Cores (i.e., all-fiber, nonfiber ends of any material), fiber, made from purchased paperboard · Georgia

Austell Tube and Core

Austell, GA · ~87 workers · 6 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
2.2
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Austell Tube and Core runs at 68% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical Cores (i.e., all-fiber, nonfiber ends of any material), fiber, made from purchased paperboard workplace, earning a grade B.

Austell Tube and Core: 2.2 TCR = 68% of Cores (i.e., all-fiber, nonfiber ends of any material), fiber, made from purchased paperboard BLS 3.3 · 6y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Austell Tube and Core safety composite

Austell Tube and Core scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 85% 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).

C

71/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 2.24 per 100 workers

Safer than 72% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 85% 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%).

TCR Δ

−3.1

2016→2021

Austell Tube and Core injury rate improved

Austell Tube and Core's TCR fell 3.1 from 4.1 in 2016 to 1.1 in 2021. Peak filing year was 2019 at 4.6 TCR. In 2021, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=4.1 · 2017=2.6 · 2018=1.1 · 2019=4.6 · 2020=0.0 · 2021=1.1

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 322219 · Austell, GA AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade B · TCR 2.2 · 68% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #4/8
  • PHOTO Easton
  • BOOK 6y book
  • INJ 14 inj
  • SIZE ~87 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Easton (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Austell Tube and Core in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Austell Tube and Core averages 2.2 TCR (68% of the Cores (i.e., all-fiber, nonfiber ends of any material), fiber, made from purchased paperboard BLS benchmark).

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

Austell Tube and Core TCR series: 2016=4.1 · 2017=2.6 · 2018=1.1 · 2019=4.6 · 2020=0 · 2021=1.1 · BLS 3.3

Where Austell Tube and Core falls in its industry

140 Cores (i.e., all-fiber, nonfib establishments

Safer than 72% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.6.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Georgia alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #4 safest of 8 Cores (i.e., all-fiber, nonfib employers in Georgia.

Austell Tube and Core (87 employees, TCR 2.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 67 employees and a TCR of 3.6 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 0200400600 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Austell Tube and Core
Austell Tube and Core (87 employees, TCR 2.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 67 employees and a TCR of 3.6

Austell Tube and Core has more employees than the Cores (i.e., all-fiber, nonfiber ends of median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.6. 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 1.1 0.0 1 0 0
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2019 4.6 2.3 4 0 0
2018 1.1 1.1 1 0 0
2017 2.6 1.7 3 0 0
2016 4.1 4.1 5 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

322219 · GA · Austell

140 Cores (i.e., all-fiber, nonfiber ends of any material), fiber, made from purchased paperboard employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 14,941 rated employers in Georgia with headcount on file · 113 employers in Austell, GA · 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 Easton 2.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR GREIF (IP SALT LAKE CITY) 2.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Solo Cup Company Chicago 2.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Huhtamaki Fulton 2.3 TCR
STATE-SIZE Reidsville 87 FTE
STATE-SIZE Gwinnett District Jackson EMC 87 FTE
STATE-SIZE Flint River Mills- Truck Department 87 FTE
STATE-SIZE Flint River Mills- Mill Department 87 FTE
CITY-NEAR WellStar Cobb Hospital 2,856 FTE
CITY-NEAR Six Flags Over Georgia 1,044 FTE
CITY-NEAR ATLANTA OPERA WAREHOUSE 863 FTE
CITY-NEAR Plateau Excavation, Inc 762 FTE
NAT-TCR Aldrich Chemical Co., LLC - Sheboygan 2.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Maryville College 2.2 TCR
NAT-TCR ON20 2.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Big Lots Store #4683 San Pablo, CA 2.2 TCR
NAT-SIZE Graduate Ann Arbor 87 FTE
NAT-SIZE SECON Consolidated 87 FTE
NAT-SIZE Rinker LASCP 87 FTE
NAT-SIZE ILJIN 87 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, 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.