Unexpectedly low labor income for direct jobs

I generally like to report rough average wages in direct, indirect and induced jobs when I write up results, just by dividing direct/indirect/induced labor income by direct/indirect/induced employment. 

For this analysis, while my indirect and induced average wages made sense (about $60k and $80k, respectively, just above and just below the average salary in the state), wages from direct employment were substantially lower, at only about $29k.

Looking more closely at the results by sector, I found a couple of sectors that seem to be heavily driving this. For example, I have about 4800 direct FTEs in sector 451, but only about $1 million in direct employee compensation. How could that be possible? That's only about $200 per FTE.

In sector 394 (general merchandise retail), I have about 100,000 direct FTEs and $1.4b in direct employee compensation, which works out to about $13k on average. If each FTE works a standard 2,080 hours per year, this would mean their hourly earnings are well below federal minimum wage. I know wages are generally not high in this sector, but indirect and induced average wages are about more where I'd have expected them ($46k).

Is there any known reason this might be happening? 

Was this post helpful?
0 out of 0 found this helpful

Comments

1 comment

  • Official comment

    Hello, thank you for the question. Which event type are you using, and in which region? To take your first example: When I run an Industry Impact Analysis (Detailed) event in Industry 451, with the United States as my region, with 4,800 FTE as my only input, my results include $937.7 million in direct employee compensation in Industry 451 (in 2026 dollars). That works out to about $195,400 in direct employee compensation per FTE.

Please sign in to leave a comment.