Hammer forgings made from purchased iron or steel, unfinished · Pennsylvania

Phoenix Forging Co., Inc.

Catasauqua, PA · ~39 workers · 9 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
7.8
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Phoenix Forging Co., Inc. runs at 237% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Hammer forgings made from purchased iron or steel, unfinished workplace, earning a grade F.

Phoenix Forging Co., Inc.: 7.8 TCR = 237% of Hammer forgings made from purchased iron or steel, unfinished BLS 3.3 · 9y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Phoenix Forging Co., Inc. safety composite

Phoenix Forging Co., Inc. scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (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

36/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 7.83 per 100 workers

Safer than 23% of industry peers

DART rate
D 2.91 per 100 workers

Safer than 39% 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

Phoenix Forging Co., Inc.: 2.8 → 8.7 TCR

Peak year 2023 @ 20.1 TCR · DART/TCR 0.37× in 2024

Phoenix Forging Co., Inc.'s TCR rose 5.9 from 2.8 in 2016 to 8.7 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2023 at 20.1 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.37× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 332111 · Catasauqua, PA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 7.8 · 237% of ind

  • DART 2.9 DART
  • RANK #25/35
  • PHOTO Superior Forge and S…
  • BOOK 9y book
  • INJ 25 inj
  • SIZE ~39 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Superior Forge and Steel - New Castle (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Phoenix Forging Co., Inc. in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Phoenix Forging Co., Inc. averages 7.8 TCR (237% of the Hammer forgings made from purchased iron or steel, unfinished BLS benchmark).

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

Phoenix Forging Co., Inc. TCR series: 2016=2.8 · 2017=10 · 2018=5.8 · 2019=11.8 · 2020=3.3 · 2021=8 · 2022=0 · 2023=20.1 · 2024=8.7 · BLS 3.3

Where Phoenix Forging Co., Inc. falls in its industry

241 Hammer forgings made from purc establishments

Safer than 23% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 5.0.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Pennsylvania alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #25 safest of 35 Hammer forgings made from purc employers in Pennsylvania.

Phoenix Forging Co., Inc. (39 employees, TCR 7.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 86 employees and a TCR of 5.0 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 0100200300400 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Phoenix Forging Co., Inc.
Phoenix Forging Co., Inc. (39 employees, TCR 7.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 86 employees and a TCR of 5.0

Phoenix Forging Co., Inc. has fewer employees than the Hammer forgings made from purchased iron median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 5.0. 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
2024 8.7 2.9 3 0 0
2023 20.1 17.2 7 0 0
2022 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2021 8.0 2.7 2 1 0
2020 3.3 0.0 1 0 0
2019 11.8 4.7 4 1 0
2018 5.8 5.8 3 0 0
2017 10.0 0.0 4 0 0
2016 2.8 2.8 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

332111 · PA · Catasauqua

241 Hammer forgings made from purchased iron or steel, unfinished employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 22,692 rated employers in Pennsylvania with headcount on file · 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 Superior Forge and Steel - New Castle 7.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Gerdau Duluth Grinding Ball 7.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR The Dayton Forging & Heat Treating Company 8.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR Hydrafab Northwest Inc 8.0 TCR
STATE-SIZE Sylvan PA 39 FTE
STATE-SIZE Monterey Mushrooms, LLC.- Temple, PA 39 FTE
STATE-SIZE Boyer Nurseries & Orchards, Inc. 39 FTE
STATE-SIZE North Creek Nurseries, Inc. (Shipping) 39 FTE
CITY-NEAR Rock Hill Trucking Co., Inc. 33 FTE
NAT-TCR Select Specialty Hospital - Ann Arbor, Inc 7.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Sodexo at Delta Sky Club Atl D10 7.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Highland Park Sunset Food Mart, Inc. 7.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Hannah B G Shaw Home, Inc 7.8 TCR
NAT-SIZE Foodland #105 39 FTE
NAT-SIZE Green Glen Nursery, Inc 39 FTE
NAT-SIZE Select Physical Therapy Texas (15151 Baylor McKinney - Acute) 39 FTE
NAT-SIZE Precision Process 39 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, 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.