wood preserving · Michigan

Hoover Treated Wood Products - Detroit

Detroit, MI · ~45 workers · 8 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

Hoover Treated Wood Products - Detroit runs at 69% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical wood preserving workplace, earning a grade B.

Hoover Treated Wood Products - Detroit: 2.3 TCR = 69% of wood preserving BLS 3.3 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Hoover Treated Wood Products - Detroit safety composite

Hoover Treated Wood Products - Detroit scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 81% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 51%), 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

74/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
B 2.27 per 100 workers

Safer than 81% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 81% 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%).

TCR Δ

−2.4

2017→2024

Hoover Treated Wood Products - Detroit injury rate improved

Hoover Treated Wood Products - Detroit's TCR fell 2.4 from 2.4 in 2017 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2021 at 7.1 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=2.4 · 2018=0.0 · 2019=2.3 · 2020=2.6 · 2021=7.1 · 2022=2.0 · 2023=1.8 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 321114 · Detroit, MI AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade B · TCR 2.3 · 69% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #2/5
  • PHOTO Carpenter Pole and P…
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 8 inj
  • SIZE ~45 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Carpenter Pole and Piling (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Hoover Treated Wood Products - Detroit in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Hoover Treated Wood Products - Detroit averages 2.3 TCR (69% of the wood preserving BLS benchmark).

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

Hoover Treated Wood Products - Detroit TCR series: 2017=2.4 · 2018=0 · 2019=2.3 · 2020=2.6 · 2021=7.1 · 2022=2 · 2023=1.8 · 2024=0 · BLS 3.3

Where Hoover Treated Wood Products - Detroit falls in its industry

183 wood preserving establishments

Safer than 81% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.3.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Michigan alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #2 safest of 5 wood preserving employers in Michigan.

Hoover Treated Wood Products - Detroit (45 employees, TCR 2.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 48 employees and a TCR of 4.3 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 050100150 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Hoover Treated Wood Products - Detroit
Hoover Treated Wood Products - Detroit (45 employees, TCR 2.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 48 employees and a TCR of 4.3

Hoover Treated Wood Products - Detroit has fewer employees than the wood preserving median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 4.3. 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
2024 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2023 1.8 1.8 1 0 0
2022 2.0 2.0 1 0 0
2021 7.1 7.1 3 0 0
2020 2.6 0.0 1 0 0
2019 2.3 2.3 1 0 0
2018 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2017 2.4 2.4 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

321114 · MI · Detroit

183 wood preserving employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,393 rated employers in Michigan with headcount on file · 673 employers in Detroit, 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 Carpenter Pole and Piling 2.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Wiggins 2.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR UFPI Lansing 2.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Great Southern Wood - Buckner 2.3 TCR
STATE-SIZE Grand Junction Office 45 FTE
STATE-SIZE DeWeerdt Poultry Farm, LLC 45 FTE
STATE-SIZE Clare SC 45 FTE
STATE-SIZE Thomas Sebold and Associates, Inc. 45 FTE
CITY-NEAR Henry Ford Hospital 8,838 FTE
CITY-NEAR Detroit Campus 8,632 FTE
CITY-NEAR Delta Air Lines - DTW 6,640 FTE
CITY-NEAR General Motors Corporation 5,241 FTE
NAT-TCR T.W. Frierson Contractor, Inc 2.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Creative Window Interiors, Inc. 2.3 TCR
NAT-TCR SEW Eurodrive Industrial Gear Motors (IG) 2.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Inland Empire Utilites Agency 2.3 TCR
NAT-SIZE Centerline Striping Co., Inc. 45 FTE
NAT-SIZE Coastal Marine Equipment inc. 45 FTE
NAT-SIZE Honeywell 45 FTE
NAT-SIZE Cazier Excavating, Inc. 45 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: 2024, 2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.