Local labour force - Individual income
Bankstown City local labour force has a lower proportion of people with high incomes ($1500 or more per week) than New South Wales.
The Individual Income levels of the labour force are directly linked to their knowledge, experience, qualifications, occupation and skill levels.
Income statistics in Bankstown City, when analysed with other data sources, such as Age Structure, Qualifications, Hours Worked and Occupations, help to evaluate the economic opportunities and socio-economic status of Bankstown City. This also indicates what knowledge and skill levels industry can draw upon locally.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) – Census 2006 and 2011 – by usual residence
|Local labour force individual income|
|Gross weekly individual income||Number||%||New South Wales %|
|Negative Income/ Nil income||855||1.2||1.1||3001|
|$2,000 or more||3,878||5.6||11.1||3011|
Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics, Census of Population and Housing (opens a new window) 2011. Compiled and presented in profile.id by .id (opens a new window), the population experts.
Compiled and presented in economy.id by .id, the population experts.
Analysis of the local labour force individual income levels in Bankstown City in 2011 compared to New South Wales shows that there was a lower proportion earning a high income (those earning $1,500 per week or more) and a higher proportion of low income persons (those earning less than $400 per week).
Overall, 14.4% of the workforce earned a high income, and 16.9% earned a low income, compared with 22.1% and 15.8% respectively for New South Wales.
The major differences between the weekly income of the local labour force workforce in Bankstown City and New South Wales were:
- A larger percentage of people who earned $600-$799 (17.4% compared to 14.9%)
- A larger percentage of people who earned $800-$999 (14.5% compared to 12.5%)
- A smaller percentage of people who earned $2,000 or more (5.6% compared to 11.1%)
- A smaller percentage of people who earned $1,500-$1,999 (8.9% compared to 11.0%)