Tubing, mechanical and hypodermic sizes, cold-drawn stainless steel, made from purchased steel · Pennsylvania

Salem Tube, Inc

Greenville, PA · ~106 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
6.6
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Salem Tube, Inc runs at 199% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Tubing, mechanical and hypodermic sizes, cold-drawn stainless steel, made from purchased steel workplace, earning a grade D.

Salem Tube, Inc: 6.6 TCR = 199% of Tubing, mechanical and hypodermic sizes, cold-drawn stainless steel, made from purchased steel BLS 3.3 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Salem Tube, Inc safety composite

Salem Tube, Inc scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 30%), 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).

D

42/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 6.57 per 100 workers

Safer than 30% of industry peers

DART rate
D 1.67 per 100 workers

Safer than 50% 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

−6.4

2016→2024

Salem Tube, Inc injury rate improved

Salem Tube, Inc's TCR fell 6.4 from 8.1 in 2016 to 1.7 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2018 at 10.4 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.25× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=8.1 · 2018=10.4 · 2019=10.1 · 2020=5.2 · 2021=8.7 · 2022=3.8 · 2023=4.7 · 2024=1.7

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 331210 · Greenville, PA ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade D · TCR 6.6 · 199% of ind

  • DART 1.7 DART
  • RANK #22/32
  • PHOTO Bull Moose Tube
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 54 inj
  • SIZE ~106 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Bull Moose Tube (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Salem Tube, Inc in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Salem Tube, Inc averages 6.6 TCR (199% of the Tubing, mechanical and hypodermic sizes, cold-drawn stainless steel, made from purchased steel BLS benchmark).

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

Salem Tube, Inc TCR series: 2016=8.1 · 2018=10.4 · 2019=10.1 · 2020=5.2 · 2021=8.7 · 2022=3.8 · 2023=4.7 · 2024=1.7 · BLS 3.3

Where Salem Tube, Inc falls in its industry

329 Tubing, mechanical and hypoder establishments

Safer than 30% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.3.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Pennsylvania alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #22 safest of 32 Tubing, mechanical and hypoder employers in Pennsylvania.

Salem Tube, Inc (106 employees, TCR 6.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 99 employees and a TCR of 4.3 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 0200400600800 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Salem Tube, Inc
Salem Tube, Inc (106 employees, TCR 6.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 99 employees and a TCR of 4.3

Salem Tube, Inc has more employees than the Tubing, mechanical and hypodermic sizes, median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 4.3. 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 1.7 1.7 2 0 0
2023 4.7 1.9 5 0 0
2022 3.8 3.8 4 0 0
2021 8.7 4.3 8 0 0
2020 5.2 5.2 5 0 0
2019 10.1 7.6 11 1 0
2018 10.4 7.8 12 0 0
2016 8.1 4.1 7 1 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

331210 · PA · Greenville

329 Tubing, mechanical and hypodermic sizes, cold-drawn stainless steel, made from purchased steel employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 22,692 rated employers in Pennsylvania with headcount on file · 34 employers in Greenville, PA · 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 Bull Moose Tube 6.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Powerbrace Corporation 6.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Wheatland Tube Company 6.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Metal-Matic, LLC Minneapolis Plant 6.6 TCR
STATE-SIZE McKeesport 106 FTE
STATE-SIZE Miller Bros Construction Inc 106 FTE
STATE-SIZE TCCo-PIT 106 FTE
STATE-SIZE GWS Lehigh 106 FTE
CITY-NEAR St. Paul Homes 448 FTE
CITY-NEAR UPMC Horizon 433 FTE
CITY-NEAR UPMC Horizon (Greenville) 335 FTE
CITY-NEAR WM 2674 274 FTE
NAT-TCR Ankeny Fire Department 6.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Weigandt Development, LTD 6.6 TCR
NAT-TCR transportation 6.6 TCR
NAT-TCR 1917 - Mount Laurel 6.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE 00457 Grape Street Ofc 106 FTE
NAT-SIZE 3112-Westin Milwaukee 106 FTE
NAT-SIZE Brookshire Residence and Rehabilitation Center 106 FTE
NAT-SIZE RWDC Industries - Athens Plant 106 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, 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.