Coating of metal and metal products with plastics for the trade · Ohio

Rack Processing Dayton

Dayton, OH · ~61 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
5.6
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Rack Processing Dayton runs at 169% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Coating of metal and metal products with plastics for the trade workplace, earning a grade D.

Rack Processing Dayton: 5.6 TCR = 169% of Coating of metal and metal products with plastics for the trade BLS 3.3 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Rack Processing Dayton safety composite

Rack Processing Dayton scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 22%), 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

34/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 5.57 per 100 workers

Safer than 34% of industry peers

DART rate
F 4.44 per 100 workers

Safer than 22% 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

−8.8

2016→2022

Rack Processing Dayton injury rate improved

Rack Processing Dayton's TCR fell 8.8 from 13.2 in 2016 to 4.4 in 2022. Peak filing year was 2016 at 13.2 TCR. In 2022, DART was 0.8× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=13.2 · 2017=4.2 · 2018=4.2 · 2019=1.6 · 2020=7.4 · 2021=3.9 · 2022=4.4

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 332812 · Dayton, OH ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 5.6 · 169% of ind

  • DART 4.4 DART
  • RANK #37/52
  • PHOTO 101 Kindleberger
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 25 inj
  • SIZE ~61 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: 101 Kindleberger (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Rack Processing Dayton in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Rack Processing Dayton averages 5.6 TCR (169% of the Coating of metal and metal products with plastics for the trade BLS benchmark).

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

Rack Processing Dayton TCR series: 2016=13.2 · 2017=4.2 · 2018=4.2 · 2019=1.6 · 2020=7.4 · 2021=3.9 · 2022=4.4 · BLS 3.3

Where Rack Processing Dayton falls in its industry

646 Coating of metal and metal pro establishments

Safer than 34% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Ohio alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #37 safest of 52 Coating of metal and metal pro employers in Ohio.

Rack Processing Dayton (61 employees, TCR 5.6) 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 Rack Processing Dayton
Rack Processing Dayton (61 employees, TCR 5.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 58 employees and a TCR of 3.9

Rack Processing Dayton has more employees than the Coating of metal and metal products with 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
2022 4.4 4.4 2 0 0
2021 3.9 2.0 2 0 0
2020 7.4 1.9 4 0 0
2019 1.6 0.0 1 0 0
2018 4.2 0.0 3 0 0
2017 4.2 1.4 3 0 0
2016 13.2 2.6 10 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

332812 · OH · Dayton

646 Coating of metal and metal products with plastics for the trade employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 22,650 rated employers in Ohio with headcount on file · 599 employers in Dayton, OH · 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 101 Kindleberger 5.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR 52nd Paint West 5.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR ST Fastening Systems - Commerce 5.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Oakwood Custom Coating 5.7 TCR
STATE-SIZE DHI COOPERATIVE 61 FTE
STATE-SIZE Utility Technologies International 61 FTE
STATE-SIZE Northeast Operations Center 61 FTE
STATE-SIZE CIN 61 FTE
CITY-NEAR Miami Valley Hospital 6,862 FTE
CITY-NEAR University of Dayton 5,359 FTE
CITY-NEAR Dayton Children's Hospital 3,590 FTE
CITY-NEAR CareSource Management Services LLC 3,172 FTE
NAT-TCR Tops #595 5.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Intergrow East 5.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Automated Casting Facility 5.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Lunds & Byerlys, Woodbury 5.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE Freeport Branch 61 FTE
NAT-SIZE Cps All 61 FTE
NAT-SIZE Rivers Edge Nursing & Rehabilitation 61 FTE
NAT-SIZE Thompson Industrial Services, LLC, Division 33 61 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: 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.