Hematology products (except diagnostic substances) manufacturing · Texas

Thermo Fisher Scientific

Austin, TX · ~238 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
0.6
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Thermo Fisher Scientific runs at 17% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Hematology products (except diagnostic substances) manufacturing workplace, earning a grade A.

Thermo Fisher Scientific: 0.6 TCR = 17% of Hematology products (except diagnostic substances) manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Thermo Fisher Scientific safety composite

Thermo Fisher Scientific scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 75% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 30%), 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

53/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
B 0.56 per 100 workers

Safer than 75% of industry peers

DART rate
F 1.06 per 100 workers

Safer than 30% 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%).

Rising injury rate

Thermo Fisher Scientific: 0.4 → 1.1 TCR

Peak year 2020 @ 1.3 TCR · DART/TCR 1.89× in 2024

Thermo Fisher Scientific's TCR rose 0.6 from 0.4 in 2016 to 1.1 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2020 at 1.3 TCR. In 2024, DART was 1.89× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 325414 · Austin, TX AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade A · TCR 0.6 · 17% of ind

  • DART 1.1 DART
  • RANK #6/10
  • PHOTO Shire: 55 Network Dr…
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 9 inj
  • SIZE ~238 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Shire: 55 Network Drive (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Thermo Fisher Scientific in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Thermo Fisher Scientific averages 0.6 TCR (17% of the Hematology products (except diagnostic substances) manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Thermo Fisher Scientific TCR series: 2016=0.4 · 2017=0.9 · 2018=0.5 · 2020=1.3 · 2021=0 · 2022=0 · 2023=0.4 · 2024=1.1 · BLS 3.3

Where Thermo Fisher Scientific falls in its industry

234 Hematology products (except di establishments

Safer than 75% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Texas alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #6 safest of 10 Hematology products (except di employers in Texas.

Thermo Fisher Scientific (238 employees, TCR 0.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 198 employees and a TCR of 1.2 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 0246 Average employees Total Case Rate Thermo Fisher Scientific
Thermo Fisher Scientific (238 employees, TCR 0.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 198 employees and a TCR of 1.2

Thermo Fisher Scientific has more employees than the Hematology products (except diagnostic s median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.2. 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 1.1 1.1 2 0 0
2023 0.4 0.4 1 0 0
2022 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2021 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2020 1.3 0.4 2 1 0
2018 0.5 0.5 1 0 0
2017 0.9 0.0 2 0 0
2016 0.4 0.4 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

325414 · TX · Austin

234 Hematology products (except diagnostic substances) manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 38,394 rated employers in Texas with headcount on file · 1,645 employers in Austin, TX · 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 Shire: 55 Network Drive 0.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Bristol Myers Squibb - Summit West Cell Therapy Manufacturing 0.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Arranta Bio 0.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Merck Teknika Facility 0.5 TCR
STATE-SIZE Summit Industrial Construction, LLC 238 FTE
STATE-SIZE JBI Electrical Systems (Fort Worth) 238 FTE
STATE-SIZE Fort Worth Plant 238 FTE
STATE-SIZE Starplast USA LLC 238 FTE
CITY-NEAR Ensign Services 11,325 FTE
CITY-NEAR NA-US-TX-Austin-Giga Texas 8,621 FTE
CITY-NEAR 6017-Loc: CORP LOC - US Austin 6,911 FTE
CITY-NEAR 6017-CORP LOC - USA UNITED STATES - AST 5,272 FTE
NAT-TCR Pippin Wholesale Company 0.6 TCR
NAT-TCR US MI Holland 11768 James St 0.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Avoca, LLC - NC 0.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. - Columbus 0.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE Penn United Technologies, Inc (Building 7 Location) 238 FTE
NAT-SIZE Allentown 238 FTE
NAT-SIZE Mid-States Concrete Industries 238 FTE
NAT-SIZE McLaren Performance 238 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, 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.