Bricks (i.e., common, face, glazed, hollow, vitrified), clay, manufacturing · Indiana

General Shale Mooresville

Mooresville, IN · ~52 workers · 5 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
2.7
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

General Shale Mooresville runs at 81% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Bricks (i.e., common, face, glazed, hollow, vitrified), clay, manufacturing workplace, earning a grade C.

General Shale Mooresville: 2.7 TCR = 81% of Bricks (i.e., common, face, glazed, hollow, vitrified), clay, manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 5y Form 300A (see methodology below)

General Shale Mooresville safety composite

General Shale Mooresville scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 64% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 21%), 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

45/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 2.67 per 100 workers

Safer than 64% of industry peers

DART rate
F 4.4 per 100 workers

Safer than 21% 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%).

Rising injury rate

General Shale Mooresville: 4.0 → 4.4 TCR

Peak year 2020 @ 4.4 TCR · DART/TCR 1.65× in 2020

General Shale Mooresville's TCR rose 0.5 from 4.0 in 2016 to 4.4 in 2020. In 2020, DART was 1.65× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 327120 · Mooresville, IN AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade C · TCR 2.7 · 81% of ind

  • DART 4.4 DART
  • RANK #4/9
  • PHOTO Red River Brick Athens
  • BOOK 5y book
  • INJ 7 inj
  • SIZE ~52 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Red River Brick Athens (0.0 TCR gap)

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

General Shale Mooresville in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows General Shale Mooresville averages 2.7 TCR (81% of the Bricks (i.e., common, face, glazed, hollow, vitrified), clay, manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

General Shale Mooresville TCR series: 2016=4 · 2017=1.6 · 2018=3.5 · 2019=0 · 2020=4.4 · BLS 3.3

Where General Shale Mooresville falls in its industry

307 Bricks (i.e., common, face, gl establishments

Safer than 64% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.7.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Indiana alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #4 safest of 9 Bricks (i.e., common, face, gl employers in Indiana.

General Shale Mooresville (52 employees, TCR 2.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 57 employees and a TCR of 3.7 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 0200400600800 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate General Shale Mooresville
General Shale Mooresville (52 employees, TCR 2.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 57 employees and a TCR of 3.7

General Shale Mooresville has fewer employees than the Bricks (i.e., common, face, glazed, holl median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.7. 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
2020 4.4 4.4 2 0 0
2019 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2018 3.5 3.5 2 0 0
2017 1.6 1.6 1 0 0
2016 4.0 0.0 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

327120 · IN · Mooresville

307 Bricks (i.e., common, face, glazed, hollow, vitrified), clay, manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 12,750 rated employers in Indiana with headcount on file · 41 employers in Mooresville, IN · 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 Red River Brick Athens 2.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Dal-Tile 2.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Boston Valley Terra Cotta 2.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Fosbel Wahl 2.6 TCR
STATE-SIZE Taconic Biosciences, Inc. Cambridge City Facility 52 FTE
STATE-SIZE 2527-Windfall, IN (Monsanto Co.) 52 FTE
STATE-SIZE LeMaster Steel Erectors Inc. - Elkhart 52 FTE
STATE-SIZE Pioneer Oil Company Inc 52 FTE
CITY-NEAR TOA, USA 886 FTE
CITY-NEAR TOA-USA, LLC 651 FTE
CITY-NEAR Mooresville - 9440 South State 540 FTE
CITY-NEAR Nice-Pak Manufacturing Facility 385 FTE
NAT-TCR Westwego 153 2.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Chattanooga 407 2.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Wilton Manors 073 2.7 TCR
NAT-TCR CCG:CG005 - CG005-Baltimore, MD Metro 2.7 TCR
NAT-SIZE Service Machine 52 FTE
NAT-SIZE Ks450-Yapi-Johnson County, Ks450 52 FTE
NAT-SIZE Jacksonville 1 Biotest Plasma Center 52 FTE
NAT-SIZE Gresham 055 52 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: 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.