Building materials (e.g., fascia, panels, siding, soffit), plastics, manufacturing · Ohio

Royal Building Products

Columbus, OH · ~260 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
0.8
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Royal Building Products runs at 24% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Building materials (e.g., fascia, panels, siding, soffit), plastics, manufacturing workplace, earning a grade A.

Royal Building Products: 0.8 TCR = 24% of Building materials (e.g., fascia, panels, siding, soffit), plastics, manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Royal Building Products safety composite

Royal Building Products scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 95% 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).

B

75/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
A 0.79 per 100 workers

Safer than 95% of industry peers

DART rate
C 0.41 per 100 workers

Safer than 71% 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%).

Royal Building Products held a steady TCR band

Royal Building Products's TCR held near 0.3 from 1.3 in 2016 to 1.6 in 2022. In 2022, DART was 0.52× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=1.3 · 2017=1.4 · 2018=0.4 · 2019=0.0 · 2020=0.0 · 2021=0.8 · 2022=1.6

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 326199 · Columbus, OH AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade A · TCR 0.8 · 24% of ind

  • DART 0.4 DART
  • RANK #16/270
  • PHOTO Exothermic Molding, …
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 15 inj
  • SIZE ~260 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Exothermic Molding, Inc (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Royal Building Products in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Royal Building Products averages 0.8 TCR (24% of the Building materials (e.g., fascia, panels, siding, soffit), plastics, manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Royal Building Products TCR series: 2016=1.3 · 2017=1.4 · 2018=0.4 · 2019=0 · 2020=0 · 2021=0.8 · 2022=1.6 · BLS 3.3

Where Royal Building Products falls in its industry

2,838 Building materials (e.g., fasc establishments

Safer than 95% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Ohio alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #16 safest of 270 Building materials (e.g., fasc employers in Ohio.

Royal Building Products (260 employees, TCR 0.8) 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 Royal Building Products
Royal Building Products (260 employees, TCR 0.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 101 employees and a TCR of 3.5

Royal Building Products has more employees than the Building materials (e.g., fascia, panels 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
2022 1.6 0.4 4 0 0
2021 0.8 0.8 2 0 0
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2019 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2018 0.4 0.0 1 0 0
2017 1.4 1.1 4 0 0
2016 1.3 0.7 4 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

326199 · OH · Columbus

2,838 Building materials (e.g., fascia, panels, siding, soffit), plastics, manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 22,650 rated employers in Ohio with headcount on file · 1,500 employers in Columbus, 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 Exothermic Molding, Inc 0.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Alltrista Plastics LLC 0.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Berry Global, Inc 0.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Teijin Automotive Technologies, Inc 0.8 TCR
STATE-SIZE Revenue Operations 260 FTE
STATE-SIZE Kenmore Construction Co., Inc. 260 FTE
STATE-SIZE Shearer's Foods - SDC 260 FTE
STATE-SIZE Carefree of Colorado - Broomfield 260 FTE
CITY-NEAR Nationwide Children's Hospital 13,367 FTE
CITY-NEAR Nationwide Children's Hospital Main Campus 10,116 FTE
CITY-NEAR Riverside Methodist Hospital 9,759 FTE
CITY-NEAR North America Fulfillment Centers (FCs) : CMH1 5,057 FTE
NAT-TCR L.F. Driscoll 0.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Wisenbaker Builder Services - San Antonio 0.8 TCR
NAT-TCR GSI : Corporate 0.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Plating for Electronics, LLC 0.8 TCR
NAT-SIZE Police 260 FTE
NAT-SIZE People's Memorial Hospital of Buchanan County Health Center 260 FTE
NAT-SIZE Attic Angel Place 260 FTE
NAT-SIZE Northwest Ordinance Distilling 260 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.