Mixed mode transit systems (e.g., bus, commuter rail, subway combinations) · Oregon

TriMet Rose Quarter Maintenance

Portland, OR · ~23 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
12.0
Avg TCR
4.5
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

TriMet Rose Quarter Maintenance runs at 266% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Mixed mode transit systems (e.g., bus, commuter rail, subway combinations) workplace, earning a grade F.

TriMet Rose Quarter Maintenance: 12.0 TCR = 266% of Mixed mode transit systems (e.g., bus, commuter rail, subway combinations) BLS 4.5 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

TriMet Rose Quarter Maintenance safety composite

TriMet Rose Quarter Maintenance scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 10%), 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

21/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 11.97 per 100 workers

Safer than 13% of industry peers

DART rate
F 10.17 per 100 workers

Safer than 10% 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%).

Rising injury rate

TriMet Rose Quarter Maintenance: 8.9 → 10.2 TCR

Peak year 2017 @ 16.9 TCR · DART/TCR 0.85× in 2018

TriMet Rose Quarter Maintenance's TCR rose 1.3 from 8.9 in 2016 to 10.2 in 2018. Peak filing year was 2017 at 16.9 TCR. In 2018, DART was 0.85× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 485111 · Portland, OR ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 12.0 · 266% of ind

  • DART 10.2 DART
  • RANK #28/30
  • PHOTO 803 Maintenance
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 8 inj
  • SIZE ~23 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: 803 Maintenance (0.0 TCR gap)

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

TriMet Rose Quarter Maintenance in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows TriMet Rose Quarter Maintenance averages 12.0 TCR (266% of the Mixed mode transit systems (e.g., bus, commuter rail, subway combinations) BLS benchmark).

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

TriMet Rose Quarter Maintenance TCR series: 2016=8.9 · 2017=16.9 · 2018=10.2 · BLS 4.5

Where TriMet Rose Quarter Maintenance falls in its industry

421 Mixed mode transit systems (e. establishments

Safer than 13% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 5.8.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Oregon alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #28 safest of 30 Mixed mode transit systems (e. employers in Oregon.

TriMet Rose Quarter Maintenance (23 employees, TCR 12.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 217 employees and a TCR of 5.8 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 05001,0001,500 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate TriMet Rose Quarter Maintenance
TriMet Rose Quarter Maintenance (23 employees, TCR 12.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 217 employees and a TCR of 5.8

TriMet Rose Quarter Maintenance has fewer employees than the Mixed mode transit systems (e.g., bus, c median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 5.8. 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
2018 10.2 10.2 2 0 0
2017 16.9 8.4 4 0 0
2016 8.9 8.9 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

485111 · OR · Portland

421 Mixed mode transit systems (e.g., bus, commuter rail, subway combinations) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 8,031 rated employers in Oregon with headcount on file · 1,728 employers in Portland, OR · 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 803 Maintenance 12.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR 4102 TRACK MAINTENANCE 12.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR 4071 SHEET METAL MAINTENANCE 11.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Metro Transit Transfer Road & Police Department 12.1 TCR
STATE-SIZE Dog River Ranch, LLC 23 FTE
STATE-SIZE Howell Prairie Vineyard 23 FTE
STATE-SIZE Decker Farms, Inc. 23 FTE
STATE-SIZE Byers Orchards LLC 23 FTE
CITY-NEAR OHSU Main Campus 18,003 FTE
CITY-NEAR OR349 PROVIDENCE ST VINCENT MEDICAL CTR-PORTLA 4,033 FTE
CITY-NEAR OR346 PROVIDENCE PORTLAND MEDICAL CTR-PORTLAND 3,684 FTE
CITY-NEAR 2252-00000530 3,498 FTE
NAT-TCR Molly Maid of Northern Brevard County 12.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Texas City Warehouse ENA7 12.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Concrete Specialties Company-Franklin Park 12.0 TCR
NAT-TCR the Melanson company, inc 12.0 TCR
NAT-SIZE Devon Energy Corportation - Crane 23 FTE
NAT-SIZE Residence inn 23 FTE
NAT-SIZE Hartzell Hardwoods Inc. - Kirksville 23 FTE
NAT-SIZE Icon Structures, Inc. 23 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: 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.