Airport operators (e.g., civil, international, national) · New Jersey

Newark International Airport

Newark, NJ · ~106 workers · 4 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
3.2
Avg TCR
4.5
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Newark International Airport runs at 72% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical Airport operators (e.g., civil, international, national) workplace, earning a grade B.

Newark International Airport: 3.2 TCR = 72% of Airport operators (e.g., civil, international, national) BLS 4.5 · 4y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Newark International Airport safety composite

Newark International Airport scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 66% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 45%), 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

55/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 3.23 per 100 workers

Safer than 66% of industry peers

DART rate
D 3.17 per 100 workers

Safer than 45% 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%).

TCR Δ

−1.0

2016→2019

Newark International Airport injury rate improved

Newark International Airport's TCR fell 1.0 from 4.2 in 2016 to 3.2 in 2019. Peak filing year was 2017 at 4.5 TCR. In 2019, DART was 0.98× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=4.2 · 2017=4.5 · 2018=1.0 · 2019=3.2

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 488119 · Newark, NJ AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade B · TCR 3.2 · 72% of ind

  • DART 3.2 DART
  • RANK #17/43
  • PHOTO ATLCW00BC ATL - CARG…
  • BOOK 4y book
  • INJ 10 inj
  • SIZE ~106 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: ATLCW00BC ATL - CARGO BUILDING C (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Newark International Airport in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Newark International Airport averages 3.2 TCR (72% of the Airport operators (e.g., civil, international, national) BLS benchmark).

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

Newark International Airport TCR series: 2016=4.2 · 2017=4.5 · 2018=1 · 2019=3.2 · BLS 4.5

Where Newark International Airport falls in its industry

1,555 Airport operators (e.g., civil establishments

Safer than 66% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to New Jersey alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #17 safest of 43 Airport operators (e.g., civil employers in New Jersey.

Newark International Airport (106 employees, TCR 3.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 65 employees and a TCR of 4.5 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 0200400600800 0102030 Average employees Total Case Rate Newark International Airport
Newark International Airport (106 employees, TCR 3.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 65 employees and a TCR of 4.5

Newark International Airport has more employees than the Airport operators (e.g., civil, internat median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 4.5. 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 3.2 3.2 3 0 0
2018 1.0 1.0 1 0 0
2017 4.5 3.4 4 0 0
2016 4.2 4.2 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

488119 · NJ · Newark

1,555 Airport operators (e.g., civil, international, national) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 11,201 rated employers in New Jersey with headcount on file · 356 employers in Newark, NJ · 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 ATLCW00BC ATL - CARGO BUILDING C 3.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR 00001161 PB3 - 161 PALM BEAH IAS 3.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR AV-Aviation 3.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR 4765-LAXPIPAX0 3.2 TCR
STATE-SIZE Henkels & McCoy, New Jersey - Cliffwood 106 FTE
STATE-SIZE CHRIS ANDERSEN ROOFING, A TECTA AMERICA COMPANY, LLC 106 FTE
STATE-SIZE Power Electric, Co. Inc. 106 FTE
STATE-SIZE MMC Contractors Northeast, Inc. 106 FTE
CITY-NEAR EWR EWR 13,545 FTE
CITY-NEAR EWR - Airport United Airlines Offices 13,015 FTE
CITY-NEAR 6925-EWR 11,764 FTE
CITY-NEAR EWRPW9829 EWR - NON AA PAX SER 4,772 FTE
NAT-TCR R.E.M. Automotive Inc. 3.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Acuity Brands Lighting SWDC 3.2 TCR
NAT-TCR 629 - Atlanta 3.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Amado Trucking Inc 3.2 TCR
NAT-SIZE Houston/George Bush Int. Airport 106 FTE
NAT-SIZE Sodexo at Tenet Delray M/C Fans 106 FTE
NAT-SIZE Texstar - Selma 106 FTE
NAT-SIZE FL300B 106 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.