General Automotive Repair · Pennsylvania

Hunter Truck Sales & Service Inc. - Pittsburgh

Pittsburgh, PA · ~39 workers · 4 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
2.4
Avg TCR
2.1
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Hunter Truck Sales & Service Inc. - Pittsburgh runs at 112% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical General Automotive Repair workplace, earning a grade C.

Hunter Truck Sales & Service Inc. - Pittsburgh: 2.4 TCR = 112% of General Automotive Repair BLS 2.1 · 4y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Hunter Truck Sales & Service Inc. - Pittsburgh safety composite

Hunter Truck Sales & Service Inc. - Pittsburgh scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 75% 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

68/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 2.35 per 100 workers

Safer than 74% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 75% 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%).

Hunter Truck Sales & Service Inc. - Pittsburgh held a steady TCR band

Hunter Truck Sales & Service Inc. - Pittsburgh's TCR held near 0.1 from 2.4 in 2016 to 2.3 in 2019. Peak filing year was 2016 at 2.4 TCR. In 2019, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=2.4 · 2017=2.3 · 2018=2.4 · 2019=2.3

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 811111 · Pittsburgh, PA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade C · TCR 2.4 · 112% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #16/39
  • PHOTO Manassas Service Cen…
  • BOOK 4y book
  • INJ 4 inj
  • SIZE ~39 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Manassas Service Center (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Hunter Truck Sales & Service Inc. - Pittsburgh in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Hunter Truck Sales & Service Inc. - Pittsburgh averages 2.4 TCR (112% of the General Automotive Repair BLS benchmark).

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

Hunter Truck Sales & Service Inc. - Pittsburgh TCR series: 2016=2.4 · 2017=2.3 · 2018=2.4 · 2019=2.3 · BLS 2.1

Where Hunter Truck Sales & Service Inc. - Pittsburgh falls in its industry

609 General Automotive Repair establishments

Safer than 74% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Pennsylvania alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #16 safest of 39 General Automotive Repair employers in Pennsylvania.

Hunter Truck Sales & Service Inc. - Pittsburgh (39 employees, TCR 2.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 40 employees and a TCR of 4.2 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 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Hunter Truck Sales & Service Inc. - Pittsburgh
Hunter Truck Sales & Service Inc. - Pittsburgh (39 employees, TCR 2.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 40 employees and a TCR of 4.2

Hunter Truck Sales & Service Inc. - Pittsburgh has fewer employees than the General Automotive Repair median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 4.2. 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
2019 2.3 0.0 1 0 0
2018 2.4 2.4 1 0 0
2017 2.3 2.3 1 0 0
2016 2.4 2.4 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

811111 · PA · Pittsburgh

609 General Automotive Repair employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 22,692 rated employers in Pennsylvania with headcount on file · 1,170 employers in Pittsburgh, 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 Manassas Service Center 2.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Cummins Sales and Service - Kansas City 2.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR TRIANGLE LEASING CORP 2.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Louisville 2.3 TCR
STATE-SIZE Sylvan PA 39 FTE
STATE-SIZE Monterey Mushrooms, LLC.- Temple, PA 39 FTE
STATE-SIZE Boyer Nurseries & Orchards, Inc. 39 FTE
STATE-SIZE North Creek Nurseries, Inc. (Shipping) 39 FTE
CITY-NEAR United States Steel COrporation 15,229 FTE
CITY-NEAR University of Pittsburgh- Oakland 14,135 FTE
CITY-NEAR UPMC Presbyterian Shadyside (PUH) 13,900 FTE
CITY-NEAR University of Pittsburgh-Oakland 13,208 FTE
NAT-TCR Richard E. Jacobs Health Center 2.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Hussmann Services Corporation- Coppell 2.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Advanced Machining & Fabricating, Inc. 2.4 TCR
NAT-TCR LFA 2.4 TCR
NAT-SIZE Tymetal Corp. Sales Office 39 FTE
NAT-SIZE UCI Syracuse 39 FTE
NAT-SIZE Advanced Disposal - Ann Arbor Hauling Company 39 FTE
NAT-SIZE Excalibur 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: 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.