Courier services (i.e., intercity network) (except establishments operating under a universal service obligation) · Connecticut

Manchester, CT SDO

Manchester, CT · ~27 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
12.3
Avg TCR
6.5
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Manchester, CT SDO runs at 188% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Courier services (i.e., intercity network) (except establishments operating under a universal service obligation) workplace, earning a grade D.

Manchester, CT SDO: 12.3 TCR = 188% of Courier services (i.e., intercity network) (except establishments operating under a universal service obligation) BLS 6.5 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Manchester, CT SDO safety composite

Manchester, CT SDO scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 9%), 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

26/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 12.25 per 100 workers

Safer than 24% of industry peers

DART rate
F 15.99 per 100 workers

Safer than 9% 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%).

Rising injury rate

Manchester, CT SDO: 4.5 → 20.0 TCR

Peak year 2017 @ 20.0 TCR · DART/TCR 1.31× in 2017

Manchester, CT SDO's TCR rose 15.5 from 4.5 in 2016 to 20.0 in 2017. In 2017, DART was 1.31× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 492110 · Manchester, CT ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 12.3 · 188% of ind

  • DART 16.0 DART
  • RANK #73/94
  • PHOTO Inner City Logistics…
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 6 inj
  • SIZE ~27 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Inner City Logistics LLC (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Manchester, CT SDO in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Manchester, CT SDO averages 12.3 TCR (188% of the Courier services (i.e., intercity network) (except establishments operating under a universal service obligation) BLS benchmark).

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

Manchester, CT SDO TCR series: 2016=4.5 · 2017=20 · BLS 6.5

Where Manchester, CT SDO falls in its industry

6,679 Courier services (i.e., interc establishments

Safer than 24% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 8.0.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Connecticut alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #73 safest of 94 Courier services (i.e., interc employers in Connecticut.

Manchester, CT SDO (27 employees, TCR 12.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 113 employees and a TCR of 8.0 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 01,0002,0003,0004,000 0102030 Average employees Total Case Rate Manchester, CT SDO
Manchester, CT SDO (27 employees, TCR 12.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 113 employees and a TCR of 8.0

Manchester, CT SDO has fewer employees than the Courier services (i.e., intercity networ median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 8.0. 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
2017 20.0 16.0 5 0 0
2016 4.5 4.5 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

492110 · CT · Manchester

6,679 Courier services (i.e., intercity network) (except establishments operating under a universal service obligation) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 7,008 rated employers in Connecticut with headcount on file · 145 employers in Manchester, CT · 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 Inner City Logistics LLC 12.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR IDREX - REXBURG IDAHO 12.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR AZPRE - PRESCOTT VALLEY 12.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Last Mile DSP LLC 12.2 TCR
STATE-SIZE Bridgeport Harbor Station Unit 5 27 FTE
STATE-SIZE Plainfield Renewable Energy 27 FTE
STATE-SIZE WORTH CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. 27 FTE
STATE-SIZE Zampell Refractories CT 27 FTE
CITY-NEAR Manchester Memorial Hospital 1,652 FTE
CITY-NEAR 235 MANCHESTER CT 412 FTE
CITY-NEAR WM 1891 387 FTE
CITY-NEAR Home Office 381 FTE
NAT-TCR Webster Halpern Ed Center 12.3 TCR
NAT-TCR PFEWH04 12.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Leonardo Logging 12.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Ross store 1319 12.3 TCR
NAT-SIZE Midwest Scrap Management PC 27 FTE
NAT-SIZE 0346 - Hialeah, Fl 27 FTE
NAT-SIZE 0296 - Spokane, Wa 27 FTE
NAT-SIZE 0146 - Margate, Fl 27 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: 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.