Generating apparatus and parts, electrical (except internal combustion engine and welding), manufacturing · Pennsylvania

Fidelity - HQ

Reading, PA · ~64 workers · 5 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
3.4
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Fidelity - HQ runs at 103% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Generating apparatus and parts, electrical (except internal combustion engine and welding), manufacturing workplace, earning a grade C.

Fidelity - HQ: 3.4 TCR = 103% of Generating apparatus and parts, electrical (except internal combustion engine and welding), manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 5y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Fidelity - HQ safety composite

Fidelity - HQ scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 82% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 29%), 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

53/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 3.41 per 100 workers

Safer than 29% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 82% 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

−2.4

2016→2021

Fidelity - HQ injury rate improved

Fidelity - HQ's TCR fell 2.4 from 5.1 in 2016 to 2.7 in 2021. Peak filing year was 2016 at 5.1 TCR. In 2021, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=5.1 · 2017=0.0 · 2018=4.8 · 2020=4.4 · 2021=2.7

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 335312 · Reading, PA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade C · TCR 3.4 · 103% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #6/9
  • PHOTO Generac Power System…
  • BOOK 5y book
  • INJ 14 inj
  • SIZE ~64 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Generac Power Systems, Inc. (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Fidelity - HQ in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Fidelity - HQ averages 3.4 TCR (103% of the Generating apparatus and parts, electrical (except internal combustion engine and welding), manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Fidelity - HQ TCR series: 2016=5.1 · 2017=0 · 2018=4.8 · 2020=4.4 · 2021=2.7 · BLS 3.3

Where Fidelity - HQ falls in its industry

222 Generating apparatus and parts establishments

Safer than 29% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.3.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Pennsylvania alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #6 safest of 9 Generating apparatus and parts employers in Pennsylvania.

Fidelity - HQ (64 employees, TCR 3.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 120 employees and a TCR of 2.3 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 02468 Average employees Total Case Rate Fidelity - HQ
Fidelity - HQ (64 employees, TCR 3.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 120 employees and a TCR of 2.3

Fidelity - HQ has fewer employees than the Generating apparatus and parts, electric median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.3. 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
2021 2.7 0.0 1 0 0
2020 4.4 0.0 2 0 0
2018 4.8 3.6 8 0 0
2017 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2016 5.1 3.4 3 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

335312 · PA · Reading

222 Generating apparatus and parts, electrical (except internal combustion engine and welding), manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 22,692 rated employers in Pennsylvania with headcount on file · 303 employers in Reading, PA · 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 Generac Power Systems, Inc. 3.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Avalon Transportation 3.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Specialty Motors Inc 3.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Regal Beloit America, Inc (Riverview) 3.3 TCR
STATE-SIZE Hershey Ag Services 64 FTE
STATE-SIZE Garman Builders, Inc. office 64 FTE
STATE-SIZE West Penn Energy Services 64 FTE
STATE-SIZE 160 Water Street, Reading, PA 19605 64 FTE
CITY-NEAR READING HOSPITAL 5,693 FTE
CITY-NEAR SAO : Reading 2,203 FTE
CITY-NEAR A077 - Penn State Health St. Joseph Medical Center 1,764 FTE
CITY-NEAR Amazon.com Services LLC - TEN1 1,261 FTE
NAT-TCR Southern Wall Products - Tucker 3.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Polamer Precision - Main 3.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Shop Rite if Livingston 3.4 TCR
NAT-TCR CBSL Transportation Services Pasadena Facility 3.4 TCR
NAT-SIZE Victor's Three-D 64 FTE
NAT-SIZE Pasadena Care Center 64 FTE
NAT-SIZE St Louis Office (2511) 64 FTE
NAT-SIZE Abbington Rehab and Nursing Center 64 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: 2021, 2020, 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.