Bottles, plastics, manufacturing · Tennessee

Ring Container Technologies: Oakland/HQ

Oakland, TN · ~102 workers · 6 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
1.1
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Ring Container Technologies: Oakland/HQ runs at 33% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Bottles, plastics, manufacturing workplace, earning a grade A.

Ring Container Technologies: Oakland/HQ: 1.1 TCR = 33% of Bottles, plastics, manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 6y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Ring Container Technologies: Oakland/HQ safety composite

Ring Container Technologies: Oakland/HQ scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 76% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 50%), 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).

C

69/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 1.08 per 100 workers

Safer than 74% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 76% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 50% 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

Ring Container Technologies: Oakland/HQ: 0.0 → 0.9 TCR

Peak year 2018 @ 3.8 TCR · DART/TCR 0× in 2021

Ring Container Technologies: Oakland/HQ's TCR rose 0.9 from 0.0 in 2016 to 0.9 in 2021. Peak filing year was 2018 at 3.8 TCR. In 2021, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 326160 · Oakland, TN AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade A · TCR 1.1 · 33% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #3/11
  • PHOTO Amcor Rigid Packagin…
  • BOOK 6y book
  • INJ 5 inj
  • SIZE ~102 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Amcor Rigid Packaging - SC Division Addison (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Ring Container Technologies: Oakland/HQ in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Ring Container Technologies: Oakland/HQ averages 1.1 TCR (33% of the Bottles, plastics, manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Ring Container Technologies: Oakland/HQ TCR series: 2016=0 · 2017=0 · 2018=3.8 · 2019=0.9 · 2020=0.9 · 2021=0.9 · BLS 3.3

Where Ring Container Technologies: Oakland/HQ falls in its industry

411 Bottles, plastics, manufacturi establishments

Safer than 74% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.0.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Tennessee alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #3 safest of 11 Bottles, plastics, manufacturi employers in Tennessee.

Ring Container Technologies: Oakland/HQ (102 employees, TCR 1.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 77 employees and a TCR of 2.0 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 0100200300400 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Ring Container Technologies: Oakland/HQ
Ring Container Technologies: Oakland/HQ (102 employees, TCR 1.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 77 employees and a TCR of 2.0

Ring Container Technologies: Oakland/HQ has more employees than the Bottles, plastics, manufacturing median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.0. 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
2021 0.9 0.0 0 1 0
2020 0.9 0.0 0 1 0
2019 0.9 0.0 1 0 0
2018 3.8 1.9 4 0 0
2017 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2016 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

326160 · TN · Oakland

411 Bottles, plastics, manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 10,743 rated employers in Tennessee with headcount on file · 10 employers in Oakland, TN · 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 Amcor Rigid Packaging - SC Division Addison 1.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Amcor Chino 1.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR BKH Enterprises LLC DBA 1.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Altium Packaging - Corona 1.1 TCR
STATE-SIZE CEMC-Headquarters 102 FTE
STATE-SIZE Titan Steel Erectors, LLC 102 FTE
STATE-SIZE Tri-State Armature & Electrical Works, Inc. 102 FTE
STATE-SIZE Morgan & Thornburg, Inc. 102 FTE
CITY-NEAR WM 4533 272 FTE
CITY-NEAR 4533 249 FTE
CITY-NEAR 025-00462 137 FTE
CITY-NEAR Main Office 97 FTE
NAT-TCR Diversco 1.1 TCR
NAT-TCR API Technologies - Fairview Manufacturing 1.1 TCR
NAT-TCR AGR Group Nevada, LLC 1.1 TCR
NAT-TCR MACOM Lowell 1.1 TCR
NAT-SIZE Thermcor Inc 102 FTE
NAT-SIZE Stratford Fire Department 102 FTE
NAT-SIZE Iowa 102 FTE
NAT-SIZE George Regional Hospital 102 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: 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.