Application service providers (ASPs) · Illinois

Uber Technologies, Inc.- Chicago N. Canal St Office

Chicago, IL · ~313 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
0.0
Avg TCR
0.7
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Uber Technologies, Inc.- Chicago N. Canal St Office runs at 0% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Application service providers (ASPs) workplace, earning a grade C.

Uber Technologies, Inc.- Chicago N. Canal St Office: 0.0 TCR = 0% of Application service providers (ASPs) BLS 0.7 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Uber Technologies, Inc.- Chicago N. Canal St Office safety composite

Uber Technologies, Inc.- Chicago N. Canal St Office scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 100% 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

72/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
A 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 100% of industry peers

DART rate
C 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 57% 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%).

Uber Technologies, Inc.- Chicago N. Canal St Office held a steady TCR band

Uber Technologies, Inc.- Chicago N. Canal St Office's TCR held near 0.0 from 0.0 in 2017 to 0.0 in 2018. Peak filing year was 2017 at 0.0 TCR.

2017=0.0 · 2018=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 518210 · Chicago, IL AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade C · TCR 0.0 · 0% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #0/5
  • PHOTO Pure Storage
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 0 inj
  • SIZE ~313 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Pure Storage (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Uber Technologies, Inc.- Chicago N. Canal St Office in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Uber Technologies, Inc.- Chicago N. Canal St Office averages 0.0 TCR (0% of the Application service providers (ASPs) BLS benchmark).

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

Uber Technologies, Inc.- Chicago N. Canal St Office TCR series: 2017=0 · 2018=0 · BLS 0.7

Where Uber Technologies, Inc.- Chicago N. Canal St Office falls in its industry

180 Application service providers establishments

Safer than 100% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 0.6.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Illinois alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #0 safest of 5 Application service providers employers in Illinois.

Uber Technologies, Inc.- Chicago N. Canal St Office (313 employees, TCR 0.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 182 employees and a TCR of 0.6 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 05001,0001,5002,0002,500 0246 Average employees Total Case Rate Uber Technologies, Inc.- Chicago N. Canal St Office
Uber Technologies, Inc.- Chicago N. Canal St Office (313 employees, TCR 0.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 182 employees and a TCR of 0.6

Uber Technologies, Inc.- Chicago N. Canal St Office has more employees than the Application service providers (ASPs) median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 0.6. 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
2018 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2017 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

518210 · IL · Chicago

180 Application service providers (ASPs) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 22,804 rated employers in Illinois with headcount on file · 2,934 employers in Chicago, IL · 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 Pure Storage 0.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR LinkedIn San Francisco 0.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR LOCATION 45018 0.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR LinkedIn Mountain View / Sunnyvale 0.0 TCR
STATE-SIZE Fareva Morton Grove Inc 313 FTE
STATE-SIZE ArcelorMittal Riverdale 313 FTE
STATE-SIZE FLEXIBLE STEEL LACING COMPANY 313 FTE
STATE-SIZE 11DA630 MED-SURG BARLETT 313 FTE
CITY-NEAR Chicago Public Schools 49,500 FTE
CITY-NEAR Chicago/Corporate 18,831 FTE
CITY-NEAR University of Illinois at Chicago 13,092 FTE
CITY-NEAR University Health Service UIC UIC Campus 12,732 FTE
NAT-TCR GeoCare, Inc. DBA Home Instead Senior Care 0.0 TCR
NAT-TCR TX-01 0.0 TCR
NAT-TCR NJ-05 0.0 TCR
NAT-TCR CT-02 0.0 TCR
NAT-SIZE Pyramid Litchfield Managment LLC 313 FTE
NAT-SIZE Detroit Athletic Club 313 FTE
NAT-SIZE West : Four Corners 313 FTE
NAT-SIZE Goodrich - Turbine Fuel Technologies- (RS271) 313 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: 2018, 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.