Architectural block, concrete (e.g., fluted, ground face, screen, slump, split), manufacturing · New York

Barnes & Cone Inc.

Syracuse, NY · ~31 workers · 9 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
6.2
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Barnes & Cone Inc. runs at 187% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Architectural block, concrete (e.g., fluted, ground face, screen, slump, split), manufacturing workplace, earning a grade D.

Barnes & Cone Inc.: 6.2 TCR = 187% of Architectural block, concrete (e.g., fluted, ground face, screen, slump, split), manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 9y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Barnes & Cone Inc. safety composite

Barnes & Cone Inc. scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 17%), 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

31/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 6.17 per 100 workers

Safer than 31% of industry peers

DART rate
F 5.83 per 100 workers

Safer than 17% 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%).

Rising injury rate

Barnes & Cone Inc.: 10.4 → 14.6 TCR

Peak year 2024 @ 14.6 TCR · DART/TCR 0.94× in 2024

Barnes & Cone Inc.'s TCR rose 4.2 from 10.4 in 2016 to 14.6 in 2024. In 2024, DART was 0.94× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 327331 · Syracuse, NY ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 6.2 · 187% of ind

  • DART 5.8 DART
  • RANK #7/8
  • PHOTO TEXAS BEST BLOCK - S…
  • BOOK 9y book
  • INJ 14 inj
  • SIZE ~31 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: TEXAS BEST BLOCK - SATB (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Barnes & Cone Inc. in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Barnes & Cone Inc. averages 6.2 TCR (187% of the Architectural block, concrete (e.g., fluted, ground face, screen, slump, split), manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Barnes & Cone Inc. TCR series: 2016=10.4 · 2017=0 · 2018=0 · 2019=3 · 2020=11.7 · 2021=3.1 · 2022=6.6 · 2023=6.2 · 2024=14.6 · BLS 3.3

Where Barnes & Cone Inc. falls in its industry

321 Architectural block, concrete establishments

Safer than 31% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.1.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to New York alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #7 safest of 8 Architectural block, concrete employers in New York.

Barnes & Cone Inc. (31 employees, TCR 6.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 42 employees and a TCR of 4.1 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 0100200300 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Barnes & Cone Inc.
Barnes & Cone Inc. (31 employees, TCR 6.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 42 employees and a TCR of 4.1

Barnes & Cone Inc. has fewer employees than the Architectural block, concrete (e.g., flu median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 4.1. 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 14.6 5.8 4 1 0
2023 6.2 6.2 2 0 0
2022 6.6 6.6 2 0 0
2021 3.1 3.1 1 0 0
2020 11.7 5.8 2 2 0
2019 3.0 3.0 1 0 0
2018 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2017 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2016 10.4 5.2 2 2 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

327331 · NY · Syracuse

321 Architectural block, concrete (e.g., fluted, ground face, screen, slump, split), manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 21,008 rated employers in New York with headcount on file · 436 employers in Syracuse, NY · 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 TEXAS BEST BLOCK - SATB 6.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Midwest Block - SGFB 6.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR General Shale Piney Flats 6.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Paver Plant 6.1 TCR
STATE-SIZE Eldred Brothers / Main Farm 31 FTE
STATE-SIZE Fox Fruit Farms LLC 31 FTE
STATE-SIZE ASC Kirkwood 31 FTE
STATE-SIZE NAES : OM - New Athens 31 FTE
CITY-NEAR St. Joseph's Health 4,299 FTE
CITY-NEAR SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY 3,970 FTE
CITY-NEAR St. Joseph's Hospital Health Center 3,720 FTE
CITY-NEAR St. Joseph's Hospital Health Center-SJH-NY 2,803 FTE
NAT-TCR LP Hodgenville, LLC- Sunrise Manor 6.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Hampton Inn & Suites Mason City 6.2 TCR
NAT-TCR BNG Phoebe, LLC 6.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Grundfest and Klaus Gin, Inc. 6.2 TCR
NAT-SIZE Maxwell Air Force Commissary 31 FTE
NAT-SIZE Lundy Construction 31 FTE
NAT-SIZE Selma Store #2205 31 FTE
NAT-SIZE Florkowski Builders, Inc. 31 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, 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.