Planting machines, farm-type, manufacturing · Illinois

John Deere Seeding Group

Moline, IL · ~625 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
2.4
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

John Deere Seeding Group runs at 73% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical Planting machines, farm-type, manufacturing workplace, earning a grade B.

John Deere Seeding Group: 2.4 TCR = 73% of Planting machines, farm-type, manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

John Deere Seeding Group safety composite

John Deere Seeding Group scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 82% 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

65/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
B 2.42 per 100 workers

Safer than 82% of industry peers

DART rate
C 1.74 per 100 workers

Safer than 56% 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

−2.3

2018→2024

John Deere Seeding Group injury rate improved

John Deere Seeding Group's TCR fell 2.3 from 4.4 in 2018 to 2.1 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2018 at 4.4 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.72× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2018=4.4 · 2019=1.7 · 2020=1.7 · 2021=1.8 · 2022=2.0 · 2023=3.2 · 2024=2.1

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 333111 · Moline, IL AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade B · TCR 2.4 · 73% of ind

  • DART 1.7 DART
  • RANK #11/37
  • PHOTO Moses Gin, Inc
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 105 inj
  • SIZE ~625 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Moses Gin, Inc (0.0 TCR gap)

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

John Deere Seeding Group in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows John Deere Seeding Group averages 2.4 TCR (73% of the Planting machines, farm-type, manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

John Deere Seeding Group TCR series: 2018=4.4 · 2019=1.7 · 2020=1.7 · 2021=1.8 · 2022=2 · 2023=3.2 · 2024=2.1 · BLS 3.3

Where John Deere Seeding Group falls in its industry

433 Planting machines, farm-type, establishments

Safer than 82% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 5.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Illinois alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #11 safest of 37 Planting machines, farm-type, employers in Illinois.

John Deere Seeding Group (625 employees, TCR 2.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 82 employees and a TCR of 5.2 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 05001,0001,5002,000 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate John Deere Seeding Group
John Deere Seeding Group (625 employees, TCR 2.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 82 employees and a TCR of 5.2

John Deere Seeding Group has more employees than the Planting machines, farm-type, manufactur median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 5.2. 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 2.1 1.7 9 2 0
2023 3.2 1.4 20 1 0
2022 2.0 1.4 15 0 0
2021 1.8 1.1 8 3 0
2020 1.7 1.1 11 0 0
2019 1.7 0.9 10 1 0
2018 4.4 2.5 32 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

333111 · IL · Moline

433 Planting machines, farm-type, manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 22,804 rated employers in Illinois with headcount on file · 103 employers in Moline, IL · 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 Moses Gin, Inc 2.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Mahindra USA 2.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Production 2.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Alamo Group Texas 2.4 TCR
STATE-SIZE Building 4 626 FTE
STATE-SIZE OSF Saint Elizabeth Medical Center 624 FTE
STATE-SIZE UChicago Medicine AdventHealth GlenOaks 626 FTE
STATE-SIZE Taylor a Division of Carrier Commercial Refrigeration 623 FTE
CITY-NEAR Deere & Company 4,102 FTE
CITY-NEAR Seeding - Moline 532 FTE
CITY-NEAR City of Moline 432 FTE
CITY-NEAR Construction Equipment Company 425 FTE
NAT-TCR Lockheed Martin Corporation US CT Shelton Platt Rd (5224) 2.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Barro's Pizza, FLW 2.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Seaboard Foods Lp Oklahoma Market 2.4 TCR
NAT-TCR AccuForm Main Location 2.4 TCR
NAT-SIZE NGMS-S550 625 FTE
NAT-SIZE Alcon Research, LLC. 625 FTE
NAT-SIZE Universal Logistics of Virginia, LLC - Corporate - 9690 625 FTE
NAT-SIZE Arizona Jack in the Box 625 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.