Commuter transit systems, mixed mode (e.g., bus, commuter rail, subway combination) · Oregon

Merlo Maintenance Building

Beaverton, OR · ~106 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
9.6
Avg TCR
4.5
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Merlo Maintenance Building runs at 213% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Commuter transit systems, mixed mode (e.g., bus, commuter rail, subway combination) workplace, earning a grade F.

Merlo Maintenance Building: 9.6 TCR = 213% of Commuter transit systems, mixed mode (e.g., bus, commuter rail, subway combination) BLS 4.5 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Merlo Maintenance Building safety composite

Merlo Maintenance Building scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 52% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 24%), 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

41/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 9.58 per 100 workers

Safer than 24% of industry peers

DART rate
D 4.03 per 100 workers

Safer than 52% 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

−4.1

2022→2024

Merlo Maintenance Building injury rate improved

Merlo Maintenance Building's TCR fell 4.1 from 10.1 in 2022 to 6.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2023 at 12.6 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.42× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2022=10.1 · 2023=12.6 · 2024=6.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 485111 · Beaverton, OR ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade F · TCR 9.6 · 213% of ind

  • DART 4.0 DART
  • RANK #23/30
  • PHOTO 1953-1182
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 28 inj
  • SIZE ~106 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: 1953-1182 (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Merlo Maintenance Building in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Merlo Maintenance Building averages 9.6 TCR (213% of the Commuter transit systems, mixed mode (e.g., bus, commuter rail, subway combination) BLS benchmark).

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

Merlo Maintenance Building TCR series: 2022=10.1 · 2023=12.6 · 2024=6 · BLS 4.5

Where Merlo Maintenance Building falls in its industry

421 Commuter transit systems, mixe establishments

Safer than 24% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 5.8.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Oregon alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #23 safest of 30 Commuter transit systems, mixe employers in Oregon.

Merlo Maintenance Building (106 employees, TCR 9.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 217 employees and a TCR of 5.8 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 05001,0001,500 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Merlo Maintenance Building
Merlo Maintenance Building (106 employees, TCR 9.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 217 employees and a TCR of 5.8

Merlo Maintenance Building has fewer employees than the Commuter transit systems, mixed mode (e. median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 5.8. 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 6.0 4.0 6 0 0
2023 12.6 10.5 12 0 0
2022 10.1 6.1 10 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

485111 · OR · Beaverton

421 Commuter transit systems, mixed mode (e.g., bus, commuter rail, subway combination) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 8,031 rated employers in Oregon with headcount on file · 240 employers in Beaverton, OR · 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 1953-1182 9.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR 1171 NORTH PARK SCHEDULED OPERATIONS 9.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Lowell C. Hagen Trucking, Inc 9.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR 1131 74TH WOOD SCHEDULED TRANSIT OPERATIONS 9.6 TCR
STATE-SIZE 00457 GRAPE STREET OFC 106 FTE
STATE-SIZE Main Office 106 FTE
STATE-SIZE Anning-Johnson Company Oregon 106 FTE
STATE-SIZE Cascade Acoustics, Inc. 106 FTE
CITY-NEAR Nike World Headquarters 14,796 FTE
CITY-NEAR 004-Nike Air Manufacturing Oregon 1,585 FTE
CITY-NEAR Tailwind (IHM - Beaverton) 1,170 FTE
CITY-NEAR Analog Devices 907 FTE
NAT-TCR Wehrung's Macungie 9.6 TCR
NAT-TCR 0551 - Fridley MN DC 9.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Legacy Wendy's-170 9.6 TCR
NAT-TCR South Woods by New Perspective 9.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE Seminole Care and Rehab Center 106 FTE
NAT-SIZE Heart of Texas Landscape & Irrigation Co., Inc 106 FTE
NAT-SIZE Lake City Plating 106 FTE
NAT-SIZE Cingo, Inc 106 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.