Food machinery repair and maintenance services · North Carolina

ITW/Hobart Service-Charlotte Branch

Charlotte, NC · ~25 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
5.5
Avg TCR
2.1
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

ITW/Hobart Service-Charlotte Branch runs at 264% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Food machinery repair and maintenance services workplace, earning a grade F.

ITW/Hobart Service-Charlotte Branch: 5.5 TCR = 264% of Food machinery repair and maintenance services BLS 2.1 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

ITW/Hobart Service-Charlotte Branch safety composite

ITW/Hobart Service-Charlotte Branch scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 76% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 17%), 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

46/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 5.54 per 100 workers

Safer than 17% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 76% 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

−3.7

2022→2023

ITW/Hobart Service-Charlotte Branch injury rate improved

ITW/Hobart Service-Charlotte Branch's TCR fell 3.7 from 7.4 in 2022 to 3.7 in 2023. Peak filing year was 2022 at 7.4 TCR. In 2023, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2022=7.4 · 2023=3.7

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 811310 · Charlotte, NC ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 5.5 · 264% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #54/72
  • PHOTO JLG - Houston
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 3 inj
  • SIZE ~25 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: JLG - Houston (0.0 TCR gap)

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

ITW/Hobart Service-Charlotte Branch in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows ITW/Hobart Service-Charlotte Branch averages 5.5 TCR (264% of the Food machinery repair and maintenance services BLS benchmark).

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

ITW/Hobart Service-Charlotte Branch TCR series: 2022=7.4 · 2023=3.7 · BLS 2.1

Where ITW/Hobart Service-Charlotte Branch falls in its industry

2,560 Food machinery repair and main establishments

Safer than 17% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.7.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to North Carolina alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #54 safest of 72 Food machinery repair and main employers in North Carolina.

ITW/Hobart Service-Charlotte Branch (25 employees, TCR 5.5) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 45 employees and a TCR of 2.7 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 0100200300400500 0246810 Average employees Total Case Rate ITW/Hobart Service-Charlotte Branch
ITW/Hobart Service-Charlotte Branch (25 employees, TCR 5.5) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 45 employees and a TCR of 2.7

ITW/Hobart Service-Charlotte Branch has fewer employees than the Food machinery repair and maintenance se median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.7. 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
2023 3.7 0.0 1 0 0
2022 7.4 0.0 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

811310 · NC · Charlotte

2,560 Food machinery repair and maintenance services employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,981 rated employers in North Carolina with headcount on file · 2,058 employers in Charlotte, 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 JLG - Houston 5.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Electrical Test Instruments, LLC 5.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Jacksonville Office 5.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR WiscoLift Inc 5.5 TCR
STATE-SIZE Fair View Nursery, Inc. 25 FTE
STATE-SIZE John William Carter III 25 FTE
STATE-SIZE Hill of Berry's 25 FTE
STATE-SIZE Andrew Tyson Farms 25 FTE
CITY-NEAR 1101-Carolinas Medical Center (1101) 8,444 FTE
CITY-NEAR 0001-Carolinas Medical Center 8,032 FTE
CITY-NEAR 4795-AA-CLT-CHARLOTTE-CLT-TRML 7,295 FTE
CITY-NEAR Novant Health Presbyterian Medical Center 4,973 FTE
NAT-TCR Gainesville Health Care Center Ltd. Co. d/b/a Renaissance Care Center 5.5 TCR
NAT-TCR NKU Norse Commons* 5.5 TCR
NAT-TCR RK-025-Muncie ( RK-025 ) 5.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Flooring Liquidators, Inc. 5.5 TCR
NAT-SIZE Atlanta-MD 25 FTE
NAT-SIZE Great Lakes Valley View 25 FTE
NAT-SIZE Kent Distribution 25 FTE
NAT-SIZE Reading Distribution 25 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.