Tubing, mechanical and hypodermic sizes, cold-drawn stainless steel, made from purchased steel · Pennsylvania

Phoenix Tube

Bethlehem, PA · ~135 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
5.7
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Phoenix Tube runs at 173% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Tubing, mechanical and hypodermic sizes, cold-drawn stainless steel, made from purchased steel workplace, earning a grade D.

Phoenix Tube: 5.7 TCR = 173% of Tubing, mechanical and hypodermic sizes, cold-drawn stainless steel, made from purchased steel BLS 3.3 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Phoenix Tube safety composite

Phoenix Tube scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 36%), 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 5.7 per 100 workers

Safer than 36% of industry peers

DART rate
D 2.29 per 100 workers

Safer than 41% 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

−0.7

2017→2024

Phoenix Tube injury rate improved

Phoenix Tube's TCR fell 0.7 from 4.7 in 2017 to 4.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2019 at 10.5 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.4× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=4.7 · 2019=10.5 · 2020=9.2 · 2021=6.2 · 2022=2.4 · 2023=3.0 · 2024=4.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 331210 · Bethlehem, PA ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade D · TCR 5.7 · 173% of ind

  • DART 2.3 DART
  • RANK #20/32
  • PHOTO Wheatland Tube
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 54 inj
  • SIZE ~135 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Wheatland Tube (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Phoenix Tube in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Phoenix Tube averages 5.7 TCR (173% of the Tubing, mechanical and hypodermic sizes, cold-drawn stainless steel, made from purchased steel BLS benchmark).

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

Phoenix Tube TCR series: 2017=4.7 · 2019=10.5 · 2020=9.2 · 2021=6.2 · 2022=2.4 · 2023=3 · 2024=4 · BLS 3.3

Where Phoenix Tube falls in its industry

329 Tubing, mechanical and hypoder establishments

Safer than 36% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.3.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Pennsylvania alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #20 safest of 32 Tubing, mechanical and hypoder employers in Pennsylvania.

Phoenix Tube (135 employees, TCR 5.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 99 employees and a TCR of 4.3 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 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Phoenix Tube
Phoenix Tube (135 employees, TCR 5.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 99 employees and a TCR of 4.3

Phoenix Tube has more employees than the Tubing, mechanical and hypodermic sizes, median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 4.3. 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 4.0 2.3 7 0 0
2023 3.0 0.0 1 4 0
2022 2.4 0.0 4 0 0
2021 6.2 0.9 7 0 0
2020 9.2 1.5 12 0 0
2019 10.5 3.9 16 0 0
2017 4.7 1.3 7 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

331210 · PA · Bethlehem

329 Tubing, mechanical and hypodermic sizes, cold-drawn stainless steel, made from purchased steel employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 22,692 rated employers in Pennsylvania with headcount on file · 358 employers in Bethlehem, PA · 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 Wheatland Tube 5.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR LJT 5.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR The Troxel Company 5.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Allegan Tubular Products 5.8 TCR
STATE-SIZE Shell Appalachia - Wellsboro Field Office 135 FTE
STATE-SIZE 103258 - Birdsboro Power Project 135 FTE
STATE-SIZE ALBARELL ELECTRIC INC 135 FTE
STATE-SIZE Hanford Drive Manufacturing Facility 135 FTE
CITY-NEAR St. Luke's Hospital 5,338 FTE
CITY-NEAR St. Luke's Physician's Group 3,041 FTE
CITY-NEAR LVH-Muhlenberg 2,139 FTE
CITY-NEAR 4087 2,105 FTE
NAT-TCR Neighborhood Health - South County Center 5.7 TCR
NAT-TCR 1031 Atascadero 5.7 TCR
NAT-TCR 2218 S Olathe 5.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Globe Composite Solutions, LLC 5.7 TCR
NAT-SIZE Dot Transportation, Inc. Cambridge City, IN 135 FTE
NAT-SIZE Phoseon Technology, Inc. 135 FTE
NAT-SIZE Saticoy Lemon Association - Oxnard 135 FTE
NAT-SIZE Grane Transportation Lines Ltd. 135 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, 2017. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.