Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and parts (except engines) manufacturing · North Carolina

Curtiss Wright Actuation Systems

Shelby, NC · ~271 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
1.0
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Curtiss Wright Actuation Systems runs at 31% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and parts (except engines) manufacturing workplace, earning a grade A.

Curtiss Wright Actuation Systems: 1.0 TCR = 31% of Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and parts (except engines) manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Curtiss Wright Actuation Systems safety composite

Curtiss Wright Actuation Systems scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 80% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 50%), blended into one 0-100 breakdown against same-industry peers. A missing measure drops out and redistributes its weight rather than deflating the score. This is a per-dimension breakdown, distinct from the single letter grade above it (which weights TCR alone against the BLS industry benchmark).

C

69/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 1.02 per 100 workers

Safer than 72% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 80% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 50% of industry peers

Benchmarked live against every credibly-rated employer in the same NAICS industry code in the current OSHA extract (a segment must have at least 8 rated peers to benchmark). Not a legal or compliance determination; PlainSafetyScore's own weighting (TCR 40%, DART 35%, fatalities 25%).

TCR Δ

−1.3

2016→2018

Curtiss Wright Actuation Systems injury rate improved

Curtiss Wright Actuation Systems's TCR fell 1.3 from 1.7 in 2016 to 0.3 in 2018. Peak filing year was 2016 at 1.7 TCR. In 2018, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=1.7 · 2018=0.3

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 336413 · Shelby, NC AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade A · TCR 1.0 · 31% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #9/14
  • PHOTO CED Main
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 6 inj
  • SIZE ~271 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: CED Main (0.0 TCR gap)

Read with this employer → · Industry book → · North Carolina employers → · Look up another →

Curtiss Wright Actuation Systems in the TCR neighbourhood

Average Total Case Rate among this establishment and nearest same-industry peers

TCR

What this shows Curtiss Wright Actuation Systems averages 1.0 TCR (31% of the Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and parts (except engines) manufacturing BLS benchmark).

Source U.S. Department of Labor, OSHA Injury Tracking Application (Form 300A) As of 2026-08-25

Curtiss Wright Actuation Systems TCR series: 2016=1.7 · 2018=0.3 · BLS 3.3

Where Curtiss Wright Actuation Systems falls in its industry

650 Aircraft assemblies, subassemb establishments

Safer than 72% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to North Carolina alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #9 safest of 14 Aircraft assemblies, subassemb employers in North Carolina.

Curtiss Wright Actuation Systems (271 employees, TCR 1.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 130 employees and a TCR of 1.9 2×2 strategic matrix plotting 30 entities by Average employees (X) and Total Case Rate (Y), with a crosshair dividing the plot into four quadrants. Larger & higher-riskSmaller & higher-riskLarger & saferSmaller & safer than peers 05001,0001,5002,000 0246810 Average employees Total Case Rate Curtiss Wright Actuation Systems
Curtiss Wright Actuation Systems (271 employees, TCR 1.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 130 employees and a TCR of 1.9

Curtiss Wright Actuation Systems has more employees than the Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.9. Workforce size and injury rate do not always move together within the same industry -- some of its smaller peers run higher rates than its larger ones, and vice versa.

Year-by-Year Safety Data

Year TCR DART Injuries Illnesses Fatalities
2018 0.3 0.0 1 0 0
2016 1.7 0.0 5 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

336413 · NC · Shelby

650 Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and parts (except engines) manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,981 rated employers in North Carolina with headcount on file · 100 employers in Shelby, NC · 4 cross-state NAT-TCR peers · 4 cross-state NAT-SIZE peers. Closest matches by relationship code are listed below.

Rel Establishment Metric
NAICS-TCR CED Main 1.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR J. A. Reinhardt & Co., Inc. (Mountainhome PA) 1.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR Brazonics, Inc. (Hampton NH) 1.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR Precision Aero Corporation 1.0 TCR
STATE-SIZE Smith-Rowe, LLC 271 FTE
STATE-SIZE Y31 AER - FAIRVIEW 271 FTE
STATE-SIZE Davis Furn Inds. 271 FTE
STATE-SIZE Aerie Pharmaceuticals 271 FTE
CITY-NEAR 1111-Atrium Health Cleveland (1111) 1,174 FTE
CITY-NEAR 6070 1,160 FTE
CITY-NEAR 0080-Atrium Health Cleveland 1,158 FTE
CITY-NEAR 0080-CHS Cleveland 1,093 FTE
NAT-TCR North District Houston ENB3 1.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Dallas/Coppell (Txcpp) 1.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Nestle Dreyer's Ice Cream 1.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Roberts Corrosion Services, LLC 1.0 TCR
NAT-SIZE US - Supply Chain : 0935 271 FTE
NAT-SIZE Courier Express Marietta, GA 271 FTE
NAT-SIZE Reynolds Wheeling 271 FTE
NAT-SIZE Ploy Blown Extrusions 271 FTE

Rel codes: NAICS-TCR · STATE-SIZE · CITY-NEAR · NAT-TCR/NAT-SIZE cross-state. Read with this employer →

Data Source: OSHA Injury Tracking Application (ITA), mandatory establishment-level injury/illness reports. Grades compare employer Total Case Rate (TCR) to BLS IIF industry benchmarks. Data covers years reported by this establishment: 2018, 2016. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.