Hot dip galvanizing metals and metal products for the trade · New Jersey

Nicholas Galvanizing

Jersey City, NJ · ~37 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
12.7
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Nicholas Galvanizing runs at 386% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Hot dip galvanizing metals and metal products for the trade workplace, earning a grade F.

Nicholas Galvanizing: 12.7 TCR = 386% of Hot dip galvanizing metals and metal products for the trade BLS 3.3 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Nicholas Galvanizing safety composite

Nicholas Galvanizing 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

17/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 12.73 per 100 workers

Safer than 7% of industry peers

DART rate
F 10.66 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%).

TCR Δ

−5.8

2016→2024

Nicholas Galvanizing injury rate improved

Nicholas Galvanizing's TCR fell 5.8 from 16.5 in 2016 to 10.7 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2021 at 19.9 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.84× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=16.5 · 2017=15.0 · 2020=13.3 · 2021=19.9 · 2022=2.7 · 2023=11.1 · 2024=10.7

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 332812 · Jersey City, NJ ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 12.7 · 386% of ind

  • DART 10.7 DART
  • RANK #9/9
  • PHOTO Alliance Industries …
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 32 inj
  • SIZE ~37 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Alliance Industries - Waupaca (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Nicholas Galvanizing in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Nicholas Galvanizing averages 12.7 TCR (386% of the Hot dip galvanizing metals and metal products for the trade BLS benchmark).

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

Nicholas Galvanizing TCR series: 2016=16.5 · 2017=15 · 2020=13.3 · 2021=19.9 · 2022=2.7 · 2023=11.1 · 2024=10.7 · BLS 3.3

Where Nicholas Galvanizing falls in its industry

646 Hot dip galvanizing metals and establishments

Safer than 7% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to New Jersey alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #9 safest of 9 Hot dip galvanizing metals and employers in New Jersey.

Nicholas Galvanizing (37 employees, TCR 12.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 58 employees and a TCR of 3.9 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 0200400600 0510152025 Average employees Total Case Rate Nicholas Galvanizing
Nicholas Galvanizing (37 employees, TCR 12.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 58 employees and a TCR of 3.9

Nicholas Galvanizing has fewer employees than the Hot dip galvanizing metals and metal pro median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.9. 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 10.7 10.7 5 0 0
2023 11.1 6.7 5 0 0
2022 2.7 0.0 1 0 0
2021 19.9 13.3 5 1 0
2020 13.3 6.6 4 0 0
2017 15.0 15.0 5 0 0
2016 16.5 16.5 7 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

332812 · NJ · Jersey City

646 Hot dip galvanizing metals and metal products for the trade employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 11,201 rated employers in New Jersey with headcount on file · 167 employers in Jersey City, NJ · 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 Alliance Industries - Waupaca 12.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Liberty Coating Company LLC 12.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Ace Galvanizing 12.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Bert R Huncilman & Son, Inc. 12.8 TCR
STATE-SIZE MCT Dairies, INC 37 FTE
STATE-SIZE Bergen Generating Station 37 FTE
STATE-SIZE Parkway Generation- Peaking 37 FTE
STATE-SIZE Logan Generating Plant 37 FTE
CITY-NEAR Kuehne + Nagel Inc CL 3,394 FTE
CITY-NEAR Jersey City Medical Center 2,710 FTE
CITY-NEAR Kuehne + Nagel Inc SAL 2,649 FTE
CITY-NEAR 333869-NEW JERSEY NDC 2,118 FTE
NAT-TCR Amherst Facility 12.7 TCR
NAT-TCR High Lean Pork/Huron Pork 12.7 TCR
NAT-TCR LSB - Arlington Hts 12.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Timberlane Care and Rehabilitation Center, LLC dba Timberlane Health and Rehabilitation 12.7 TCR
NAT-SIZE Andrews Construction Co., Inc. 37 FTE
NAT-SIZE Memorial Mall Store #2306 37 FTE
NAT-SIZE Brookshire Store #2305 37 FTE
NAT-SIZE Oakwood Contractors Inc 37 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, 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.