Job stampings, automotive, metal, manufacturing · Georgia

Dekalb Tool & Die, Inc. Tucker

Tucker, GA · ~40 workers · 4 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
7.4
Avg TCR
5.4
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Dekalb Tool & Die, Inc. Tucker runs at 137% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Job stampings, automotive, metal, manufacturing workplace, earning a grade D.

Dekalb Tool & Die, Inc. Tucker: 7.4 TCR = 137% of Job stampings, automotive, metal, manufacturing BLS 5.4 · 4y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Dekalb Tool & Die, Inc. Tucker safety composite

Dekalb Tool & Die, Inc. Tucker scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 90% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 20%), 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

52/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 7.41 per 100 workers

Safer than 20% of industry peers

DART rate
A 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 90% 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%).

TCR Δ

−7.4

2017→2021

Dekalb Tool & Die, Inc. Tucker injury rate improved

Dekalb Tool & Die, Inc. Tucker's TCR fell 7.4 from 7.4 in 2017 to 0.0 in 2021. Peak filing year was 2019 at 12.4 TCR. In 2021, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=7.4 · 2018=9.9 · 2019=12.4 · 2021=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 336370 · Tucker, GA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 7.4 · 137% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #18/20
  • PHOTO Plant 6
  • BOOK 4y book
  • INJ 12 inj
  • SIZE ~40 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Plant 6 (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Dekalb Tool & Die, Inc. Tucker in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Dekalb Tool & Die, Inc. Tucker averages 7.4 TCR (137% of the Job stampings, automotive, metal, manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Dekalb Tool & Die, Inc. Tucker TCR series: 2017=7.4 · 2018=9.9 · 2019=12.4 · 2021=0 · BLS 5.4

Where Dekalb Tool & Die, Inc. Tucker falls in its industry

510 Job stampings, automotive, met establishments

Safer than 20% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Georgia alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #18 safest of 20 Job stampings, automotive, met employers in Georgia.

Dekalb Tool & Die, Inc. Tucker (40 employees, TCR 7.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 145 employees and a TCR of 4.5 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 05001,0001,500 024681012 Average employees Total Case Rate Dekalb Tool & Die, Inc. Tucker
Dekalb Tool & Die, Inc. Tucker (40 employees, TCR 7.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 145 employees and a TCR of 4.5

Dekalb Tool & Die, Inc. Tucker has fewer employees than the Job stampings, automotive, metal, manufa median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 4.5. 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
2021 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2019 12.4 7.4 5 0 0
2018 9.9 2.5 4 0 0
2017 7.4 0.0 3 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

336370 · GA · Tucker

510 Job stampings, automotive, metal, manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 14,941 rated employers in Georgia with headcount on file · 132 employers in Tucker, GA · 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 Plant 6 7.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR CQL MFG LLC 7.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Hyundai Steel (Alabama) 7.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Rotor CLip Company Inc. 7.5 TCR
STATE-SIZE Eagle Grove Farms 40 FTE
STATE-SIZE Unlimited Contract Services - Hoboken, GA 40 FTE
STATE-SIZE Southeastern Gin Inc 40 FTE
STATE-SIZE Coffee Co Gin County Inc 40 FTE
CITY-NEAR Emory Ortho and Spine Hospital 1,402 FTE
CITY-NEAR Emory Ortho and Spine Hospital - EHC 1,282 FTE
CITY-NEAR Williams Plant Services, LLC (All Locations) 473 FTE
CITY-NEAR GA.TUCKE.9 - Ricoh Usa, Inc 445 FTE
NAT-TCR Molded Fiber Glass Companies/Texas LP 7.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Metro Dentalcare-Eagan 7.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Ennis-Flint Salem, OR 7.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Milan Mi 7.4 TCR
NAT-SIZE BMW (Paint Shop) 40 FTE
NAT-SIZE Kilihau Facility 40 FTE
NAT-SIZE Flexjet Teteboro Facility 40 FTE
NAT-SIZE Flexjet White Plains Facilty 40 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: 2021, 2019, 2018, 2017. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.

Read our methodology - how this data is sourced, computed, and verified.

Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.