Extruded, molded or lathe-cut rubber goods manufacturing · California

Ames Rubber Manufacturing Company, Inc.

Los Angeles, CA · ~31 workers · 4 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
4.5
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Ames Rubber Manufacturing Company, Inc. runs at 138% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Extruded, molded or lathe-cut rubber goods manufacturing workplace, earning a grade D.

Ames Rubber Manufacturing Company, Inc.: 4.5 TCR = 138% of Extruded, molded or lathe-cut rubber goods manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 4y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Ames Rubber Manufacturing Company, Inc. safety composite

Ames Rubber Manufacturing Company, Inc. scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 5%), 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).

F

30/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 4.55 per 100 workers

Safer than 38% of industry peers

DART rate
F 8.76 per 100 workers

Safer than 5% 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%).

Rising injury rate

Ames Rubber Manufacturing Company, Inc.: 0.0 → 8.8 TCR

Peak year 2024 @ 8.8 TCR · DART/TCR 1.93× in 2024

Ames Rubber Manufacturing Company, Inc.'s TCR rose 8.8 from 0.0 in 2020 to 8.8 in 2024. In 2024, DART was 1.93× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 326291 · Los Angeles, CA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 4.5 · 138% of ind

  • DART 8.8 DART
  • RANK #8/18
  • PHOTO Karman Rubber Compan…
  • BOOK 4y book
  • INJ 5 inj
  • SIZE ~31 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Karman Rubber Company Inc (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Ames Rubber Manufacturing Company, Inc. in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Ames Rubber Manufacturing Company, Inc. averages 4.5 TCR (138% of the Extruded, molded or lathe-cut rubber goods manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Ames Rubber Manufacturing Company, Inc. TCR series: 2020=0 · 2022=3.4 · 2023=6 · 2024=8.8 · BLS 3.3

Where Ames Rubber Manufacturing Company, Inc. falls in its industry

266 Extruded, molded or lathe-cut establishments

Safer than 38% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.6.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #8 safest of 18 Extruded, molded or lathe-cut employers in California.

Ames Rubber Manufacturing Company, Inc. (31 employees, TCR 4.5) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 81 employees and a TCR of 3.6 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 0200400600 0510152025 Average employees Total Case Rate Ames Rubber Manufacturing Company, Inc.
Ames Rubber Manufacturing Company, Inc. (31 employees, TCR 4.5) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 81 employees and a TCR of 3.6

Ames Rubber Manufacturing Company, Inc. has fewer employees than the Extruded, molded or lathe-cut rubber goo median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.6. 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 8.8 8.8 2 0 0
2023 6.0 6.0 2 0 0
2022 3.4 3.4 1 0 0
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

326291 · CA · Los Angeles

266 Extruded, molded or lathe-cut rubber goods manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 2,064 employers in Los Angeles, CA · 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 Karman Rubber Company Inc 4.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR NEDC 4.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Plasticoid Elkton 4.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR IFI 4.6 TCR
STATE-SIZE GCF 31 FTE
STATE-SIZE Nielsen Farms 31 FTE
STATE-SIZE Western Star Nurseries LLC 31 FTE
STATE-SIZE Progressive Growers Inc 31 FTE
CITY-NEAR Live Nation Worldwide, Inc. 50,317 FTE
CITY-NEAR UC Los Angeles 40,333 FTE
CITY-NEAR LADWP 11,717 FTE
CITY-NEAR Los Angeles Department of Water and Power 10,346 FTE
NAT-TCR South Miami Hospital 4.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Shop-Vac USA, LLC. 4.5 TCR
NAT-TCR DQ Training Restaurants, LLC 4.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Bradford Company 4.5 TCR
NAT-SIZE Huntsville AL Yard 31 FTE
NAT-SIZE GAP 31 FTE
NAT-SIZE NEEDHAM 31 FTE
NAT-SIZE Heritage Ministries Gerry Homes Woodlands Orchard Grove 31 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, 2020. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.