corrugated and solid fiber box manufacturing · Illinois

Menasha Packaging Company - Chicago

Chicago, IL · ~151 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
2.1
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Menasha Packaging Company - Chicago runs at 65% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical corrugated and solid fiber box manufacturing workplace, earning a grade B.

Menasha Packaging Company - Chicago: 2.1 TCR = 65% of corrugated and solid fiber box manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Menasha Packaging Company - Chicago safety composite

Menasha Packaging Company - Chicago scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 54% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 23%), 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

42/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 2.15 per 100 workers

Safer than 54% of industry peers

DART rate
F 2.75 per 100 workers

Safer than 23% 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

Menasha Packaging Company - Chicago: 1.2 → 3.4 TCR

Peak year 2021 @ 4.4 TCR · DART/TCR 1.28× in 2022

Menasha Packaging Company - Chicago's TCR rose 2.3 from 1.2 in 2016 to 3.4 in 2022. Peak filing year was 2021 at 4.4 TCR. In 2022, DART was 1.28× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 322211 · Chicago, IL AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade B · TCR 2.1 · 65% of ind

  • DART 2.8 DART
  • RANK #41/86
  • PHOTO Rockford Container
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 21 inj
  • SIZE ~151 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Rockford Container (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Menasha Packaging Company - Chicago in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Menasha Packaging Company - Chicago averages 2.1 TCR (65% of the corrugated and solid fiber box manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Menasha Packaging Company - Chicago TCR series: 2016=1.2 · 2017=2 · 2018=2.5 · 2019=0.7 · 2020=0.7 · 2021=4.4 · 2022=3.4 · BLS 3.3

Where Menasha Packaging Company - Chicago falls in its industry

1,338 corrugated and solid fiber box establishments

Safer than 54% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.4.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Illinois alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #41 safest of 86 corrugated and solid fiber box employers in Illinois.

Menasha Packaging Company - Chicago (151 employees, TCR 2.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 102 employees and a TCR of 2.4 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 0100200300 0123456 Average employees Total Case Rate Menasha Packaging Company - Chicago
Menasha Packaging Company - Chicago (151 employees, TCR 2.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 102 employees and a TCR of 2.4

Menasha Packaging Company - Chicago has more employees than the corrugated and solid fiber box manufactu median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.4. 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
2022 3.4 2.8 4 1 0
2021 4.4 0.7 6 0 0
2020 0.7 0.0 1 0 0
2019 0.7 0.7 1 0 0
2018 2.5 1.3 4 0 0
2017 2.0 1.3 3 0 0
2016 1.2 1.2 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

322211 · IL · Chicago

1,338 corrugated and solid fiber box manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 22,804 rated employers in Illinois with headcount on file · 2,934 employers in Chicago, IL · 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 Rockford Container 2.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR International Paper Middletown Container 2.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR SupplyOne Oklahoma City, Inc. - Tulsa 2.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Liberty Packaging - Fort Worth, TX 2.1 TCR
STATE-SIZE AMEREN ILLINOIS - Eastern - IL Electric Ops 151 FTE
STATE-SIZE Sound Seal DBA Catalyst Acoustics 151 FTE
STATE-SIZE The Levy Company 151 FTE
STATE-SIZE U.S. Waterproofing 151 FTE
CITY-NEAR Chicago Public Schools 49,500 FTE
CITY-NEAR Chicago/Corporate 18,831 FTE
CITY-NEAR University of Illinois at Chicago 13,092 FTE
CITY-NEAR University Health Service UIC UIC Campus 12,732 FTE
NAT-TCR Applied Technology 2.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Pavestone - SACP 2.1 TCR
NAT-TCR 6070 Orange RTS 2.1 TCR
NAT-TCR USM Store #520 2.1 TCR
NAT-SIZE Forwood Manor 151 FTE
NAT-SIZE Soho #633 151 FTE
NAT-SIZE NPR of America 151 FTE
NAT-SIZE PF Tuscany SNF Ops, LLC 151 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: 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.