Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and parts (except engines) manufacturing · Michigan

Global Tooling Systems-Macomb

Macomb, MI · ~243 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
1.8
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Global Tooling Systems-Macomb runs at 56% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and parts (except engines) manufacturing workplace, earning a grade B.

Global Tooling Systems-Macomb: 1.8 TCR = 56% of Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and parts (except engines) manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Global Tooling Systems-Macomb safety composite

Global Tooling Systems-Macomb scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 75% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 32%), 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

54/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
B 1.84 per 100 workers

Safer than 75% of industry peers

DART rate
F 1.88 per 100 workers

Safer than 32% 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%).

Rising injury rate

Global Tooling Systems-Macomb: 1.5 → 2.2 TCR

Peak year 2019 @ 2.2 TCR · DART/TCR 1.02× in 2019

Global Tooling Systems-Macomb's TCR rose 0.7 from 1.5 in 2018 to 2.2 in 2019. In 2019, DART was 1.02× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

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

Grade B · TCR 1.8 · 56% of ind

  • DART 1.9 DART
  • RANK #29/131
  • PHOTO Alaark Tooling & Aut…
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 11 inj
  • SIZE ~243 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Alaark Tooling & Automation, Inc (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Global Tooling Systems-Macomb in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Global Tooling Systems-Macomb averages 1.8 TCR (56% of the Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and parts (except engines) manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Global Tooling Systems-Macomb TCR series: 2018=1.5 · 2019=2.2 · BLS 3.3

Where Global Tooling Systems-Macomb falls in its industry

387 Aircraft assemblies, subassemb establishments

Safer than 75% 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 #29 safest of 131 Aircraft assemblies, subassemb employers in Michigan.

Global Tooling Systems-Macomb (243 employees, TCR 1.8) 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 Global Tooling Systems-Macomb
Global Tooling Systems-Macomb (243 employees, TCR 1.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 56 employees and a TCR of 3.4

Global Tooling Systems-Macomb has more employees than the Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and 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
2019 2.2 1.9 7 0 0
2018 1.5 0.8 4 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

333514 · MI · Macomb

387 Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and parts (except engines) manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,393 rated employers in Michigan with headcount on file · 50 employers in Macomb, 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 Alaark Tooling & Automation, Inc 1.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Lexington Technologies Company 1.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Cloeren Incorporated 1.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Nitrogen Gas Products Brecksville Division 1.8 TCR
STATE-SIZE Caniff Service Center 243 FTE
STATE-SIZE Loc Performance 243 FTE
STATE-SIZE Chassix Benton Harbor 243 FTE
STATE-SIZE Meijer #260 243 FTE
CITY-NEAR PTI Engineered Plastics 288 FTE
CITY-NEAR Triumph Group - Macomb 288 FTE
CITY-NEAR Triumph Gear Systems 275 FTE
CITY-NEAR Baker Industries 260 FTE
NAT-TCR Elite Spice: Magellan 1.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Turner at Olin Chlor Alkali Products Charleston TN 1.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Jacksonville Sportservice Inc 1.8 TCR
NAT-TCR AMEREN ILLINOIS - Persimmon Street 1.8 TCR
NAT-SIZE #299 Neptune Shoprite 243 FTE
NAT-SIZE Hatfield Facility 1 243 FTE
NAT-SIZE Clayton Homes-Appalachia 243 FTE
NAT-SIZE Putnam Street Main Office 243 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: 2019, 2018. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.