Addition, alteration and renovation for-sale builders, commercial and institutional building · Minnesota

Max Gray Construction, Inc.

Hibbing, MN · ~42 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
3.4
Avg TCR
2.9
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Max Gray Construction, Inc. runs at 116% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Addition, alteration and renovation for-sale builders, commercial and institutional building workplace, earning a grade C.

Max Gray Construction, Inc.: 3.4 TCR = 116% of Addition, alteration and renovation for-sale builders, commercial and institutional building BLS 2.9 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Max Gray Construction, Inc. safety composite

Max Gray Construction, Inc. scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 4%), 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

29/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 3.36 per 100 workers

Safer than 36% of industry peers

DART rate
F 7.59 per 100 workers

Safer than 4% 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%).

Rising injury rate

Max Gray Construction, Inc.: 7.0 → 12.7 TCR

Peak year 2023 @ 12.7 TCR · DART/TCR 2.26× in 2023

Max Gray Construction, Inc.'s TCR rose 5.6 from 7.0 in 2017 to 12.7 in 2023. In 2023, DART was 2.26× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 236220 · Hibbing, MN ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade C · TCR 3.4 · 116% of ind

  • DART 7.6 DART
  • RANK #68/130
  • PHOTO Plank. LLC
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 10 inj
  • SIZE ~42 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Plank. LLC (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Max Gray Construction, Inc. in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Max Gray Construction, Inc. averages 3.4 TCR (116% of the Addition, alteration and renovation for-sale builders, commercial and institutional building BLS benchmark).

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

Max Gray Construction, Inc. TCR series: 2017=7 · 2018=3.9 · 2019=0 · 2020=0 · 2021=0 · 2022=0 · 2023=12.7 · BLS 2.9

Where Max Gray Construction, Inc. falls in its industry

4,692 Addition, alteration and renov establishments

Safer than 36% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.3.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Minnesota alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #68 safest of 130 Addition, alteration and renov employers in Minnesota.

Max Gray Construction, Inc. (42 employees, TCR 3.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 55 employees and a TCR of 2.3 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 0100200300400500 02468 Average employees Total Case Rate Max Gray Construction, Inc.
Max Gray Construction, Inc. (42 employees, TCR 3.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 55 employees and a TCR of 2.3

Max Gray Construction, Inc. has fewer employees than the Addition, alteration and renovation for- median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.3. 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
2023 12.7 7.6 5 0 0
2022 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2021 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2019 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2018 3.9 3.9 2 0 0
2017 7.0 2.3 3 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

236220 · MN · Hibbing

4,692 Addition, alteration and renovation for-sale builders, commercial and institutional building employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 15,828 rated employers in Minnesota with headcount on file · 53 employers in Hibbing, MN · 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 Plank. LLC 3.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Malitz Construction, Inc. 3.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Construction Company 3.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Blanton Construction 3.4 TCR
STATE-SIZE Michael Foods Inc.- GY2 42 FTE
STATE-SIZE Redwood Falls, MN-PS 42 FTE
STATE-SIZE Willmar Municipal Utilities 42 FTE
STATE-SIZE Benson Power, LLC 42 FTE
CITY-NEAR FV - Range Medical Center 811 FTE
CITY-NEAR WM 2937 247 FTE
CITY-NEAR L&M Radiator 246 FTE
CITY-NEAR 2937 237 FTE
NAT-TCR Adventhealth North P 3.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Biloxi Public Schools* 3.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Fiesta # 41 3.4 TCR
NAT-TCR John Tillman Company (DBA Tillman Compton) 3.4 TCR
NAT-SIZE Taylor Brothers 42 FTE
NAT-SIZE Insulation Services, Inc 42 FTE
NAT-SIZE Sodexo at Young Harris College Facilitie 42 FTE
NAT-SIZE Sodexo at Westmont College 42 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, 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.