Best States for Construction Managers: California Leads, But New York and Washington Pay More

Across LaborCove’s top 10 states for construction managers, the data show a wide spread in how salary, employment, and Geography Scores line up. Several states in the top 10 have median pay well above the national median of $114,990, including New York at $155,360 and Washington at $155,070, while Texas and Florida are both below the national level. California, Texas, and Florida stand out for their relatively large employment counts among the ranked states, but they differ substantially in pay and Geography Score. The rankings also illustrate that the highest salary does not automatically correspond to the highest LaborCove Geography Score: New York has the highest median salary in this group but ranks #2, while California holds the #1 spot with a lower median salary than New York and Washington. Nationally, projected employment for construction managers is expected to grow 8.7%, framing these state comparisons within a growing occupation overall at the national level.

The national median annual salary for construction managers is $114,990. Within LaborCove’s top 10 states, several locations have median salaries above this national benchmark. New York reports the highest median salary in the top 10 at $155,360, followed closely by Washington at $155,070 and Massachusetts at $145,010. All three sit well above the national median of $114,990. New Jersey at $138,230, Alaska at $139,190, California at $133,160, Maryland at $128,330, and Colorado at $124,830 also have median pay levels above the national figure. By contrast, Texas at $101,470 and Florida at $113,130 both have median salaries below the national median. This demonstrates that being in the overall top 10 does not guarantee a state-level median salary above the national benchmark.

The LaborCove rankings show that top salaries and top Geography Scores do not always align. New York has the highest reported median salary among the top 10 states at $155,360, yet it ranks #2 overall with a Geography Score of 61.44. Washington has the second-highest salary at $155,070 and holds the #3 spot with a Geography Score of 57.51. Both states trail California in the Geography Score rankings. California ranks #1 overall with a Geography Score of 63.78 and a median salary of $133,160, which is lower than the median salaries in New York and Washington. This contrast highlights that LaborCove’s Geography Score captures more than just pay when determining rankings.

Employment counts vary significantly among the top-ranked states for construction managers. Texas has the largest reported employment count in this top-10 group at 59,060 construction managers. California and Florida also have relatively large counts, with 34,750 and 34,010 respectively. All three substantially exceed the national top-geography employment minimum of 6,010 represented by Washington in this list. Other states in the top 10 have smaller employment counts. Colorado has 12,550, New York 10,280, Massachusetts 9,870, New Jersey 6,910, Maryland 5,770, and Alaska 1,720. These differences show that some high-ranked states represent comparatively smaller employment markets than others within the same top 10.

Several mid-ranked states in the top 10 combine solid Geography Scores with salaries that are above the national median. Massachusetts ranks #5 with a Geography Score of 56.02 and a median salary of $145,010, which is higher than California’s $133,160. New Jersey ranks #6 with a Geography Score of 49.78 and a median salary of $138,230, again above California’s median pay. Alaska, at #8 with a Geography Score of 45.90, has a median salary of $139,190, which is higher than California’s $133,160 and Colorado’s $124,830. Colorado, ranked #9 with a Geography Score of 45.43, shows a median salary of $124,830, placing it above the national median of $114,990. Together, these results illustrate that some states in the middle of the top 10 provide median pay levels that exceed both the national benchmark and the median salary in higher-ranked California.

The lower end of the top 10 includes states where Geography Scores are closer to the bottom of this group, and pay levels and employment counts vary. Florida ranks #7 with a Geography Score of 46.63, a median salary of $113,130, and employment of 34,010. Its median pay is slightly below the national median of $114,990 despite ranking ahead of Alaska, Colorado, and Maryland in this list. Texas, ranked #4 with a Geography Score of 57.18, has the largest employment count at 59,060 but the lowest median salary in the top 10 at $101,470. Maryland appears at #10 with a Geography Score of 43.35, a median salary of $128,330, and an employment count of 5,770. While its Geography Score is the lowest among these 10 states, its median salary remains above the national median of $114,990 and higher than Florida’s $113,130.

LaborCove’s rankings for construction managers use authoritative U.S. labor-market data and LaborCove’s proprietary Geography Score methodology. For this article, national and state-level salaries and employment counts for construction managers (occupation 11-9021) are based on Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) observations with a reference period of May 2025. The report year of 2026 reflects when LaborCove packages and publishes these results and should not be interpreted as the OEWS observation year. LaborCove’s Geography Score aggregates multiple labor-market indicators into a single number for each state, which is then used to produce the state rankings shown here. The specific weight of each factor within the Geography Score is not disclosed, and this article does not infer which individual metric is most important. National projected employment growth of 8.7% for construction managers is a separate U.S.-wide occupational projection. It is not an OEWS observation and is not a state- or metro-level forecast. No state or metro projected growth rates are supplied for this occupation in the data used here. These rankings should be considered alongside personal factors such as preferred regions, industry segments, and individual career goals, which are outside the scope of the LaborCove dataset for this article.