Jet aircraft engines; mfg, assy, test · Connecticut

Pratt & Whitney Middletown

Middletown, CT · ~2,686 workers · 9 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
1.6
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Pratt & Whitney Middletown runs at 50% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Jet aircraft engines; mfg, assy, test workplace, earning a grade A.

Pratt & Whitney Middletown: 1.6 TCR = 50% of Jet aircraft engines; mfg, assy, test BLS 3.3 · 9y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Pratt & Whitney Middletown safety composite

Pratt & Whitney Middletown scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 41%), 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

46/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 1.64 per 100 workers

Safer than 48% of industry peers

DART rate
D 0.73 per 100 workers

Safer than 41% 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

2016→2024

Pratt & Whitney Middletown injury rate improved

Pratt & Whitney Middletown's TCR fell 1.4 from 2.8 in 2016 to 1.4 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2016 at 2.8 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.45× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=2.8 · 2017=1.9 · 2018=1.5 · 2019=1.4 · 2020=1.1 · 2021=1.8 · 2022=1.4 · 2023=1.6 · 2024=1.4

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 336412 · Middletown, CT AT/BELOW-IND · LARGE

Grade A · TCR 1.6 · 50% of ind

  • DART 0.7 DART
  • RANK #11/54
  • PHOTO Andrews Laser Works
  • BOOK 9y book
  • INJ 381 inj
  • SIZE ~2,686 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Andrews Laser Works (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Pratt & Whitney Middletown in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Pratt & Whitney Middletown averages 1.6 TCR (50% of the Jet aircraft engines; mfg, assy, test BLS benchmark).

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

Pratt & Whitney Middletown TCR series: 2016=2.8 · 2017=1.9 · 2018=1.5 · 2019=1.4 · 2020=1.1 · 2021=1.8 · 2022=1.4 · 2023=1.6 · 2024=1.4 · BLS 3.3

Where Pratt & Whitney Middletown falls in its industry

366 Jet aircraft engines; mfg, ass establishments

Safer than 48% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.6.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Connecticut alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #11 safest of 54 Jet aircraft engines; mfg, ass employers in Connecticut.

Pratt & Whitney Middletown (2,686 employees, TCR 1.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 155 employees and a TCR of 1.6 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 02,0004,0006,0008,000 012345 Average employees Total Case Rate Pratt & Whitney Middletown
Pratt & Whitney Middletown (2,686 employees, TCR 1.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 155 employees and a TCR of 1.6

Pratt & Whitney Middletown has more employees than the Jet aircraft engines; mfg, assy, test median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.6. 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 1.4 0.7 34 2 0
2023 1.6 0.6 39 1 0
2022 1.4 0.4 40 2 0
2021 1.8 0.8 44 8 0
2020 1.1 0.5 31 4 0
2019 1.4 0.8 40 6 0
2018 1.5 0.7 45 2 0
2017 1.9 0.9 52 1 0
2016 2.8 1.3 56 13 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

336412 · CT · Middletown

366 Jet aircraft engines; mfg, assy, test employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 7,008 rated employers in Connecticut with headcount on file · 119 employers in Middletown, 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 Andrews Laser Works 1.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR L&E Engineering 1.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Supply Chain : Auburn, AL 1.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Pratt & Whitney Edwards AFB 1.7 TCR
STATE-SIZE MIDDLESEX HEALTH SYSTEM INC. 2,666 FTE
STATE-SIZE Amazon.com Services LLC - BDL4 2,628 FTE
STATE-SIZE Stamford Hospital 2,599 FTE
STATE-SIZE Campus 2,582 FTE
CITY-NEAR 6458-MIDD 1,435 FTE
CITY-NEAR Middletown Public Schools 1,105 FTE
CITY-NEAR Pieper-Olson Veterinary Hospital, LLC 279 FTE
CITY-NEAR Kaman Precision Products 279 FTE
NAT-TCR Special Mine Services-IL 1.6 TCR
NAT-TCR KMP - KUKA Systems N.A. LLC 1.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Berkots 313 1.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Fulcrum Construction, Inc 1.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE Beau Rivage Resorts Inc 2,687 FTE
NAT-SIZE Utlke - Utah Regional Hub 2,684 FTE
NAT-SIZE Total Terminals International, LLC. 2,683 FTE
NAT-SIZE Detroit Diesel Corporation 2,689 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.

Read our methodology - how this data is sourced, computed, and verified.

Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.