Buildings, prefabricated wood, merchant wholesalers · Georgia

Flowery Branch

Flowery Branch, GA · ~66 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
3.5
Avg TCR
2.2
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Flowery Branch runs at 157% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Buildings, prefabricated wood, merchant wholesalers workplace, earning a grade D.

Flowery Branch: 3.5 TCR = 157% of Buildings, prefabricated wood, merchant wholesalers BLS 2.2 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Flowery Branch safety composite

Flowery Branch scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 58% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 50%), 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).

C

56/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 3.45 per 100 workers

Safer than 58% of industry peers

DART rate
C 1.56 per 100 workers

Safer than 58% 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

−3.0

2016→2023

Flowery Branch injury rate improved

Flowery Branch's TCR fell 3.0 from 4.5 in 2016 to 1.6 in 2023. Peak filing year was 2019 at 6.7 TCR. In 2023, DART was 0.45× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=4.5 · 2017=1.1 · 2018=4.2 · 2019=6.7 · 2020=3.9 · 2021=2.9 · 2022=2.6 · 2023=1.6

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 423310 · Flowery Branch, GA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 3.5 · 157% of ind

  • DART 1.6 DART
  • RANK #30/69
  • PHOTO 4192-00051484-40
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 22 inj
  • SIZE ~66 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: 4192-00051484-40 (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Flowery Branch in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Flowery Branch averages 3.5 TCR (157% of the Buildings, prefabricated wood, merchant wholesalers BLS benchmark).

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

Flowery Branch TCR series: 2016=4.5 · 2017=1.1 · 2018=4.2 · 2019=6.7 · 2020=3.9 · 2021=2.9 · 2022=2.6 · 2023=1.6 · BLS 2.2

Where Flowery Branch falls in its industry

1,225 Buildings, prefabricated wood, establishments

Safer than 58% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Georgia alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #30 safest of 69 Buildings, prefabricated wood, employers in Georgia.

Flowery Branch (66 employees, TCR 3.5) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 41 employees and a TCR of 4.2 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 020406080100120 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Flowery Branch
Flowery Branch (66 employees, TCR 3.5) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 41 employees and a TCR of 4.2

Flowery Branch has more employees than the Buildings, prefabricated wood, merchant median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 4.2. 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 1.6 1.6 1 0 0
2022 2.6 2.6 1 0 0
2021 2.9 0.0 1 0 0
2020 3.9 2.0 4 0 0
2019 6.7 3.8 7 0 0
2018 4.2 4.2 4 0 0
2017 1.1 1.1 1 0 0
2016 4.5 4.5 3 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

423310 · GA · Flowery Branch

1,225 Buildings, prefabricated wood, merchant wholesalers employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 14,941 rated employers in Georgia with headcount on file · 57 employers in Flowery Branch, 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 4192-00051484-40 3.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Continental Hardwood Co. 3.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Masonite Distribution (BWI) Leominster 3.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Columbus 3.4 TCR
STATE-SIZE Jefferson District - Jackson EMC 66 FTE
STATE-SIZE Southern Rivers Energy 66 FTE
STATE-SIZE Jefferson District Jackson EMC 66 FTE
STATE-SIZE Oakley Ind Operating 7365 Oakley Industrial Blvd Union City 66 FTE
CITY-NEAR GNV 972 FTE
CITY-NEAR Kings Hawaiian 750 FTE
CITY-NEAR King's Hawaiian Bakery Southeast Inc 631 FTE
CITY-NEAR ZF-Flowery Branch 474 FTE
NAT-TCR Inter Contracting Corp. 3.5 TCR
NAT-TCR D. C. Taylor Co Cedar Rapids- Iowa 3.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Midland Paper - Wausau, WI 3.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Central Carolina Air Conditioning 3.5 TCR
NAT-SIZE Lithia TO Inc dba Lithia Toyota of Odessa 66 FTE
NAT-SIZE Ontario Knife Comapny 66 FTE
NAT-SIZE Evergreen Village at Bloomington 66 FTE
NAT-SIZE Skyway Concessions Company LLC 66 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, 2020, 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.