Dies and die holders for metal cutting and forming (except threading) manufacturing · Michigan

L&M Machining & Manufacturing

Warren, MI · ~56 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
1.7
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

L&M Machining & Manufacturing runs at 52% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical Dies and die holders for metal cutting and forming (except threading) manufacturing workplace, earning a grade B.

L&M Machining & Manufacturing: 1.7 TCR = 52% of Dies and die holders for metal cutting and forming (except threading) manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

L&M Machining & Manufacturing safety composite

L&M Machining & Manufacturing scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 78% 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

70/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
B 1.71 per 100 workers

Safer than 78% of industry peers

DART rate
C 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 74% 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%).

L&M Machining & Manufacturing held a steady TCR band

L&M Machining & Manufacturing's TCR held near 0.2 from 1.8 in 2022 to 1.6 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2022 at 1.8 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2022=1.8 · 2023=1.7 · 2024=1.6

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 333514 · Warren, MI AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade B · TCR 1.7 · 52% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #25/131
  • PHOTO AmeriKen Die Supply,…
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 3 inj
  • SIZE ~56 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: AmeriKen Die Supply, Inc (0.0 TCR gap)

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

L&M Machining & Manufacturing in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows L&M Machining & Manufacturing averages 1.7 TCR (52% of the Dies and die holders for metal cutting and forming (except threading) manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

L&M Machining & Manufacturing TCR series: 2022=1.8 · 2023=1.7 · 2024=1.6 · BLS 3.3

Where L&M Machining & Manufacturing falls in its industry

387 Dies and die holders for metal establishments

Safer than 78% 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 #25 safest of 131 Dies and die holders for metal employers in Michigan.

L&M Machining & Manufacturing (56 employees, TCR 1.7) 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 L&M Machining & Manufacturing
L&M Machining & Manufacturing (56 employees, TCR 1.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 56 employees and a TCR of 3.4

L&M Machining & Manufacturing has more employees than the Dies and die holders for metal cutting a 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
2024 1.6 0.0 1 0 0
2023 1.7 1.7 1 0 0
2022 1.8 0.0 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

333514 · MI · Warren

387 Dies and die holders for metal cutting and forming (except threading) manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,393 rated employers in Michigan with headcount on file · 290 employers in Warren, 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 AmeriKen Die Supply, Inc 1.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Novi Industries 1.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Carter Mfg Inc 1.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Wayne Wire Die Co. 1.8 TCR
STATE-SIZE John B Schaendorf Dairy 56 FTE
STATE-SIZE Hamtramck Energy Services 56 FTE
STATE-SIZE A. Lindberg & Sons Inc. 56 FTE
STATE-SIZE Cipparrone Contracting Inc 56 FTE
CITY-NEAR Warren Technical Center 22,693 FTE
CITY-NEAR GM Global Technical Center 21,000 FTE
CITY-NEAR Warren Truck Assembly Plant 3,804 FTE
CITY-NEAR 1855-MIDET153 1,903 FTE
NAT-TCR B & B Hydraulics, Inc 1.7 TCR
NAT-TCR J.C. Lee Construction & Supply Co., Inc. 1.7 TCR
NAT-TCR CSE, Inc. 1.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Fabricators Unlimited 1.7 TCR
NAT-SIZE Bedford Hills 56 FTE
NAT-SIZE Molding Products LLC 56 FTE
NAT-SIZE Allred Metal Stamping Works INC. 56 FTE
NAT-SIZE Diversified Plastics Inc. 56 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.