Automobile dealers, new only or new and used · South Carolina

Crews Subaru of Charleston

North Charleston, SC · ~64 workers · 6 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
4.5
Avg TCR
3.4
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Crews Subaru of Charleston runs at 132% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Automobile dealers, new only or new and used workplace, earning a grade D.

Crews Subaru of Charleston: 4.5 TCR = 132% of Automobile dealers, new only or new and used BLS 3.4 · 6y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Crews Subaru of Charleston safety composite

Crews Subaru of Charleston scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 31%), 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

41/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 4.49 per 100 workers

Safer than 31% of industry peers

DART rate
D 1.43 per 100 workers

Safer than 46% 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

−2.6

2017→2024

Crews Subaru of Charleston injury rate improved

Crews Subaru of Charleston's TCR fell 2.6 from 4.0 in 2017 to 1.4 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2020 at 11.3 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.32× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=4.0 · 2018=3.8 · 2020=11.3 · 2022=4.9 · 2023=1.4 · 2024=1.4

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 441110 · North Charleston, SC ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 4.5 · 132% of ind

  • DART 1.4 DART
  • RANK #32/46
  • PHOTO 2233
  • BOOK 6y book
  • INJ 16 inj
  • SIZE ~64 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: 2233 (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Crews Subaru of Charleston in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Crews Subaru of Charleston averages 4.5 TCR (132% of the Automobile dealers, new only or new and used BLS benchmark).

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

Crews Subaru of Charleston TCR series: 2017=4 · 2018=3.8 · 2020=11.3 · 2022=4.9 · 2023=1.4 · 2024=1.4 · BLS 3.4

Where Crews Subaru of Charleston falls in its industry

2,847 Automobile dealers, new only o establishments

Safer than 31% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.3.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to South Carolina alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #32 safest of 46 Automobile dealers, new only o employers in South Carolina.

Crews Subaru of Charleston (64 employees, TCR 4.5) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 69 employees and a TCR of 3.3 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 0100200300400 0510152025 Average employees Total Case Rate Crews Subaru of Charleston
Crews Subaru of Charleston (64 employees, TCR 4.5) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 69 employees and a TCR of 3.3

Crews Subaru of Charleston has fewer employees than the Automobile dealers, new only or new and median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.3. 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 1.4 1 0 0
2023 1.4 1.4 1 0 0
2022 4.9 3.3 3 0 0
2020 11.3 1.6 7 0 0
2018 3.8 3.8 2 0 0
2017 4.0 2.0 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

441110 · SC · North Charleston

2,847 Automobile dealers, new only or new and used employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 7,610 rated employers in South Carolina with headcount on file · 256 employers in North Charleston, SC · 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 2233 4.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Luther Nissan Kia 4.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR St. George Auto Sales, INC 4.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Roberson Albany Ford 4.5 TCR
STATE-SIZE Myrtle Beach Service Center/ Technical Services 64 FTE
STATE-SIZE Metropolitan Sewer Subdistrict 64 FTE
STATE-SIZE Reeves Structures 64 FTE
STATE-SIZE Kent Companies 64 FTE
CITY-NEAR Charleston County 2,601 FTE
CITY-NEAR Palmetto Goodwill Services 1,105 FTE
CITY-NEAR Trident Medical Center 1,015 FTE
CITY-NEAR SRC Charleston ISS Division 815 FTE
NAT-TCR The Corners 4.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Sauereisen, Inc. 4.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Goodwill Alliance Store 4.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Legerity Rehab, LLC DBA Palm Garden Rehab 4.5 TCR
NAT-SIZE Smiths Interconnect - Salisbury 64 FTE
NAT-SIZE Suddath Relocation Systems of Oregon, LLC (W) 64 FTE
NAT-SIZE 505STL 64 FTE
NAT-SIZE 506SGE 64 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, 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.