Bearings (e.g., camshaft, crankshaft, connecting rod), automotive and truck gasoline engine, manufacturing · Tennessee

GT Technologies Tennessee

Hendersonville, TN · ~98 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
5.4
Avg TCR
5.4
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

GT Technologies Tennessee runs at 100% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Bearings (e.g., camshaft, crankshaft, connecting rod), automotive and truck gasoline engine, manufacturing workplace, earning a grade C.

GT Technologies Tennessee: 5.4 TCR = 100% of Bearings (e.g., camshaft, crankshaft, connecting rod), automotive and truck gasoline engine, manufacturing BLS 5.4 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

GT Technologies Tennessee safety composite

GT Technologies Tennessee scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 3%), 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).

F

21/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 5.4 per 100 workers

Safer than 19% of industry peers

DART rate
F 8.31 per 100 workers

Safer than 3% 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%).

Rising injury rate

GT Technologies Tennessee: 4.3 → 8.3 TCR

Peak year 2020 @ 8.3 TCR · DART/TCR 1.54× in 2020

GT Technologies Tennessee's TCR rose 4.0 from 4.3 in 2018 to 8.3 in 2020. In 2020, DART was 1.54× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 336310 · Hendersonville, TN AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade C · TCR 5.4 · 100% of ind

  • DART 8.3 DART
  • RANK #17/21
  • PHOTO 17601765 LKQ
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 17 inj
  • SIZE ~98 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: 17601765 LKQ (0.0 TCR gap)

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

GT Technologies Tennessee in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows GT Technologies Tennessee averages 5.4 TCR (100% of the Bearings (e.g., camshaft, crankshaft, connecting rod), automotive and truck gasoline engine, manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

GT Technologies Tennessee TCR series: 2018=4.3 · 2019=3.6 · 2020=8.3 · BLS 5.4

Where GT Technologies Tennessee falls in its industry

221 Bearings (e.g., camshaft, cran establishments

Safer than 19% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Tennessee alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #17 safest of 21 Bearings (e.g., camshaft, cran employers in Tennessee.

GT Technologies Tennessee (98 employees, TCR 5.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 165 employees and a TCR of 2.9 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 02004006008001,000 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate GT Technologies Tennessee
GT Technologies Tennessee (98 employees, TCR 5.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 165 employees and a TCR of 2.9

GT Technologies Tennessee has fewer employees than the Bearings (e.g., camshaft, crankshaft, co median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.9. 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
2020 8.3 8.3 8 0 0
2019 3.6 2.7 4 0 0
2018 4.3 2.6 5 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

336310 · TN · Hendersonville

221 Bearings (e.g., camshaft, crankshaft, connecting rod), automotive and truck gasoline engine, manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 10,743 rated employers in Tennessee with headcount on file · 82 employers in Hendersonville, TN · 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 17601765 LKQ 5.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Sogefi USA, Inc 5.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR OTICS USA, INC. - KODAK 5.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Managed Programs LLC 5.3 TCR
STATE-SIZE Messer Construction Co. - Nashville Region 98 FTE
STATE-SIZE R.C. Mathews Contractor, LLC 98 FTE
STATE-SIZE USA TN Memphis 98 FTE
STATE-SIZE Long Foundation Drilling Co. 98 FTE
CITY-NEAR TriStar Hendersonville Medical Center 734 FTE
CITY-NEAR Hendersonville Medical Center 567 FTE
CITY-NEAR City of Hendersonville 414 FTE
CITY-NEAR City of Hendersonville, TN 413 FTE
NAT-TCR PCEPA 5.4 TCR
NAT-TCR 34-Rafael Lopez Nussa 5.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Luther Burnsville Hyundai 5.4 TCR
NAT-TCR BW Kelly Inn Minot 5.4 TCR
NAT-SIZE Pueblo Center 98 FTE
NAT-SIZE RCN Telecom Services, LLC - Starpower Lanham MD 98 FTE
NAT-SIZE O'Mara Incorporated 98 FTE
NAT-SIZE Organon Teknika Facility 98 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: 2020, 2019, 2018. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.