Motor vehicle moldings and extrusions, plastics, manufacturing · Michigan

Roseville Plant

Roseville, MI · ~83 workers · 9 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
2.7
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Roseville Plant runs at 82% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Motor vehicle moldings and extrusions, plastics, manufacturing workplace, earning a grade C.

Roseville Plant: 2.7 TCR = 82% of Motor vehicle moldings and extrusions, plastics, manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 9y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Roseville Plant safety composite

Roseville Plant scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 62% 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

55/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 2.7 per 100 workers

Safer than 62% of industry peers

DART rate
D 1.58 per 100 workers

Safer than 51% 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%).

TCR Δ

−0.4

2016→2024

Roseville Plant injury rate improved

Roseville Plant's TCR fell 0.4 from 2.0 in 2016 to 1.6 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2023 at 3.8 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.59× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=2.0 · 2017=2.0 · 2018=3.0 · 2019=3.4 · 2020=3.7 · 2021=2.4 · 2022=2.4 · 2023=3.8 · 2024=1.6

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 326199 · Roseville, MI AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade C · TCR 2.7 · 82% of ind

  • DART 1.6 DART
  • RANK #74/218
  • PHOTO MIDWEST MOLDING INC
  • BOOK 9y book
  • INJ 21 inj
  • SIZE ~83 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: MIDWEST MOLDING INC (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Roseville Plant in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Roseville Plant averages 2.7 TCR (82% of the Motor vehicle moldings and extrusions, plastics, manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Roseville Plant TCR series: 2016=2 · 2017=2 · 2018=3 · 2019=3.4 · 2020=3.7 · 2021=2.4 · 2022=2.4 · 2023=3.8 · 2024=1.6 · BLS 3.3

Where Roseville Plant falls in its industry

2,838 Motor vehicle moldings and ext establishments

Safer than 62% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Michigan alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #74 safest of 218 Motor vehicle moldings and ext employers in Michigan.

Roseville Plant (83 employees, TCR 2.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 101 employees and a TCR of 3.5 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 Roseville Plant
Roseville Plant (83 employees, TCR 2.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 101 employees and a TCR of 3.5

Roseville Plant has fewer employees than the Motor vehicle moldings and extrusions, p median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.5. 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 1.6 1.6 1 0 0
2023 3.8 3.8 3 0 0
2022 2.4 2.4 2 0 0
2021 2.4 1.2 2 0 0
2020 3.7 3.7 3 0 0
2019 3.4 1.1 3 0 0
2018 3.0 2.0 3 0 0
2017 2.0 0.0 2 0 0
2016 2.0 0.0 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

326199 · MI · Roseville

2,838 Motor vehicle moldings and extrusions, plastics, manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,393 rated employers in Michigan with headcount on file · 82 employers in Roseville, MI · 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 MIDWEST MOLDING INC 2.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Currier Plastics 2.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Anfinsen Plastic Molding, Inc. 2.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Peabody Engineering & Supply, Inc. 2.7 TCR
STATE-SIZE F&V Operations and Resource Management, Inc. 83 FTE
STATE-SIZE Scodeller Construction Inc. 83 FTE
STATE-SIZE Vos Glass, LLC 83 FTE
STATE-SIZE 1557_3151 83 FTE
CITY-NEAR 4003 - TPG/PBM 666 FTE
CITY-NEAR 4002 - TPG/PBS (inc 4009) 565 FTE
CITY-NEAR WM 2959 446 FTE
CITY-NEAR RCO Engineering, Inc. 417 FTE
NAT-TCR Great South Timber & Lumber, LLC 2.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Plastipak- Highlands 2.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Vcf 825 2.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Lowes Foods #159 2.7 TCR
NAT-SIZE Center Rock Inc 83 FTE
NAT-SIZE Amcon - Rapid City 83 FTE
NAT-SIZE Indianola Admin Office/Plant 83 FTE
NAT-SIZE Entrust Manufacturing Technologies, Inc. 83 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, 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.