Machinery and equipment, large-scale, installation · North Carolina

Guy M. Turner Crane and Rigging, Inc.

Greensboro, NC · ~24 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
2.1
Avg TCR
2.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Guy M. Turner Crane and Rigging, Inc. runs at 76% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical Machinery and equipment, large-scale, installation workplace, earning a grade B.

Guy M. Turner Crane and Rigging, Inc.: 2.1 TCR = 76% of Machinery and equipment, large-scale, installation BLS 2.8 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Guy M. Turner Crane and Rigging, Inc. safety composite

Guy M. Turner Crane and Rigging, Inc. scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 13%), 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

36/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 2.14 per 100 workers

Safer than 46% of industry peers

DART rate
F 4.28 per 100 workers

Safer than 13% 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

Guy M. Turner Crane and Rigging, Inc.: 0.0 → 4.3 TCR

Peak year 2022 @ 4.3 TCR · DART/TCR 2× in 2022

Guy M. Turner Crane and Rigging, Inc.'s TCR rose 4.3 from 0.0 in 2021 to 4.3 in 2022. In 2022, DART was 2× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 238290 · Greensboro, NC AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade B · TCR 2.1 · 76% of ind

  • DART 4.3 DART
  • RANK #19/35
  • PHOTO JC DUGGAN, INC.
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 1 inj
  • SIZE ~24 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: JC DUGGAN, INC. (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Guy M. Turner Crane and Rigging, Inc. in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Guy M. Turner Crane and Rigging, Inc. averages 2.1 TCR (76% of the Machinery and equipment, large-scale, installation BLS benchmark).

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

Guy M. Turner Crane and Rigging, Inc. TCR series: 2021=0 · 2022=4.3 · BLS 2.8

Where Guy M. Turner Crane and Rigging, Inc. falls in its industry

1,138 Machinery and equipment, large establishments

Safer than 46% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.0.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to North Carolina alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #19 safest of 35 Machinery and equipment, large employers in North Carolina.

Guy M. Turner Crane and Rigging, Inc. (24 employees, TCR 2.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 52 employees and a TCR of 2.0 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 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Guy M. Turner Crane and Rigging, Inc.
Guy M. Turner Crane and Rigging, Inc. (24 employees, TCR 2.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 52 employees and a TCR of 2.0

Guy M. Turner Crane and Rigging, Inc. has fewer employees than the Machinery and equipment, large-scale, in median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.0. 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
2022 4.3 4.3 1 0 0
2021 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

238290 · NC · Greensboro

1,138 Machinery and equipment, large-scale, installation employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,981 rated employers in North Carolina with headcount on file · 920 employers in Greensboro, NC · 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 JC DUGGAN, INC. 2.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Manufacturing & Millwright 2.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Overhead Door Company of Worcester 2.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Diebold Nixdorf Glen Allen VA 2.1 TCR
STATE-SIZE Open Grounds Farm, Inc. 24 FTE
STATE-SIZE Super-Sod Charlotte 24 FTE
STATE-SIZE Holland Farms, Inc 24 FTE
STATE-SIZE CENTRAL LNM-EST 24 FTE
CITY-NEAR MHCMH-Cone-Moses H Cone Memorial Hospital 3,806 FTE
CITY-NEAR Guilford County Local Government - All Employees 3,270 FTE
CITY-NEAR Guilford County Local Government 3,194 FTE
CITY-NEAR NCGRE - GREENSBORO HUB 2,447 FTE
NAT-TCR Tetra Pak Processing Equipment Inc - Champlin 2.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Sodexo at Southwestern Univ-Board 2.1 TCR
NAT-TCR ASNY 2.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Chicago Central 38760 2.1 TCR
NAT-SIZE Tomahawk Manufacturing, Inc. Hartland 24 FTE
NAT-SIZE Island Blvd IRA - Middle Island 24 FTE
NAT-SIZE US Polymers-Accurez 24 FTE
NAT-SIZE WDGA01 24 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: 2022, 2021. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.