Solderless connectors (electric wiring devices) manufacturing · Massachusetts

Electro-Term, Inc.

Springfield, MA · ~39 workers · 9 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
4.8
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Electro-Term, Inc. runs at 144% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Solderless connectors (electric wiring devices) manufacturing workplace, earning a grade D.

Electro-Term, Inc.: 4.8 TCR = 144% of Solderless connectors (electric wiring devices) manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 9y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Electro-Term, Inc. safety composite

Electro-Term, Inc. scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 81% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 11%), 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).

D

46/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 4.75 per 100 workers

Safer than 11% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 81% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 51% 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

−6.2

2016→2024

Electro-Term, Inc. injury rate improved

Electro-Term, Inc.'s TCR fell 6.2 from 6.2 in 2016 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2020 at 26.2 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=6.2 · 2017=0.0 · 2018=0.0 · 2019=2.5 · 2020=26.2 · 2021=2.7 · 2022=2.6 · 2023=2.5 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 335931 · Springfield, MA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 4.8 · 144% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #6/7
  • PHOTO JAE Oregon
  • BOOK 9y book
  • INJ 6 inj
  • SIZE ~39 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: JAE Oregon (0.1 TCR gap)

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

Electro-Term, Inc. in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Electro-Term, Inc. averages 4.8 TCR (144% of the Solderless connectors (electric wiring devices) manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Electro-Term, Inc. TCR series: 2016=6.2 · 2017=0 · 2018=0 · 2019=2.5 · 2020=26.2 · 2021=2.7 · 2022=2.6 · 2023=2.5 · 2024=0 · BLS 3.3

Where Electro-Term, Inc. falls in its industry

152 Solderless connectors (electri establishments

Safer than 11% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.0.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Massachusetts alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #6 safest of 7 Solderless connectors (electri employers in Massachusetts.

Electro-Term, Inc. (39 employees, TCR 4.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 107 employees and a TCR of 2.0 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 0200400600 012345 Average employees Total Case Rate Electro-Term, Inc.
Electro-Term, Inc. (39 employees, TCR 4.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 107 employees and a TCR of 2.0

Electro-Term, Inc. has fewer employees than the Solderless connectors (electric wiring d median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.0. 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
2024 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2023 2.5 0.0 1 0 0
2022 2.6 0.0 1 0 0
2021 2.7 2.7 1 0 0
2020 26.2 26.2 0 10 0
2019 2.5 0.0 1 0 0
2018 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2017 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2016 6.2 3.1 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

335931 · MA · Springfield

152 Solderless connectors (electric wiring devices) manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 10,108 rated employers in Massachusetts with headcount on file · 215 employers in Springfield, MA · 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 JAE Oregon 4.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Connector Manufacturing - Hamilton 4.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Leviton West Coast Distribution 4.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Littleton Site 5.1 TCR
STATE-SIZE Kendall Green Energy, LLC 39 FTE
STATE-SIZE Eversource - Wrentham 39 FTE
STATE-SIZE PHRG BOS- RIO 39 FTE
STATE-SIZE WES Construction Corp. 39 FTE
CITY-NEAR BMC - Baystate Medical Center 8,310 FTE
CITY-NEAR BMP - Baystate Medical Practices 1,977 FTE
CITY-NEAR Blue Tarp Redevelopment, LLC d/b/a MGM Springfield 1,867 FTE
CITY-NEAR BMF - Baystate Medical Practices 1,746 FTE
NAT-TCR elmhurst care center 4.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Alcal Sparks Multi-Product 4.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Shelby 4.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Haren Construction Co., Inc. 4.8 TCR
NAT-SIZE NSCC 39 FTE
NAT-SIZE Northfield North Distribution Center 39 FTE
NAT-SIZE ITW SAP - Bedford Wire 39 FTE
NAT-SIZE J.H. Stevedoring Company, Inc. 39 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: 2024, 2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 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.