Interested in Worker Mobility Between Colorado and Other States?
Then this article is a must-read
Note: due to the length of this article, it may truncate when received via email. Visit this link if you run into those issues: https://ryangedney.substack.com/archive.
Near the end of a previous post, a data source from the U.S. Census Bureau was highlighted, which enables detailed analysis of quarterly worker job movement, or flows, between various geographic areas across the nation. While this dataset is lagged by a year (the most recent data is currently from second quarter 2023), it is unmatched with the level of information available on worker mobility. Geographic-level statistics and trends on worker mobility can be useful to help identify potential population shifts and the relative attractiveness of a specific area as a destination for labor market activity. With those focuses in mind, this article will explore worker job flows between Colorado and other states and select metro areas from 2005 to mid-2023. The analysis is split into six sections: 1) introduction and explanation of the job flow concept; 2) states that are primary and secondary contributors of job flows into Colorado; 3) states that are the primary beneficiaries of job flows from Colorado, either historically or recently emerging; 4) aggregated job flow trends for states not detailed in the prior two sections; 5) statistics on job flows between Colorado and select U.S. metro areas; and 6) high-level interstate job flows data for Colorado’s seven Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA) and a consolidated area that combines all of the state’s 47 counties that are not within an MSA.
Section 1. Introduction
As previously mentioned, these quarterly job flow data are produced by the U.S. Census Bureau; specifically through their Longitudinal Employment-Household Dynamics (LEHD) program (technical documentation and data for these job flow statistics are available within the LEHD website). Job flows concentrate on a certain segment of the working population – those individuals who switch employers, with no or limited nonemployment spells (therefore excluding those with long unemployment durations, breaks from the labor force, or that did not work for a traditional payroll employer). This cohort of job-changing workers can generally be separated into four groups: 1) those that stay in the same state and remain in the same industry; 2) those that stay in the same state, but change industries; 3) those that move to a new state and remain in the same industry; and 4) those that move to a new state, but change industries. This analysis combines groups 3 and 4, which narrows the scope to workers that relocate to a different state, regardless of industry (individuals who switch to work remotely for an out-of-state employer, but continue to live in their same state, would also be included; however, those workers are not isolated through the LEHD job flows data product). Using this subset of data provides the ability to measure workers who move to and from a state (inflow and outflow), and whether the net difference (net flow) for Colorado is positive or negative over time. Another way to think about it is as a useful proxy for tracking the exchange of labor between Colorado and other states (due to periods of missing or incomplete data between 2005 and 2023, the following states are not included in this analysis: Alaska, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, North Carolina, and the District of Columbia).
So how big is this subset of worker inflow and outflow in Colorado? Since 2005, the state’s inflow and outflow of jobs with 44 other states have combined to represent between 5.5% and 9.0% of Colorado’s total employment during a given period. This is illustrated in the chart below (black line), which takes a rolling four-quarter total of job inflows and outflows and divides that by a four-quarter average employment estimate derived from LEHD’s Quarterly Workforce Indicators data product. The flow of workers to and from Colorado notably slowed during the past two recessions and rebounded following those downturns. The post-pandemic surge in Colorado’s inflow and outflow of jobs mirror other employment metrics (like that from the Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey) that showed historically high levels of worker movement once the economy began to re-open in 2021. Additionally, Colorado inflows (blue line) have outpaced outflows (orange line) since 2005, although that gap has significantly narrowed during recessions. Interestingly, Colorado’s recent (four-quarter period ending Q2 2023) inflow share of 4.4% has returned to pre-pandemic levels, while the outflow share of 4.0% remains above the 2019 peak of 3.7%.
The rest of this analysis will primarily focus on net job flow trends for Colorado, which simply takes the state’s inflow totals and subtracts out the outflow totals. A positive net figure (identified by green bars in subsequent charts) indicates that Colorado is gaining jobs, or workers, in its exchange of labor with another area, while a negative figure (red bars) implies the opposite effect. As the following chart presents, Colorado’s total net job flow with 44 other states has been positive in all of the 71 four-quarter periods spanning between 2005 and 2023. Prior to the Great Recession, the net job flow level peaked at 12,500, before dropping below 2,500 during the economic downturn. The benchmark of 12,500 wasn’t surpassed until 2012-13, and growth in the state’s net job flow continued until a new peak of over 24,000 was established in 2014-15. Colorado’s level of net job flows remained historically high for the next several years, but started exhibiting signs of accelerated decline in 2018. Right before the pandemic (the four quarters ending in Q1 2020), Colorado’s net job flows achieved a seven-year low, at slightly above 15,000. With the pandemic and subsequent recession, the state’s net job flow total bottomed out at 6,400, but quickly recovered to exceed the 15,000-mark only a year later. However, recent trends indicate that the surge in net job flow was short-lived, as current levels rest below 11,300. In order to provide a more complete picture of Colorado’s net job flows over time, the remaining sections of this article will disaggregate the information displayed in this chart and highlight meaningful and interesting trends.
Section 2. States that are primary and secondary contributors of positive net job flows for Colorado
To anyone who has lived in Colorado over the past 30 years, it’s probably not a surprise that California and Texas top the list for primary contributors of positive net job flows for the state. The nation’s two most populous states are also within relatively close proximity to Colorado, so it makes sense there would be a high level of labor exchange between the three areas. On average, Texas and California combine to make up around 25% of Colorado’s summed inflow and outflow totals referenced above. Some notable observations emerge when looking at the panel shown below. First, while California has consistently been a net positive job flow state for Colorado since 2005, there was a period during the Great Recession when net job flows were negative with Texas. Second, net job flows with Texas did not surpass 1,000 until 2013, a level that was easily exceeded by California eight years prior. Third, due to a spike between 2016 and 2018, Colorado net job flows with Texas were briefly larger than with California. Fourth, divergent trends were exhibited between the two states during the pandemic and ensuing recovery. The 2020-21 period featured a significant increase in California-based net job flows, while at the same time Texas net job flows plummeted. However, recent net job flows with Texas have risen substantially, which coincide with a gradual decline in California net job flows. Finally, over the past five years (2018-2023), California and Texas have represented a much larger combined share of Colorado’s total net job flows when compared to the thirteen years prior (2005-2017). Between 2005 and 2017, that share peaked at 42% (2005) and reached a trough of around 3% during the Great Recession. Since then, the share has moved from 33% in 2018, to 75% during the height of the pandemic, and now sits at 62% based on the most recent four-quarter data available.
The five states identified in the following panel are secondary contributors of positive net job flows for Colorado. These are Illinois, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Virginia and they all share commonality in being located east of the Mississippi River and having larger populations than Colorado. Combined, they account for about 13% of Colorado’s summed inflow and outflow totals (or a little over half the average rate for California and Texas). Pennsylvania and Virginia were briefly net negative job flow states for Colorado during the Great Recession, while the other three states have a constant sea of green spread throughout their job flow charts. All five states appear to have a decrease in net job flows that corresponds with the pandemic; however, New York’s dip occurred in 2019, with a subsequent rise during the pandemic that is reminiscent of the California trend. A unified post-pandemic trend is also revealed, as Colorado has experienced notable slowdowns in positive net job flows with this group of states. Respective net job flows with Illinois, New York, and Virginia have dropped to their lowest levels in approximately 10 years, while labor exchange with Ohio and Pennsylvania would be in similarly comparative position if their 2020 declines are ignored.
Section 3. States that are the primary beneficiaries of net job flows from Colorado, either historically or recently emerging
When looking at the six states that are historically the primary beneficiaries of net job flows from Colorado, a shared thread becomes quickly obvious. As presented in the panel below, these Pacific Northwest and Mountain states – Idaho , Montana, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming – are close neighbors with Colorado and all offer a combination of outdoor, recreational, and wilderness experiences not too dissimilar from the Centennial State. Other than very brief periods of positive net job flows, Washington, Oregon, and Montana exclusively interact as negative net job flow states with Colorado. The peak of negative flows with Washington and Oregon occurred in 2016, while Montana’s highest level took place during the pandemic. Negative net job flows with Oregon have increased post-pandemic, which is the reverse of the trend for Montana and Washington during that period.
The states in the bottom part of the panel have contributed to extended durations of positive net job flows for Colorado (Wyoming: 2012 to 2018, Idaho: 2007 to 2014, and Utah: 2010 to 2015), but are more likely to have the labor exchange advantage over the past 18 years. However, there is recent evidence that the net flow balance might be swinging back into Colorado’s favor. Net job flows with Utah have switched back to positive starting in 2021 and negative flows with Wyoming and Idaho are currently at their lowest levels in many years.
The states that have recently emerged as contributors to Colorado’s negative net job flows all reside along the nation’s Sun Belt: Arizona, Florida, South Carolina, and Tennessee. Other than Arizona, a state that shares a border with Colorado, the other three states are concentrated in the southeast corner of the U.S. Based on the information displayed in the next panel, it’s clear that Arizona and Florida were once significant contributors to positive net job flows for Colorado. For an eight-year stretch between 2007 and 2015, Arizona ranked as a Top 10 state (out of the 44 states evaluated in this analysis) for net flows benefiting Colorado. Florida had an even more impressive streak, ranking in the Top 5 in 52 out of the 56 four-quarter periods measured between mid-2006 and early 2020. However, the change in net job flows with Florida came swiftly once the pandemic reached full height. By the four-quarter period ending in Q3 2021, Florida represented the largest drain on Colorado’s net job flow totals. While net flows with Florida have improved recently, the levels remain negative and still rank among the worst nationally. Net job flows with Arizona, on the other hand, finally turned positive for Colorado beginning in 2022, after six years of red. Compared to Florida, the shift in net job flows from positive to negative with Arizona were relatively gradual, although timing likely is a meaningful factor with that observation (starting in 2016 with Arizona vs. the pandemic with Florida).
Graphically, South Carolina and Tennessee appear like mini versions of Florida, with extended periods of positive net job flows for Colorado prior to the pandemic and then a sudden drop to negative net job flow territory once the effects from COVID-19 were fully incorporated into the data. Colorado’s net job flows with Tennessee clearly declined at a faster rate relative to South Carolina, and as of the four-quarter period ending in Q2 2023, the Volunteer State trailed only Oregon with the largest level of negative net job flows.
Section 4. Aggregated net job flow trends for states not detailed in the prior two sections
Up to this point of the article, net job flow trends with Colorado and 17 other states have been detailed and discussed. That leaves a total of 27 more states that require analysis. As fun as it may sound to break these remaining states into respective group clusters, we’re going to take a more efficient approach and aggregate them (see the caption below for a listing of those states). Together, these 27 states represent about 37% of Colorado’s summed inflow and outflow totals, which exceeds the combined contribution from California and Texas. Aggregated net job flows with Colorado and this group of states have been positive since 2005, as the following chart shows, although levels fell precipitously low during the past two recessions. This collection of states made up roughly half of the surge in Colorado’s positive net job flow total that peaked in 2015. However, that share has steadily declined to just over 21% based on the most recent data available, which barely edges out the series low proportion of 16% in 2009, during the height of the Great Recession. This shift in the 27-state share also coincides with the rise in the joint California-Texas contribution to Colorado’s positive net job flow totals mentioned in the second section.
While there are retrospective arguments for why Colorado’s spike in positive net job flows in 2015 were not sustainable, the subsequent table isolates 10 of these 27 aggregated states and displays their net job flow values for the following four-quarter periods: Q2 2007, Q2 2011, Q2 2015, Q2 2019, and Q2 2023. The states listed in the table are sorted by the 10 highest Q2 2015 Colorado positive net job flow figures out of the group of 27. These 10 states combined to total nearly 7,600 net jobs for Colorado in the four-quarter period ending 2015 Q2, led by Kansas and New Mexico with over 900 each. Moving back or forth on the table reveals the 2015 levels were a clear outlier, but also illustrates the lackluster status of current net job flows. For the four-quarter period ending 2023 Q2, the total number of net jobs of the 10 states is about 1,500, which is a lower sum than any other period presented on the table. Three states (Kansas, North Dakota, and Oklahoma) have recently shifted to negative net job flows, while a fourth (Missouri) is on the brink. This mirrors a concerning trend when refocusing the analytical scope back to the 27 aggregated states. Going back to 2005, there have only been four instances when at least 12 of these 27 states had negative net job flows with Colorado: twice during the Great Recession, the height of the pandemic, and the most recent four-quarter period available.
Section 5. Statistics of net job flows between Colorado and select U.S. metro areas
Having thoroughly covered state-to-state labor exchanges, the remaining sections will focus on metro area analysis. The first of these two sections highlights interesting net job flow trends between Colorado and U.S. metropolitan statistical areas (MSA) and aggregated state regions that are not in a metropolitan area (also referred to as a non-MSA, it’s useful to think about these broad areas as a proxy for the “rural” part of a given state).
The table below shows the Top 10 areas that contributed most to Colorado’s positive net job flows for the following four-quarter periods: Q2 2011, Q2 2015, Q2 2019, and Q2 2023 (starting the table in 2011, rather than 2005 or 2007, allowed for the inclusion of more metro areas, like Washington D.C. and Boston, which had missing data in earlier years). The bolded MSAs – Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York – show up in the table in every period and can be considered as the largest drivers for the state over time. However, this is likely not a revelatory statement, given the state-level information provided above and that these are the three largest U.S. cities. 21 different MSAs and 1 non-MSA (North Dakota) appear in this table.
The next table displays a Bottom 10 list during the same four-quarter periods, or more precisely, the areas that contributed most to Colorado’s negative net job flows. Portland is the only bolded MSA, unsurprising given Oregon’s historical labor exchange with Colorado. The distribution of areas is more diverse in this table, with 24 different MSAs and 8 non-MSAs listed. There are also six areas that show up in both the Top and Bottom 10 tables: Austin, Kansas City, Las Vegas, Phoenix, San Francisco/Oakland, and non-MSA North Dakota.
The final part of this section takes six select metro areas and presents their net job flows with Colorado since 2005. The top portion of the panel below highlights net job flows with the Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York MSAs. The bottom portion of the panel combines MSAs that are within close proximity to each other and that exhibit some interesting trends with Colorado over time: Dallas-Houston-Austin, Texas; San Francisco/Oakland-San Jose, California; and Pensacola-Crestview, Florida.
As mentioned before, Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York are the primary drivers of positive net job flows for Colorado from a metropolitan area perspective. On average, those three MSAs combine to represent a 9% share of Colorado’s summed inflow and outflow totals. Chicago is the only one of the three areas to see net job flow levels exceed 2,000, which happened in 2017-18 and just after the height of the pandemic. However, Los Angeles was the key driver of net job flows before the Great Recession, as those levels reached 1,500, compared to Chicago and New York pre-recession peaks that were below 700. Matching a common theme, Colorado has experienced a notable recent decline in net job flows with all three MSAs. New York and Chicago net job flows are at their lowest level in 9 to 10 years, while Los Angeles remains above the pre-pandemic mark, but heading towards the wrong direction.
The Dallas, Austin, and Houston MSAs are located in the eastern part of Texas and form a triangle when they’re connected on a map. Besides geometric shapes, another thing these metro areas have in common is that they each ranked in the top 5 for positive net flows with Colorado based on the most recent data available. These combined areas have an interesting labor exchange trend with Colorado over the past 18 years. From 2005 to 2012, net job flows were either negative or very low on the positive side. Net job flows then surged in the following years, peaking in 2017, before gradually declining in 2018-19. The pandemic accelerated that decrease, but then a rapid rebound occurred starting in 2021 and net job flow levels are now currently at their highest levels recorded in this analysis. Looking at the detailed data of each of the three MSAs reveals that recent net flows with Austin have increased the most compared to 2017-18 levels, so that’s likely a trend worth following.
Approximately 50 miles separate the San Francisco/Oakland and San Jose MSAs and they are known as key tech hubs within the U.S. Colorado, which also has high concentrations of tech employment, has a unique labor exchange history with this group of metro areas located on the central part of western California. Between 2005 and 2009, Colorado had slightly positive net job flows with these areas. As the Great Recession progressed, those net job flows turned negative and remained in the red until 2014 (San Francisco/Oakland and San Jose both show up in the Bottom 10 table above for the Q2 2011 period). From that point forward, net job flows accelerated in Colorado’s favor, peaking above 1,500 in 2021. Current net job flows have subsided, but remain above pre-pandemic levels.
Recall back to Section 3 that Florida, once a key driver of positive net job flows for Colorado, swiftly became a primary contributor of negative net job flows following the immediate aftermath of the pandemic. In no place is this switch more prevalent than in the northwest portion of Florida’s handle, where Pensacola and Crestview are located. While the two MSAs accounted for modest net job flows for Colorado between 2005 and 2020, a staggering reversal took place in the following years. In 2021 the levels dropped below -200 and continued a rapid decline in 2022 to -750 net job flows. Looking back at the Bottom 10 table reveals that Pensacola and Crestview ranked 1st and 4th, respectively, for negative net job flows with Colorado based on the most recent data available.
Section 6. High-level interstate net job flow data for Colorado’s seven MSAs and one consolidated non-MSA area
This final section will look at high-level interstate net job flow trends for Colorado’s seven metropolitan statistical areas (MSA) and a “region” that combines the state’s 47 counties that are not within an MSA, also known as a non-MSA, or rural, area. Colorado’s seven MSAs are comprised of the following counties, while all other counties are rolled up into the non-MSA area:
Boulder: Boulder County
Colorado Springs: El Paso and Teller counties
Denver: Adams, Arapahoe, Broomfield, Clear Creek, Denver, Douglas, Elbert, Gilpin, Jefferson, and Park counties
Fort Collins: Larimer County
Grand Junction: Mesa County
Greeley: Weld County
Pueblo: Pueblo County
These eight areas are split into two groups of panels below. The first panel looks at Colorado’s larger MSAs, which also happen to almost exclusively display positive net job flows. The second panel displays smaller areas, which all show intermittent periods of net negative job flows.
Denver is the state’s largest MSA, making up approximately 55% of total employment. Additionally, on average, over half of Colorado’s state-to-state job inflow and outflow totals either end up or originate in the Denver MSA. To no surprise, Denver’s net job flows since 2005 are highly correlated with the state. While Denver historically represents a little more than 50% of Colorado’s employment and job flow totals, the share of net job flows is significantly higher. Since 2013, Denver’s proportion of Colorado net job flows has ranged between 60% and 94%. Following a brief, post-pandemic spike, Denver’s net job flow totals are currently at their lowest levels in 11 years (discounting the decline during the height of COVID-19).
The Boulder, Colorado Springs, and Fort Collins MSAs, like Denver, are situated along the state’s Front Range. Roughly 6% of Colorado’s inflow and outflow totals are allocated to Boulder and Fort Collins, respectively. The share for Colorado Springs is larger at 11%. Interstate net job flows for Colorado Springs peaked between 2015 and 2017 after a sustained period of subdued levels. Since then, net job flow totals have gradually declined and have essentially returned to 2010-12 levels based on the most recent data available. Boulder and Fort Collins net job flows follow similar trends over time, albeit at different magnitudes and severity during the pandemic. While Boulder’s net job flows fell in 2020, they were still positive; however, levels in Fort Collins briefly shifted to negative during that same time. Notably, Boulder’s historic net job flow peak occurred right after the height of the pandemic, but quickly subsided.
The remaining three MSAs, Grand Junction, Greeley, and Pueblo, are sprinkled throughout different geographic parts of the state. Combined, their share of Colorado’s summed inflow and outflow totals is just under 9%. As the following panel shows, Grand Junction registered large levels of both positive and negative net job flows from 2005 to 2012, but after exhibited only small movements through 2021. However, a recent uptick has brought Grand Junction’s net job flows to their highest levels in 13 years. Greeley, well known as a regional hub for oil and gas exploration and production, experienced a steep rise in positive net job flows between 2012 and 2014, which coincided with a fracking boom. A collapse in oil prices starting in late 2014 corresponded with Greeley’s net job flows eventually turning negative, although the decline was short-lived and levels quickly rebounded. However, the oil industry was severely impacted by the global effects of the pandemic, and Greeley’s net job flows plummeted. Recent net job flows for Greeley have returned to just slightly positive levels, but appear to have stagnated. Pueblo net job flows are historically more likely to be positive than negative. Like Grand Junction and Greeley, Pueblo net job flows fell into red territory during the height of the pandemic. Pueblo is currently (based on the most recent four-quarter data available) the only Colorado area with a recorded negative net job flow value.
Colorado’s non-MSA/rural region is an aggregation of 47 disparate counties and makes up 16% of the inflow and outflow totals. This includes sparsely populated areas of southern and eastern Colorado, recreational destinations nestled in the Rocky Mountains, and locales experiencing economic and industrial transformations. These wide differences make it difficult to tell drivers of net job flows for the state’s non-MSA area, but it’s still valuable to be able to analyze the trends. Other than during the height of the Great Recession, interstate net job flows for rural Colorado tend to be positive, but vacillate between high and low levels. Interestingly, net job flows for non-MSA Colorado were positive during the pandemic peak (four-quarter period ending Q1 2021) and have sustained relatively high levels based on the most recent data available. From 2013 to 2019, rural Colorado’s average share of the state’s net job flow total was 5%, but has jumped to over 12% during the past three measured periods.
Conclusion
If you’ve made it this far, congratulations! This was certainly a long-form article, containing a lot of varied detail and analysis. While this subset of labor exchange represents less than 10% of the state’s total employment, these worker mobility trends have a meaningful impact on Colorado’s past, present, and future economy and job market. Looking forward, the data shows some potential areas of weakness for Colorado, but perhaps that will begin to normalize once the unprecedented churn and volatility of the post-pandemic period starts to subside. The continued monitoring and evaluation of this underutilized LEHD resource will be key in answering that and other crucial questions. Depending on time, availability, and interest, this analytical concept could be expanded into more articles that look into additional net job flow trends for Colorado, like further explorations into industry-level data, or analysis of worker age and sex characteristics.