Jigs and fixtures for use with machine tools manufacturing · Michigan

Dominion Technologies Group, Inc.

Roseville, MI · ~201 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
2.3
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Dominion Technologies Group, Inc. runs at 71% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical Jigs and fixtures for use with machine tools manufacturing workplace, earning a grade B.

Dominion Technologies Group, Inc.: 2.3 TCR = 71% of Jigs and fixtures for use with machine tools manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Dominion Technologies Group, Inc. safety composite

Dominion Technologies Group, Inc. scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 66% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 29%), 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

49/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 2.33 per 100 workers

Safer than 66% of industry peers

DART rate
F 2.06 per 100 workers

Safer than 29% 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%).

Dominion Technologies Group, Inc. held a steady TCR band

Dominion Technologies Group, Inc.'s TCR held near 0.1 from 2.6 in 2016 to 2.6 in 2023. Peak filing year was 2022 at 3.5 TCR. In 2023, DART was 0.88× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=2.6 · 2017=2.3 · 2018=0.9 · 2019=1.8 · 2021=2.5 · 2022=3.5 · 2023=2.6

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 333514 · Roseville, MI AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade B · TCR 2.3 · 71% of ind

  • DART 2.1 DART
  • RANK #38/131
  • PHOTO Oberg Freeport
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 35 inj
  • SIZE ~201 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Oberg Freeport (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Dominion Technologies Group, Inc. in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Dominion Technologies Group, Inc. averages 2.3 TCR (71% of the Jigs and fixtures for use with machine tools manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Dominion Technologies Group, Inc. TCR series: 2016=2.6 · 2017=2.3 · 2018=0.9 · 2019=1.8 · 2021=2.5 · 2022=3.5 · 2023=2.6 · BLS 3.3

Where Dominion Technologies Group, Inc. falls in its industry

387 Jigs and fixtures for use with establishments

Safer than 66% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.4.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Michigan alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #38 safest of 131 Jigs and fixtures for use with employers in Michigan.

Dominion Technologies Group, Inc. (201 employees, TCR 2.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 56 employees and a TCR of 3.4 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 0100200300400500 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Dominion Technologies Group, Inc.
Dominion Technologies Group, Inc. (201 employees, TCR 2.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 56 employees and a TCR of 3.4

Dominion Technologies Group, Inc. has more employees than the Jigs and fixtures for use with machine t median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.4. 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
2023 2.6 2.1 5 0 0
2022 3.5 2.2 8 0 0
2021 2.5 2.2 5 2 0
2019 1.8 0.7 5 0 0
2018 0.9 0.5 2 0 0
2017 2.3 0.9 5 0 0
2016 2.6 1.6 5 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

333514 · MI · Roseville

387 Jigs and fixtures for use with machine tools manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,393 rated employers in Michigan with headcount on file · 82 employers in Roseville, MI · 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 Oberg Freeport 2.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Century Specialties 2.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Amada Tool America, Inc. 2.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Atlantic Tool & Die SHARON CENTER 2.4 TCR
STATE-SIZE Skymint CHQ Production Facility 201 FTE
STATE-SIZE Whaley Steel Corp 201 FTE
STATE-SIZE Kraft North Assembly & Distribution 201 FTE
STATE-SIZE MOBILITY_CADILLAC_MI 201 FTE
CITY-NEAR 4003 - TPG/PBM 666 FTE
CITY-NEAR 4002 - TPG/PBS (inc 4009) 565 FTE
CITY-NEAR WM 2959 446 FTE
CITY-NEAR RCO Engineering, Inc. 417 FTE
NAT-TCR Unlimited Opportunities Inc 2.3 TCR
NAT-TCR International Auto Processing 2.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Westminster College 2.3 TCR
NAT-TCR EF Academy 2.3 TCR
NAT-SIZE Sodexo at Spotsylvania County Schools 201 FTE
NAT-SIZE Univ of Colorado Hospital Inpa 201 FTE
NAT-SIZE EAN Holdings - DFW APT 201 FTE
NAT-SIZE SteelFab of Virginia, Inc. 201 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: 2023, 2022, 2021, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.