Railway construction (e.g., interlocker, roadbed, signal, track) · Illinois

103899 - CTA MID-CON JOC Addison DF

Chicago, IL · ~54 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
0.0
Avg TCR
2.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

103899 - CTA MID-CON JOC Addison DF runs at 0% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Railway construction (e.g., interlocker, roadbed, signal, track) workplace, earning a grade C.

103899 - CTA MID-CON JOC Addison DF: 0.0 TCR = 0% of Railway construction (e.g., interlocker, roadbed, signal, track) BLS 2.8 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

103899 - CTA MID-CON JOC Addison DF safety composite

103899 - CTA MID-CON JOC Addison DF scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 100% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 52%), 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

79/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
A 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 100% of industry peers

DART rate
C 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 73% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 52% 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%).

103899 - CTA MID-CON JOC Addison DF held a steady TCR band

103899 - CTA MID-CON JOC Addison DF's TCR held near 0.0 from 0.0 in 2019 to 0.0 in 2021. Peak filing year was 2019 at 0.0 TCR.

2019=0.0 · 2020=0.0 · 2021=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 237990 · Chicago, IL AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade C · TCR 0.0 · 0% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #0/23
  • PHOTO The Goettle Company
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 0 inj
  • SIZE ~54 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: The Goettle Company (0.1 TCR gap)

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

103899 - CTA MID-CON JOC Addison DF in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows 103899 - CTA MID-CON JOC Addison DF averages 0.0 TCR (0% of the Railway construction (e.g., interlocker, roadbed, signal, track) BLS benchmark).

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

103899 - CTA MID-CON JOC Addison DF TCR series: 2019=0 · 2020=0 · 2021=0 · BLS 2.8

Where 103899 - CTA MID-CON JOC Addison DF falls in its industry

932 Railway construction (e.g., in establishments

Safer than 100% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Illinois alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #0 safest of 23 Railway construction (e.g., in employers in Illinois.

103899 - CTA MID-CON JOC Addison DF (54 employees, TCR 0.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 69 employees and a TCR of 1.5 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 05001,0001,500 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate 103899 - CTA MID-CON JOC Addison DF
103899 - CTA MID-CON JOC Addison DF (54 employees, TCR 0.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 69 employees and a TCR of 1.5

103899 - CTA MID-CON JOC Addison DF has fewer employees than the Railway construction (e.g., interlocker, median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.5. 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
2021 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2019 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

237990 · IL · Chicago

932 Railway construction (e.g., interlocker, roadbed, signal, track) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 22,804 rated employers in Illinois with headcount on file · 2,934 employers in Chicago, IL · 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 The Goettle Company 0.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Turner at Sasol North America Westlake LA 0.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Olin Corporation Freeport TX 0.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Standard Constructors, Inc. 0.1 TCR
STATE-SIZE Illinois Crop Improvement Association, Inc. 54 FTE
STATE-SIZE Illinois Electric Cooperative 54 FTE
STATE-SIZE Greenlink Energy Solutions, Inc. 54 FTE
STATE-SIZE POINTCORE Construction, LLC 54 FTE
CITY-NEAR Chicago Public Schools 49,500 FTE
CITY-NEAR Chicago/Corporate 18,831 FTE
CITY-NEAR University of Illinois at Chicago 13,092 FTE
CITY-NEAR University Health Service UIC UIC Campus 12,732 FTE
NAT-TCR Gap Inc. - Corporate 0.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Hampton Inn & Suites 0.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Atlanta - Phipps 0.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Meijer 208 0.0 TCR
NAT-SIZE Integer Telecom Dallas Office 54 FTE
NAT-SIZE LAX - Maintenance 54 FTE
NAT-SIZE NM Amb - Brainerd 54 FTE
NAT-SIZE Central Freight Lines Inc. - Greensboro 54 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: 2021, 2020, 2019. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.