Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and parts (except engines) manufacturing · Connecticut

PCX Aerosystems Enfield

Enfield, CT · ~81 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
1.3
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

PCX Aerosystems Enfield runs at 40% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and parts (except engines) manufacturing workplace, earning a grade A.

PCX Aerosystems Enfield: 1.3 TCR = 40% of Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and parts (except engines) manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

PCX Aerosystems Enfield safety composite

PCX Aerosystems Enfield scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 80% 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

66/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 1.32 per 100 workers

Safer than 64% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 80% 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

−1.4

2022→2024

PCX Aerosystems Enfield injury rate improved

PCX Aerosystems Enfield's TCR fell 1.4 from 1.4 in 2022 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2023 at 2.6 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2022=1.4 · 2023=2.6 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 336413 · Enfield, CT AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade A · TCR 1.3 · 40% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #8/36
  • PHOTO Defense and Systems …
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 3 inj
  • SIZE ~81 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Defense and Systems Loves Park IL (0.0 TCR gap)

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

PCX Aerosystems Enfield in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows PCX Aerosystems Enfield averages 1.3 TCR (40% of the Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and parts (except engines) manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

PCX Aerosystems Enfield TCR series: 2022=1.4 · 2023=2.6 · 2024=0 · BLS 3.3

Where PCX Aerosystems Enfield falls in its industry

650 Aircraft assemblies, subassemb establishments

Safer than 64% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Connecticut alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #8 safest of 36 Aircraft assemblies, subassemb employers in Connecticut.

PCX Aerosystems Enfield (81 employees, TCR 1.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 130 employees and a TCR of 1.9 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 05001,0001,5002,000 0246810 Average employees Total Case Rate PCX Aerosystems Enfield
PCX Aerosystems Enfield (81 employees, TCR 1.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 130 employees and a TCR of 1.9

PCX Aerosystems Enfield has fewer employees than the Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.9. 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
2024 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2023 2.6 1.3 2 0 0
2022 1.4 1.4 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

336413 · CT · Enfield

650 Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and parts (except engines) manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 7,008 rated employers in Connecticut with headcount on file · 106 employers in Enfield, 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 Defense and Systems Loves Park IL 1.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR 10 Cobham 1.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR The Handy Tool & Mfg. Co., Inc. 1.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Ducommun Aerostructures New York, Inc. 1.3 TCR
STATE-SIZE The Morganti Group Inc. 81 FTE
STATE-SIZE CCL Label - Shelton 81 FTE
STATE-SIZE Spartech, LLC 81 FTE
STATE-SIZE Bender Plumbing Supplies New Haven 81 FTE
CITY-NEAR DC 41 - Hartford 464 FTE
CITY-NEAR Eppendorf Manufacturing Corporation 442 FTE
CITY-NEAR Advance Auto Parts DC 41 419 FTE
CITY-NEAR 12131 346 FTE
NAT-TCR Buffalo Office 1.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Life Technologies Corporation 1.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Kia of Orange Park 1.3 TCR
NAT-TCR West Tree Service, LLC 1.3 TCR
NAT-SIZE Westview Elementary School 81 FTE
NAT-SIZE Woodland Elementary School 81 FTE
NAT-SIZE Chocolatte Enterprises LLC. DBA Trutech Logistics 81 FTE
NAT-SIZE General Motors Rancho CCA 81 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: 2024, 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.