Market Intelligence · System 03
The AlphaHire Labor Scarcity Index.
A proprietary 0–100 framework that estimates how hard it is to hire construction leadership — by market and by role. Think of it as the VIX for construction labor: one number that captures demand, supply, compensation velocity, and contractor growth.
National Read
Construction leadership scarcity.
National Scarcity Index
81/100
Severe · ▲ 4 pts QoQ National read across the leadership roles AlphaHire recruits. 81/100 = Severe and rising.
Scarcity trend movement
National index · historical comparison
Q2 ’2573/100
Q2 ’26 (current)▲ 81/100
Module 01 WEST CENTRAL EAST
National Labor Scarcity Map.
Every tracked metro plotted geographically and sized by scarcity. The deepest purple markets are where leadership hiring is hardest.
Ashburn · 93 Critical · ↑3 QoQ Phoenix · 90 Critical · ↑6 QoQ Columbus · 89 Critical · ↑7 QoQ Dallas · 88 Critical · ↑4 QoQ Austin · 86 Critical · ↑5 QoQ San Jose · 84 Critical · ↑3 QoQ Los Angeles · 82 Critical · ↑2 QoQ Houston · 81 Critical · ↑3 QoQ Atlanta · 80 Severe · ↑4 QoQ Boston · 80 Severe · ↑2 QoQ Seattle · 79 Severe · ↑3 QoQ Nashville · 78 Severe · ↑4 QoQ San Diego · 78 Severe · ↑2 QoQ Reno · 77 Severe · ↑5 QoQ Raleigh · 76 Severe · ↑3 QoQ Chicago · 75 Severe · ↑2 QoQ Denver · 75 Severe · ↑3 QoQ Salt Lake City · 74 Severe · ↑4 QoQ Charlotte · 74 Severe · ↑3 QoQ Orlando · 73 Severe · ↑3 QoQ Portland · 72 Severe · ↑4 QoQ Tampa · 71 Severe · ↑3 QoQ Miami · 70 Severe · ↑2 QoQ Indianapolis · 68 Severe · ↑3 QoQ Kansas City · 67 Severe · ↑2 QoQ Northern Virginia · 91 Critical · ↑4 QoQ Washington DC · 77 Severe · ↑2 QoQ Philadelphia · 72 Severe · ↑2 QoQ Pittsburgh · 62 Severe · ↑2 QoQ San Antonio · 70 Severe · ↑4 QoQ Minneapolis · 69 Severe · ↑2 QoQ Detroit · 67 Severe · ↑3 QoQ Las Vegas · 73 Severe · ↑3 QoQ Sacramento · 69 Severe · ↑3 QoQ Inland Empire · 68 Severe · ↑3 QoQ Jacksonville · 66 Severe · ↑3 QoQ Tucson · 68 Severe · ↑4 QoQ Cincinnati · 66 Severe · ↑3 QoQ Milwaukee · 64 Severe · ↑2 QoQ St. Louis · 67 Severe · ↑3 QoQ Baltimore · 70 Severe · ↑4 QoQ Bay Area · 84 Critical · ↑5 QoQ Orange County · 78 Severe · ↑4 QoQ Oklahoma City · 60 Elevated · ↑2 QoQ Omaha · 72 Severe · ↑4 QoQ Des Moines · 58 Elevated · ↑2 QoQ New Orleans · 65 Severe · ↑3 QoQ Birmingham · 62 Severe · ↑3 QoQ Greenville · 69 Severe · ↑4 QoQ Richmond · 66 Severe · ↑3 QoQ
U.S. Construction Markets Critical (81–100) Severe (61–80) Elevated (41–60) Stable (0–40)
Module 05 · Talent Pressure Indicators 50 markets
Supply constraint × hiring competition.
The scarcity score decomposed into its two biggest drivers. Top-right is the danger zone — scarce supply meeting fierce competition.
Hiring Competition →
Critical Competitive Constrained Accessible Ashburn ↑ 3 Ashburn Talent pressure93/100 · Critical Avg senior PM comp$205K Avg time-to-fill78 days Active major projects24 Counteroffer activitySevere Phoenix ↑ 6 Phoenix Talent pressure90/100 · Critical Avg senior PM comp$185K Avg time-to-fill74 days Active major projects16 Counteroffer activityHigh Columbus ↑ 7 Columbus Talent pressure89/100 · Critical Avg senior PM comp$178K Avg time-to-fill74 days Active major projects18 Counteroffer activityHigh Dallas ↑ 4 Dallas Talent pressure88/100 · Critical Avg senior PM comp$182K Avg time-to-fill72 days Active major projects14 Counteroffer activityHigh Austin ↑ 5 Austin Talent pressure86/100 · Critical Avg senior PM comp$180K Avg time-to-fill71 days Active major projects11 Counteroffer activityHigh San Jose ↑ 3 San Jose Talent pressure84/100 · Critical Avg senior PM comp$205K Avg time-to-fill70 days Active major projects8 Counteroffer activityHigh Los Angeles ↑ 2 Los Angeles Talent pressure82/100 · Critical Avg senior PM comp$198K Avg time-to-fill70 days Active major projects9 Counteroffer activityHigh ↑ 3 Houston Talent pressure81/100 · Critical Avg senior PM comp$178K Avg time-to-fill68 days Active major projects10 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 4 Atlanta Talent pressure80/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$172K Avg time-to-fill67 days Active major projects12 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 2 Boston Talent pressure80/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$195K Avg time-to-fill69 days Active major projects7 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 3 Seattle Talent pressure79/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$192K Avg time-to-fill68 days Active major projects8 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 4 Nashville Talent pressure78/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$170K Avg time-to-fill66 days Active major projects9 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 2 San Diego Talent pressure78/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$185K Avg time-to-fill66 days Active major projects6 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 5 Reno Talent pressure77/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$172K Avg time-to-fill67 days Active major projects9 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 3 Raleigh Talent pressure76/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$168K Avg time-to-fill65 days Active major projects8 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 2 Chicago Talent pressure75/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$178K Avg time-to-fill65 days Active major projects8 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 3 Denver Talent pressure75/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$172K Avg time-to-fill64 days Active major projects7 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 4 Salt Lake City Talent pressure74/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$165K Avg time-to-fill64 days Active major projects8 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 3 Charlotte Talent pressure74/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$168K Avg time-to-fill64 days Active major projects7 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 3 Orlando Talent pressure73/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$162K Avg time-to-fill63 days Active major projects7 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 4 Portland Talent pressure72/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$168K Avg time-to-fill63 days Active major projects6 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 3 Tampa Talent pressure71/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$160K Avg time-to-fill62 days Active major projects6 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 2 Miami Talent pressure70/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$165K Avg time-to-fill62 days Active major projects6 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 3 Indianapolis Talent pressure68/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$158K Avg time-to-fill60 days Active major projects6 Counteroffer activityModerate ↑ 2 Kansas City Talent pressure67/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$156K Avg time-to-fill60 days Active major projects5 Counteroffer activityModerate Northern Virginia ↑ 4 Northern Virginia Talent pressure91/100 · Critical Avg senior PM comp$200K Avg time-to-fill77 days Active major projects24 Counteroffer activitySevere ↑ 2 Washington DC Talent pressure77/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$190K Avg time-to-fill67 days Active major projects9 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 2 Philadelphia Talent pressure72/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$178K Avg time-to-fill65 days Active major projects7 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 2 Pittsburgh Talent pressure62/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$158K Avg time-to-fill59 days Active major projects5 Counteroffer activityModerate ↑ 4 San Antonio Talent pressure70/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$160K Avg time-to-fill63 days Active major projects9 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 2 Minneapolis Talent pressure69/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$166K Avg time-to-fill62 days Active major projects6 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 3 Detroit Talent pressure67/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$162K Avg time-to-fill61 days Active major projects7 Counteroffer activityModerate ↑ 3 Las Vegas Talent pressure73/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$168K Avg time-to-fill63 days Active major projects9 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 3 Sacramento Talent pressure69/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$170K Avg time-to-fill62 days Active major projects6 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 3 Inland Empire Talent pressure68/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$165K Avg time-to-fill61 days Active major projects7 Counteroffer activityModerate ↑ 3 Jacksonville Talent pressure66/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$156K Avg time-to-fill60 days Active major projects6 Counteroffer activityModerate ↑ 4 Tucson Talent pressure68/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$158K Avg time-to-fill64 days Active major projects7 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 3 Cincinnati Talent pressure66/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$165K Avg time-to-fill62 days Active major projects8 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 2 Milwaukee Talent pressure64/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$168K Avg time-to-fill60 days Active major projects7 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 3 St. Louis Talent pressure67/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$170K Avg time-to-fill63 days Active major projects9 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 4 Baltimore Talent pressure70/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$185K Avg time-to-fill66 days Active major projects10 Counteroffer activityHigh Bay Area ↑ 5 Bay Area Talent pressure84/100 · Critical Avg senior PM comp$235K Avg time-to-fill72 days Active major projects14 Counteroffer activitySevere ↑ 4 Orange County Talent pressure78/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$210K Avg time-to-fill68 days Active major projects12 Counteroffer activityHigh ↑ 2 Oklahoma City Talent pressure60/100 · Elevated Avg senior PM comp$155K Avg time-to-fill58 days Active major projects6 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 4 Omaha Talent pressure72/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$165K Avg time-to-fill64 days Active major projects8 Counteroffer activityHigh ↑ 2 Des Moines Talent pressure58/100 · Elevated Avg senior PM comp$152K Avg time-to-fill56 days Active major projects5 Counteroffer activityModerate ↑ 3 New Orleans Talent pressure65/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$162K Avg time-to-fill61 days Active major projects7 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 3 Birmingham Talent pressure62/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$156K Avg time-to-fill59 days Active major projects6 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 4 Greenville Talent pressure69/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$162K Avg time-to-fill62 days Active major projects8 Counteroffer activityElevated ↑ 3 Richmond Talent pressure66/100 · Severe Avg senior PM comp$170K Avg time-to-fill61 days Active major projects7 Counteroffer activityElevated
Low Supply Constraint → High
Critical (81–100) Severe (61–80) Elevated (41–60) Bubble size = active major projects · hover any market for detail
No markets match these filters.
Rankings
Where it is hardest to hire.
Module 02 · Regional scarcity rankings
01
Ashburn
Northeast · Data Center
93/100 ▲ 3 QoQ
02 Northern Virginia
Northeast · Data Center
91/100 ▲ 4 QoQ
03 Phoenix
West · Semiconductor
90/100 ▲ 6 QoQ
04 Columbus
Central · Data Center
89/100 ▲ 7 QoQ
05 Dallas
Central · Data Center
88/100 ▲ 4 QoQ
06 Austin
Central · Semiconductor
86/100 ▲ 5 QoQ
07 San Jose
West · Mission Critical
84/100 ▲ 3 QoQ
08 Bay Area
West · Mission Critical
84/100 ▲ 5 QoQ
09 Los Angeles
West · Healthcare
82/100 ▲ 2 QoQ
10 Houston
Central · Industrial
81/100 ▲ 3 QoQ
11 Atlanta
Southeast · Commercial
80/100 ▲ 4 QoQ
12 Boston
Northeast · Healthcare
80/100 ▲ 2 QoQ
Module 03 / 07 · Role scarcity — hardest roles to fill
01
Commissioning Manager
Mission Critical · 78-day avg fill
92/100 ▲ 5 QoQ
02
Mission-Critical Superintendent
Data Center · 75-day avg fill
90/100 ▲ 4 QoQ
03
Data Center Project Manager
Data Center · 74-day avg fill
89/100 ▲ 6 QoQ
04
Electrical Estimator
Electrical · 74-day avg fill
86/100 ▲ 4 QoQ
05
Mechanical Project Manager
Mechanical / HVAC · 71-day avg fill
85/100 ▲ 5 QoQ
06
Chief Estimator
Heavy Civil / Commercial · 73-day avg fill
84/100 ▲ 3 QoQ
07
Preconstruction Manager
Commercial · 69-day avg fill
82/100 ▲ 4 QoQ
08
Healthcare Project Executive
Healthcare · 70-day avg fill
81/100 ▲ 2 QoQ
09
Senior Project Manager
Commercial · 68-day avg fill
79/100 ▲ 3 QoQ
10
Superintendent
Industrial · 66-day avg fill
78/100 ▲ 3 QoQ
Module 06 / 08 · Market acceleration — fastest-growing scarcity
Ranked by quarter-over-quarter point gain.
01
Columbus
Now 89/100 · Central
7
02
Phoenix
Now 90/100 · West
6
03
Austin
Now 86/100 · Central
5
04
Reno
Now 77/100 · West
5
05
Bay Area
Now 84/100 · West
5
06
Dallas
Now 88/100 · Central
4
07
Atlanta
Now 80/100 · Southeast
4
08
Nashville
Now 78/100 · Southeast
4
Module 04 · Hiring volatility indicators
ColumbusFastest-rising scarcity nationally. High ▲ 7
PhoenixFab + hyperscale demand compounding. High ▲ 6
RenoHyperscale infrastructure surge. Elevated ▲ 5
AustinSemiconductor backlog. Elevated ▲ 5
DallasDeep market absorbing steady demand. Moderate ▲ 4
NashvilleHealthcare + mixed-use pipeline. Moderate ▲ 4
Methodology
How the score is built.
Each market + role score is a weighted composite of ten inputs. Phase 1 blends AlphaHire internal search data with curated public indicators; the architecture is built to ingest BLS, FRED, USAspending, and permit data as those feeds are connected.
Open demand 18% weight
Qualified talent pool 16% weight
Compensation acceleration 14% weight
Contractor growth 12% weight
Project award activity 10% weight
Hiring velocity / time-to-fill 10% weight
Recruiter response rate 8% weight
Submission difficulty 6% weight
Candidate engagement 6% weight
Example read: “Phoenix Mechanical PM Scarcity Score: 85/100.” Directional by design — calibrated weekly, not a live feed. See compensation intelligence →
Work With AlphaHire
Put the index to work on a real search.
AlphaHire uses the Labor Scarcity Index to set realistic timelines, calibrate compensation, and target the passive operators a tight market is hiding.
Interpret the risk → Advisory
An executive briefing translates this intelligence into decisions — expansion feasibility, compensation exposure, hiring risk, and workforce planning.
Execute the hire → Workforce Search
When the decision is made, AlphaHire executes the search — identifying and engaging the passive operators these conditions are hiding.