Industry profile · NAICS 311615

Chickens, processing, fresh, frozen, canned, or cooked (except baby and pet food)

Workplace injury rates across 498 OSHA-reporting establishments in this industry, 2016–2024.

498
Employers
4.6
Avg TCR
3.3
BLS benchmark
38,248
Injuries

The industry picture

Employers in Chickens, processing, fresh, frozen, canned, or cooked (except baby and pet food) average 4.6 recordable injuries per 100 workers, 1.4 times the BLS national benchmark of 3.3.

4.6
avg TCR · reporting employers
3.3
BLS national benchmark
498
employers reporting
38,248
recordable injuries

OSHA-reporting establishments skew toward larger, higher-hazard sites, so the reporting average runs above the BLS all-establishment benchmark.

What Chickens, processing, fresh, frozen, canned, or cooked (except baby and pet food) Safety Data Reveals

The Chickens, processing, fresh, frozen, canned, or cooked (except baby and pet food) sector (NAICS 311615) encompasses 498 distinct employer establishments currently reporting to OSHA's Injury Tracking Application. Across this cohort, workers have logged 38,248 recordable injuries during the 2016–2024 reporting window, producing an industry-weighted average Total Case Rate (TCR) of 4.6 injuries per 100 full-time workers per year. Because OSHA's ITA mandates submission from establishments with 250+ employees plus all high-hazard industries at 20+ employees, this dataset represents a structural slice of U.S. workplace risk rather than a voluntary sample.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes a separate national benchmark TCR of 3.3 for this NAICS code, derived from the BLS Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses. Comparing the two, the ITA-reported rate of 4.6 is higher than the BLS benchmark, a gap that typically widens when the industry contains many large, high-exposure establishments required to file ITA reports. Employers in the table below are sorted so you can see how far individual establishments deviate from both the industry average and the national benchmark.

The practical value of industry-level safety data is threefold. First, jobseekers can gauge whether a prospective employer is better or worse than its industry peers, not just absolute injury counts, which tilt toward larger payrolls. Second, insurers and workers' compensation carriers use sector TCR as a baseline for experience-modification adjustments. Third, safety professionals benchmark their own programs against the cohort median. Use the grade-sorted employer list below to identify specific establishments within Chickens, processing, fresh, frozen, canned, or cooked (except baby and pet food) that outperform or underperform the sector average, and click through to each record for year-by-year injury, illness, and fatality breakdowns.

Employers in this industry, by injury rate

Page 7 of 11
Employer LocationGradeAvg TCR
VBZ Fort Smith, AR C 2.9
Heavener Processing Plant Heavener, OK C 2.9
Peco Foods Inc.-Poultry Processing Plant Pocahontas, AR C 2.8
Selbyville Processing Selbyville, DE C 2.8
Ambassador Sanitation Management @ Filet of Chicken Forest Park, GA C 2.8
Bay Springs, MS Processing Plant Bay Springs, MS C 2.8
Fieldale Farms - Murrayville Plant Murrayville, GA C 2.8
Butterball LLC Ozark, AR C 2.8
Navy Road, P-19719 Fort Smith, AR C 2.8
Mt Vernon Distribution Center Mt Vernon, WA C 2.8
Claxton Poultry Farms Claxton, GA C 2.8
George's Springdale Further Processing Plant Springdale, AR C 2.8
Pilgrim's Pride Fresh Processing Athens, GA C 2.8
Benson Ave Plant Willmar, MN C 2.7
Hatchery Broadway, VA C 2.7
Further Processing Springdale, AR C 2.7
Bay Springs Processing Facility Bay Springs, MS C 2.7
Danville Plant Danville, AR C 2.7
Alatrade Foods Inc - Boaz Boaz, AL C 2.7
Martin Foods, L.P. Houston, TX C 2.7
West Plant Mt Pleasant, TX C 2.7
Tuscaloosa Plant Tuscaloosa, AL C 2.7
Cromwell Plant Beaver Dam, KY C 2.6
Tuscaloosa Processing Tuscaloosa, AL C 2.6
De Oro Foods, DBA Dorada Foods, LLC Reidsville, NC B 2.6
VBC Van Buren, AR B 2.6
Brooksville Further processing Brooksville, MS B 2.6
Petaluma Plant Petaluma, CA B 2.6
Danville processing plant Danville, AR B 2.6
Batesville Processing Batesville, AR B 2.6
OKC Processing Plant Oklahoma City, OK B 2.6
George's Harrisonburg Processing Plant Harrisonburg, VA B 2.6
Farmers Pride Inc Plant 2 Fredericksburg, PA B 2.5
Moorefield Fresh Foods Processing Moorefield, WV B 2.5
Fertilizer Plant Livingston, CA B 2.5
Koch Foods (Further Processing) Plant Morton, MS B 2.5
GC7 Airport Dr, Gold Creek Processing, LLC. Gainesville, GA B 2.5
John Soules Foods Gainesville Gainesville, GA B 2.5
Processing Plant Hattiesburg, MS B 2.5
Lake Foods LLC Hartwell, GA B 2.5
DG Foods, LLC Bastrop Bastrop, LA B 2.5
Alatrade - Albertville Albertville, AL B 2.5
Case Farms winesburg processing Winesburg, OH B 2.4
Timberville Processing plant Timberville, VA B 2.4
Maple Leaf Farms, Inc. - Syracuse Feedmill & Nql Syracuse, IN B 2.4
To Ricos Aibonito, PR B 2.4
Plainville Farms New Oxford, PA B 2.4
Pendergrass Plant Pendergrass, GA B 2.4
Pilgrims Mt. Pleasant Waste Water Mt. Pleasant, TX B 2.4
Petaluma - Pet1 Petaluma, CA B 2.4
← Prev Page 7 of 11 Next →
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details. Retrieved and formatted by PlainSafetyScore Editorial

Verify with BLS →

Verify with OSHA →

Working in Chickens, processing, fresh, frozen, canned, or cooked (except baby and pet food)?

This sector averages 4.6 against a BLS benchmark of 3.3 - but individual employers span the full A-to-F range.

Sector figures use the credible-subset mean across reporting employers; a benchmark is not any single establishment's measured rate.

Every figure and grade on PlainSafetyScore is computed directly from OSHA's published Injury Tracking Application data and BLS industry benchmarks, no number is typed in by an editor. See our editorial standards & corrections policy, the methodology behind these safety grades, or report a data error. Data current as of 2016-2024 OSHA ITA release.