Skip to content

An independent salary reference. Not affiliated with BLS or any U.S. government agency.

Salary data from BLS Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics

Human Resources Managers Salary: Vermont vs Massachusetts

Human Resources Managers earn a median of $124,340 in Vermont and $176,510 in Massachusetts. That is a nominal gap of $52,170 (-29.6%), with Massachusetts paying more before any cost-of-living adjustment.

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics survey, May 2024 estimates. Cost-of-living adjustment uses BEA Regional Price Parities, most recent release.

$124,340
Vermont median
$126,932 after COL
$176,510
Massachusetts median
$166,901 after COL
-29.6%
Nominal gap
Massachusetts leads
-23.9%
Adjusted gap
Massachusetts leads after COL

The story behind the numbers

On raw wages, Massachusetts pays $52,170 more per year than Vermont for human resources managers, a gap of +29.6%.

After adjusting for cost of living, Massachusetts still comes out ahead, with roughly $39,970 of extra purchasing power (+23.9% real gap). Local prices do not reverse the nominal advantage.

Full breakdown by location

Detailed wage, employment, and cost-of-living figures for human resources managers in each location. Click through to the full local salary page for percentiles, outlook, and peer areas.

Human Resources Managers

Vermont

Median salary
$124,340
Mean salary
$138,030
Employment
380
Location quotient
0.89
Jobs per 1,000
1.2
COL-adjusted median
$126,932
Regional Price Parity
98.0%

Exact state RPP match.

Full Human Resources Managers page for Vermont →

Human Resources Managers

Massachusetts

Median salary
$176,510
Mean salary
$195,340
Employment
6,730
Location quotient
1.32
Jobs per 1,000
1.8
COL-adjusted median
$166,901
Regional Price Parity
105.8%

Exact state RPP match.

Full Human Resources Managers page for Massachusetts →

Related pages

Keep digging into human resources managers from a different angle.

Common questions about this comparison

What does the cost-of-living adjustment actually do? +

It divides each location's nominal median wage by its Regional Price Parity (RPP), which measures how local prices compare to the national average (100 = national). A wage of $100,000 in an area with RPP 120 has the same purchasing power as roughly $83,000 nationally.

Why would the nominal and adjusted winners disagree? +

High-cost metros often pay higher salaries, but not by enough to fully offset the higher cost of housing, goods, and services. When that happens, the location with the lower nominal wage actually offers more real purchasing power.

What is a location quotient? +

The location quotient measures how concentrated an occupation is in a given area versus the national average. A value of 2.0 means the occupation is twice as common there as nationally. It is a signal of what a state specializes in.