Fencing contractors (except electronic containment fencing for pets) · California

Wolverine Fence Company, Inc.

La Habra, CA · ~34 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
3.6
Avg TCR
2.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Wolverine Fence Company, Inc. runs at 128% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Fencing contractors (except electronic containment fencing for pets) workplace, earning a grade D.

Wolverine Fence Company, Inc.: 3.6 TCR = 128% of Fencing contractors (except electronic containment fencing for pets) BLS 2.8 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Wolverine Fence Company, Inc. safety composite

Wolverine Fence Company, Inc. scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 73% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 32%), 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

51/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 3.57 per 100 workers

Safer than 32% of industry peers

DART rate
C 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 73% 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

−5.7

2017→2019

Wolverine Fence Company, Inc. injury rate improved

Wolverine Fence Company, Inc.'s TCR fell 5.7 from 5.7 in 2017 to 0.0 in 2019. Peak filing year was 2017 at 5.7 TCR. In 2019, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=5.7 · 2018=5.0 · 2019=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 238990 · La Habra, CA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 3.6 · 128% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #90/171
  • PHOTO York Scaffold Equipm…
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 4 inj
  • SIZE ~34 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: York Scaffold Equipment Corp (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Wolverine Fence Company, Inc. in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Wolverine Fence Company, Inc. averages 3.6 TCR (128% of the Fencing contractors (except electronic containment fencing for pets) BLS benchmark).

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

Wolverine Fence Company, Inc. TCR series: 2017=5.7 · 2018=5 · 2019=0 · BLS 2.8

Where Wolverine Fence Company, Inc. falls in its industry

1,634 Fencing contractors (except el establishments

Safer than 32% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #90 safest of 171 Fencing contractors (except el employers in California.

Wolverine Fence Company, Inc. (34 employees, TCR 3.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 52 employees and a TCR of 1.9 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 0246810 Average employees Total Case Rate Wolverine Fence Company, Inc.
Wolverine Fence Company, Inc. (34 employees, TCR 3.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 52 employees and a TCR of 1.9

Wolverine Fence Company, Inc. has fewer employees than the Fencing contractors (except electronic c median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.9. 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
2019 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2018 5.0 0.0 2 0 0
2017 5.7 0.0 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

238990 · CA · La Habra

1,634 Fencing contractors (except electronic containment fencing for pets) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 57 employers in La Habra, CA · 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 York Scaffold Equipment Corp 3.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR The Pool Company Inc. 3.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Apache Concrete Cutting, Inc. 3.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Beyel Brothers Headquarters 3.6 TCR
STATE-SIZE Ardent Mills Yuba City 34 FTE
STATE-SIZE Filice Farms, L.P. 34 FTE
STATE-SIZE Alexander Ranch, Inc. 34 FTE
STATE-SIZE MFarms 34 FTE
CITY-NEAR 86170B01 CVS PHARMACY, INC. 1,057 FTE
CITY-NEAR 6795-86170B0199 1,031 FTE
CITY-NEAR Ono-038 910 FTE
CITY-NEAR 0777 - LA HABRA CA WHSE 332 FTE
NAT-TCR Kerr Lake Nursing and Rehabilitation 3.6 TCR
NAT-TCR ACA Industries Inc 3.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Federal-Mogul Powertrain 3.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Anderson County-Dcbs 3.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE Honda East Liberty Plant (Marysville) 34 FTE
NAT-SIZE Francis-Schulze Company 34 FTE
NAT-SIZE Main 34 FTE
NAT-SIZE Pottle's Transportation, LLC Kutztown Terminal 34 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: 2019, 2018, 2017. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.