Line slash (i.e., rights of way) maintenance services · Texas

C. M. Joslin Co., Inc.

Conroe, TX · ~62 workers · 9 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
2.6
Avg TCR
4.5
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

C. M. Joslin Co., Inc. runs at 57% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical Line slash (i.e., rights of way) maintenance services workplace, earning a grade B.

C. M. Joslin Co., Inc.: 2.6 TCR = 57% of Line slash (i.e., rights of way) maintenance services BLS 4.5 · 9y Form 300A (see methodology below)

C. M. Joslin Co., Inc. safety composite

C. M. Joslin Co., Inc. scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 73% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 31%), 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

53/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 2.56 per 100 workers

Safer than 73% of industry peers

DART rate
F 4.54 per 100 workers

Safer than 31% 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%).

Rising injury rate

C. M. Joslin Co., Inc.: 0.0 → 4.5 TCR

Peak year 2018 @ 7.0 TCR · DART/TCR 1.77× in 2024

C. M. Joslin Co., Inc.'s TCR rose 4.5 from 0.0 in 2016 to 4.5 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2018 at 7.0 TCR. In 2024, DART was 1.77× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 561730 · Conroe, TX AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade B · TCR 2.6 · 57% of ind

  • DART 4.5 DART
  • RANK #66/187
  • PHOTO Enzo Caserta Landsca…
  • BOOK 9y book
  • INJ 16 inj
  • SIZE ~62 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Enzo Caserta Landscaping, Inc. (0.0 TCR gap)

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

C. M. Joslin Co., Inc. in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows C. M. Joslin Co., Inc. averages 2.6 TCR (57% of the Line slash (i.e., rights of way) maintenance services BLS benchmark).

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

C. M. Joslin Co., Inc. TCR series: 2016=0 · 2017=1.4 · 2018=7 · 2019=4 · 2020=2.8 · 2021=0 · 2022=3.3 · 2023=0 · 2024=4.5 · BLS 4.5

Where C. M. Joslin Co., Inc. falls in its industry

2,875 Line slash (i.e., rights of wa establishments

Safer than 73% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.7.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Texas alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #66 safest of 187 Line slash (i.e., rights of wa employers in Texas.

C. M. Joslin Co., Inc. (62 employees, TCR 2.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 53 employees and a TCR of 4.7 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 0200400600800 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate C. M. Joslin Co., Inc.
C. M. Joslin Co., Inc. (62 employees, TCR 2.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 53 employees and a TCR of 4.7

C. M. Joslin Co., Inc. has more employees than the Line slash (i.e., rights of way) mainten median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 4.7. 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 4.5 4.5 3 0 0
2023 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2022 3.3 3.3 2 0 0
2021 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2020 2.8 2.8 2 0 0
2019 4.0 4.0 3 0 0
2018 7.0 7.0 5 0 0
2017 1.4 1.4 1 0 0
2016 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

561730 · TX · Conroe

2,875 Line slash (i.e., rights of way) maintenance services employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 38,394 rated employers in Texas with headcount on file · 271 employers in Conroe, TX · 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 Enzo Caserta Landscaping, Inc. 2.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR The Rhoads Garden 2.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Weed Man Bloomington 2.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Certified Parts - Edgerton 2.6 TCR
STATE-SIZE EP Energy - Eagle Ford (Dilley) 62 FTE
STATE-SIZE Big Dog Drilling 62 FTE
STATE-SIZE Koserca Headquearters 62 FTE
STATE-SIZE Monahans 2790 South Wilma, Monahans, TX 79756 62 FTE
CITY-NEAR HCA Houston Healthcare Conroe 1,069 FTE
CITY-NEAR HCA Houston Conroe 1,015 FTE
CITY-NEAR Medivators - TX 621 FTE
CITY-NEAR Houston Eye Associates - CNR 616 FTE
NAT-TCR Crown Cork & Seal USA, Inc. - Hanover Plant 2.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Leeda Northeast, Inc Ashtabula 2.6 TCR
NAT-TCR The Fresh Market 107 2.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Heraeus Precious Metals Conshohocken LLC 2.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE Nelco Inc 62 FTE
NAT-SIZE Emerald Place 62 FTE
NAT-SIZE The Fresh Market 042 62 FTE
NAT-SIZE The Fresh Market 068 62 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.

Read our methodology - how this data is sourced, computed, and verified.

Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.