Tubing, mechanical and hypodermic sizes, cold-drawn stainless steel, made from purchased steel · New York

Markin Tubing

Wyoming, NY · ~105 workers · 9 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
7.6
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Markin Tubing runs at 229% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Tubing, mechanical and hypodermic sizes, cold-drawn stainless steel, made from purchased steel workplace, earning a grade F.

Markin Tubing: 7.6 TCR = 229% of Tubing, mechanical and hypodermic sizes, cold-drawn stainless steel, made from purchased steel BLS 3.3 · 9y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Markin Tubing safety composite

Markin Tubing scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 8%), 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).

F

25/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 7.57 per 100 workers

Safer than 23% of industry peers

DART rate
F 7.78 per 100 workers

Safer than 8% 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

−6.3

2016→2024

Markin Tubing injury rate improved

Markin Tubing's TCR fell 6.3 from 15.0 in 2016 to 8.8 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2016 at 15.0 TCR. In 2024, DART was 1.03× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=15.0 · 2017=13.1 · 2018=8.2 · 2019=3.4 · 2020=0.0 · 2021=6.9 · 2022=5.2 · 2023=7.6 · 2024=8.8

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 331210 · Wyoming, NY ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade F · TCR 7.6 · 229% of ind

  • DART 7.8 DART
  • RANK #4/4
  • PHOTO Bull Moose Industries
  • BOOK 9y book
  • INJ 72 inj
  • SIZE ~105 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Bull Moose Industries (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Markin Tubing in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Markin Tubing averages 7.6 TCR (229% of the Tubing, mechanical and hypodermic sizes, cold-drawn stainless steel, made from purchased steel BLS benchmark).

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

Markin Tubing TCR series: 2016=15 · 2017=13.1 · 2018=8.2 · 2019=3.4 · 2020=0 · 2021=6.9 · 2022=5.2 · 2023=7.6 · 2024=8.8 · BLS 3.3

Where Markin Tubing falls in its industry

329 Tubing, mechanical and hypoder establishments

Safer than 23% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.3.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to New York alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #4 safest of 4 Tubing, mechanical and hypoder employers in New York.

Markin Tubing (105 employees, TCR 7.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 99 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 0200400600800 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Markin Tubing
Markin Tubing (105 employees, TCR 7.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 99 employees and a TCR of 4.3

Markin Tubing has more employees than the Tubing, mechanical and hypodermic sizes, median and a higher 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 8.8 7.8 8 1 0
2023 7.6 5.7 8 0 0
2022 5.2 3.5 6 0 0
2021 6.9 2.6 4 4 0
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2019 3.4 3.4 4 0 0
2018 8.2 2.5 8 2 0
2017 13.1 5.7 16 0 0
2016 15.0 5.8 18 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

331210 · NY · Wyoming

329 Tubing, mechanical and hypodermic sizes, cold-drawn stainless steel, made from purchased steel employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 21,008 rated employers in New York with headcount on file · 4 employers in Wyoming, NY · 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 Bull Moose Industries 7.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Tampco Inc. 7.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR ASTI - Troutman Location 7.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Delta Steel & Tube, Inc. 7.5 TCR
STATE-SIZE Artimus LLC 105 FTE
STATE-SIZE Sea Beach 105 FTE
STATE-SIZE Bay Park Conveyance 105 FTE
STATE-SIZE FJM-Ferro, Inc. 105 FTE
CITY-NEAR Pearl Creek Management, Inc. 65 FTE
CITY-NEAR TMP Technologies, Inc. Advanced Rubber Products Division 31 FTE
CITY-NEAR SUPERIOR PLUS - 0105 24 FTE
NAT-TCR Snowshoe Mountain Inc. 7.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Landscape 7.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Liberty Village Streator 7.6 TCR
NAT-TCR LP Lexington Bluegrass, LLC 7.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE Trader Joe's 0602 Westwood 105 FTE
NAT-SIZE Trader Joe's 0632 Wayne 105 FTE
NAT-SIZE La Cosecha Food Service, LLC 105 FTE
NAT-SIZE Trader Joe's 0527 South Burlington 105 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, 2016. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.