
 The median weekly wages of New York City's managerial/professional
workers showed strong growth even during the recession.
15.0%
13.7%

10.0% 9.5%

7.5%

5.0% 4.1%
Percent

0.0%

Non-managerial/non-professional
-5.0% -4.3%
Managerial/professional

-7.3%

-10.0%
All Male Female
Source: FPI analysis of Current Population Survey.

FIGURE 10A
 Male managerial/professional workers had the greatest decline in
median weekly wages in the suburbs and upstate between the first
half of 2007 and the first half of 2010.
3.0%

2.0%
2.0%

1.0%

0.0%
-0.2%
-1.0%
-1.0%

-2.0%
Percent

-2.2%
-3.0%
3.0%

-4.0%
Non-managerial/non-professional

-5.0% Managerial/professional

-6.0%
-5.9%

-7.0% -6.8%

-8.0%
All Male Female
Source: FPI analysis of Current Population Survey.

FIGURE 10B
In New York State, job losses have been greatest in manufacturing, finance,
construction, retail trade and professional services. Government employment has
fallen more in New York than nationally.

U.S. employment NYS employment

Absolute Percent Absolute Percent
Industrial sector July 2008 July 2010 change change July 2008 July 2010 change change
Total nonfarm 137,075 130,242 -6,833 -5.0% 8,807 8,522 -285 -3.2%
Total private 114,518 107,737 -6,781 -5.9% 7,290 7,041 -249 -3.4%

Construction 7,164 5,573 -1,591 -22.2% 360 314 -46 -12.9%

Manufacturing 13,456 11,717 -1,739 -12.9% 533 463 -70 -13.1%
Wholesale trade 5,947 5,586 -361 -6.1% 352 322 -30 -8.5%
Retail trade 15,305 14,434 -872 -5.7% 896 857 -39 -4.4%
Transportation & warehousing 5,087 4,742 -346 -6.8% 276 260 -16 -5.7%

Information 2,988 2,712 -276 -9.2% 263 250 -14 -5.3%

Finance & insurance 6,024 5,640 -384 -6.4% 535 486 -50 -9.3%
Real estate 1,489 1,375 -115 -7.7% 159 153 -6 -3.9%
Prof. & technical services 7,813 7,406 -408 -5.2% 591 557 -34 -5.7%
Management of companies 1,910 1,824 -86 -4.5% 134 132 -2 -1.6%

Admin. & support services 7,700 7,087 -613 -8.0% 416 387 -29 -7.0%
Educational services 3,068 3,147 79 2.6% 375 385 10 2.6%
Health care & social assistance 15,815 16,412 596 3.8% 1,256 1,303 47 3.7%
Arts, entertainment & recreation 1,972 1,915 -57 -2.9% 144 146 2 1.3%
Accomm. & food services 11,480 11,182 -298 -2.6% 574 589 15 2.6%
Other services 5,522 5,339 -183 -3.3% 368 387 19 5.2%
Federal Government 2,763 3,017 254 9.2% 126 137 11 8.4%
State and Local Government 19,794 19,488 -306 -1.5% 1,404 1,364 -40 -2.9%

NYC employment Suburban and upstate employment

Absolute Percent Absolute Percent
Industrial sector July 2008 July 2010 change change July 2008 July 2010 change change
Total nonfarm 3,802 3,688 -114 -3.0% 5,005 4,835 -171 -3.4%
Total private 3,240 3,146 -94 -2.9% 4,050 3,895 -155 -3.8%

Construction 133 114 -19 -14.3% 227 199 -27 -12.1%

Manufacturing 96 79 -16 -17.2% 438 384 -54 -12.3%
Wholesale trade 149 137 -13 -8.4% 203 186 -17 -8.5%
Retail trade 300 293 -7 -2.3% 596 564 -32 -5.4%
Transportation & warehousing 126 116 -9 -7.4% 150 143 -6 -4.3%

Information 167 159 -9 -5.1% 96 91 -5 -5.5%

Finance & insurance 345 308 -36 -10.5% 191 177 -13 -7.0%
Real estate 111 109 -2 -1.6% 48 43 -4 -9.3%
Prof. & technical services 348 330 -19 -5.3% 243 228 -15 -6.3%
Management of companies 63 60 -2 -3.7% 71 71 0 0.2%

Admin. & support services 192 175 -16 -8.6% 224 212 -12 -5.6%
Educational services 159 174 15 9.6% 216 211 -5 -2.4%
Health care & social assistance 559 580 21 3.8% 697 723 26 3.7%
Arts, entertainment & recreation 70 70 1 1.0% 74 76 1 1.6%
Accomm. & food services 242 250 8 3.3% 332 339 7 2.1%
Other services 161 170 9 5.9% 208 217 10 4.7%
Federal Government 56 63 6 11.3% 70 74 4 6.0%
State and Local Government 509 484 -25 -4.9% 895 879 -15 -1.7%

Note: All figures are in thousands except percent change

Source: U.S. employment data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics CES (seasonally adjusted) and FPI's seasonal adjustment for CES data for NYS,
NYC and the rest of the state.

FIGURE 11
From July 2008 to July 2010, most New York metro areas
had smaller job declines than metro areas in other states.
Change in Rank among 365
Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA)
percent MSAs

United States average -5.0%

Ithaca, NY -1.1% 36
Utica-Rome, NY -1.6% 42
Kingston, NY -1.8% 46
Glens Falls, NY -1.9% 50
Syracuse, NY -2.7% 81
Nassau-Suffolk, NY Metropolitan Division -2.9% 93
New York City, NY -3.0% 96
Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY -3.0% 97
Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY -3.1% 98
Elmira, NY -3.4% 111
Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-Middletown, NY -3.7% 129
Rochester, NY -3.9% 135
Binghamton, NY -4.7% 175
Putnam-Rockland-Westchester, NY Metrolitan Division -5.6% 219

Note: The New York portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island MSA is separated into
New York City, and Nassau-Suffolk and Putnam-Rockland-Westchester metropolitan divisions.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics MSA total nonfarm employment, not seasonally adjusted.

FIGURE 12
During the last two years of the expansion (2005-2007), and during the first two years of
the Great Recession (2007-2009), most metro areas in New York State had faster per
capita personal income growth than the metropolitan average for the nation.

Per capita personal income Per capita income growth rate Rank among 366
Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA)
2005 2007 2009 2005-2007 2007-2009 2005-2009 MSAs, 2005-2009

United States metropolitan portion $37,082 $41,260 $40,757 11.3% -1.2% 9.9%

Binghamton, NY (MSA) $28,262 $32,870 $34,116 16.3% 3.8% 20.7% 14

Ithaca, NY (MSA) $28,272 $32,374 $33,632 14.5% 3.9% 19.0% 27
Kingston, NY (MSA) $30,677 $35,738 $36,481 16.5% 2.1% 18.9% 28
Utica-Rome, NY (MSA) $27,972 $31,614 $33,069 13.0% 4.6% 18.2% 32
Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY (MSA) $31,801 $36,216 $37,511 13.9% 3.6% 18.0% 36
Elmira, NY (MSA) $27,952 $31,656 $32,814 13.3% 3.7% 17.4% 44
Syracuse, NY (MSA) $31,474 $35,797 $36,784 13.7% 2.8% 16.9% 50
Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY (MSA) $36,239 $40,941 $42,318 13.0% 3.4% 16.8% 52
Rochester, NY (MSA) $34,114 $38,635 $39,192 13.3% 1.4% 14.9% 92
Glens Falls, NY (MSA) $28,740 $31,833 $32,994 10.8% 3.6% 14.8% 98
Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-Middletown, NY (MSA) $34,396 $39,109 $39,282 13.7% 0.4% 14.2% 111
NY-No. NJ -Long Island, NY-NJ-PA (MSA) $45,952 $53,864 $52,375 17.2% -2.8% 14.0% 116

Note: All income figures are in current dollars.

Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis, Regional Income Division.

FIGURE 13
Weekly earnings for many New York non-managerial, non-
professional workers have dropped sharply over the past three
years, while earnings for NYC managerial/professional workers
have increased.
NYC Median Weekly Wages by Occupational Group, first half 2007 and first half 2010
First half First half Absolute Percent
2007 2010 change change
Non-managerial/non-professional
All $515 $493 -$22 -4.3%
Male $611 $567 -$45 -7.3%
Female $428 $446 $18 4.1%
Managerial/professional
All $958 $1,049 $91 9.5%
Male $998 $1,135 $137 13.7%
Female $917 $986 $69 7.5%

Rest of NYS Median Weekly Wages by Occupational Group, first half 2007 and first half 2010
First half First half Absolute Percent
2007 2010 change change
Non-managerial/non-professional
All $509 $479 -$30 -5.9%
Male $619 $606 -$13 -2.2%
Female $397 $396 -$1 -0.2%
Managerial/professional
All $1,014 $1,004 -$10 -1.0%
Male $1,226 $1,142 -$83 -6.8%
Female $854 $871 $17 2.0%

Notes: Median weekly wages are adjusted to 2009 annual average dollars using CPI-US city average.
Managerial/professional includes Standard Occupational Classifications (SOC) 11-29, plus SOC 41 except for
cashiers and retail salespersons; Non-managerial/non-professional occupations includes SOC 31-39 and 43-53,
plus retail salespersons and cashiers from SOC 41, and includes healthcare support; protective service; food
preparation and serving related; building and grounds cleaning and maintenance; personal care and service; retail
sales-persons and retail cashiers; office and administrative support; farming, fishing, and forestry; construction and
extraction; installation, maintenance, and repair; production; transportation and material moving.
Source: FPI analysis of Current Population Survey.

APPENDIX
The Fiscal Policy Institute is a nonpartisan research and
education organization that focuses on tax, budget, and
economic issues that affect the quality of life and the
economic well being of New York State residents.
www.fiscalpolicy.org
One Lear Jet Lane 11 Park Place, Suite 701
Latham, NY 12110 New York, NY 10007
518-786-3156 212-721-5624