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

MLR316Logistics

Orlando, FL · ~68 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
11.4
Avg TCR
6.5
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

MLR316Logistics runs at 176% 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.

MLR316Logistics: 11.4 TCR = 176% of Courier services (i.e., intercity network) (except establishments operating under a universal service obligation) BLS 6.5 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

MLR316Logistics safety composite

MLR316Logistics scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 22%), 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

32/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 11.41 per 100 workers

Safer than 28% of industry peers

DART rate
F 10.99 per 100 workers

Safer than 22% 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%).

TCR Δ

−0.8

2022→2023

MLR316Logistics injury rate improved

MLR316Logistics's TCR fell 0.8 from 11.8 in 2022 to 11.0 in 2023. Peak filing year was 2022 at 11.8 TCR. In 2023, DART was 0.96× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2022=11.8 · 2023=11.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 492110 · Orlando, FL ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 11.4 · 176% of ind

  • DART 11.0 DART
  • RANK #309/437
  • PHOTO 780410000
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 16 inj
  • SIZE ~68 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: 780410000 (0.0 TCR gap)

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

MLR316Logistics in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows MLR316Logistics averages 11.4 TCR (176% 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

MLR316Logistics TCR series: 2022=11.8 · 2023=11 · BLS 6.5

Where MLR316Logistics falls in its industry

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

Safer than 28% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 8.0.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Florida alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #309 safest of 437 Courier services (i.e., interc employers in Florida.

MLR316Logistics (68 employees, TCR 11.4) 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 MLR316Logistics
MLR316Logistics (68 employees, TCR 11.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 113 employees and a TCR of 8.0

MLR316Logistics 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
2023 11.0 11.0 8 0 0
2022 11.8 7.4 8 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

492110 · FL · Orlando

6,679 Courier services (i.e., intercity network) (except establishments operating under a universal service obligation) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 26,569 rated employers in Florida with headcount on file · 1,997 employers in Orlando, FL · 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 780410000 11.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR PALATINE (ILPAL) 11.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Amazon.com Services LLC - DKS3 11.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Connect Training and Logistics 11.4 TCR
STATE-SIZE ORL1-DWH-ORLANDO DIVISION 68 FTE
STATE-SIZE Lennar East ROC Tampa 68 FTE
STATE-SIZE R.W. Harris, Inc. 68 FTE
STATE-SIZE Tecta America South Florida 68 FTE
CITY-NEAR Universal Orlando Resort 20,343 FTE
CITY-NEAR Universal Parks and Resorts : UO 13,442 FTE
CITY-NEAR ADVENTHEALTH ORLANDO 11,412 FTE
CITY-NEAR Florida Hospital Orlando 10,318 FTE
NAT-TCR Gordon Biersch Brewing Company 11.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Love's Truck Solutions 6150 Laredo, TX 11.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Brookdale Longview 11.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Seafood City Supermarket - Eagle Rock 11.4 TCR
NAT-SIZE Treeland TF1 68 FTE
NAT-SIZE Clark County Nursing Home 68 FTE
NAT-SIZE Holiday Retirement Village 68 FTE
NAT-SIZE Walt Morey Middle School 68 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: 2023, 2022. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.