Placing and tying reinforcing rod at a construction site · Washington

CHG Building Systems, Inc.

Seattle, WA · ~59 workers · 5 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
8.1
Avg TCR
2.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

CHG Building Systems, Inc. runs at 291% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Placing and tying reinforcing rod at a construction site workplace, earning a grade F.

CHG Building Systems, Inc.: 8.1 TCR = 291% of Placing and tying reinforcing rod at a construction site BLS 2.8 · 5y Form 300A (see methodology below)

CHG Building Systems, Inc. safety composite

CHG Building Systems, Inc. scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 80% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 19%), 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

49/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 8.14 per 100 workers

Safer than 19% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 80% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 53% 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

−1.2

2019→2023

CHG Building Systems, Inc. injury rate improved

CHG Building Systems, Inc.'s TCR fell 1.2 from 3.7 in 2019 to 2.5 in 2023. Peak filing year was 2021 at 12.4 TCR. In 2023, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2019=3.7 · 2020=10.9 · 2021=12.4 · 2022=11.2 · 2023=2.5

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 238120 · Seattle, WA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 8.1 · 291% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #6/19
  • PHOTO OBSE California
  • BOOK 5y book
  • INJ 20 inj
  • SIZE ~59 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: OBSE California (0.0 TCR gap)

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

CHG Building Systems, Inc. in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows CHG Building Systems, Inc. averages 8.1 TCR (291% of the Placing and tying reinforcing rod at a construction site BLS benchmark).

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

CHG Building Systems, Inc. TCR series: 2019=3.7 · 2020=10.9 · 2021=12.4 · 2022=11.2 · 2023=2.5 · BLS 2.8

Where CHG Building Systems, Inc. falls in its industry

705 Placing and tying reinforcing establishments

Safer than 19% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Washington alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #6 safest of 19 Placing and tying reinforcing employers in Washington.

CHG Building Systems, Inc. (59 employees, TCR 8.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 58 employees and a TCR of 3.9 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 050100150200250 0246810 Average employees Total Case Rate CHG Building Systems, Inc.
CHG Building Systems, Inc. (59 employees, TCR 8.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 58 employees and a TCR of 3.9

CHG Building Systems, Inc. has more employees than the Placing and tying reinforcing rod at a c median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.9. 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
2023 2.5 0.0 1 0 0
2022 11.2 8.9 5 0 0
2021 12.4 4.1 6 0 0
2020 10.9 10.9 6 0 0
2019 3.7 3.7 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

238120 · WA · Seattle

705 Placing and tying reinforcing rod at a construction site employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 10,147 rated employers in Washington with headcount on file · 1,279 employers in Seattle, WA · 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 OBSE California 8.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Jans Corporation 8.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR RSM Development, Inc. 8.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Mid Cities Erectors LLC 8.1 TCR
STATE-SIZE John I. Haas, Inc. - Warehouse Division 59 FTE
STATE-SIZE Nationwide Solar 59 FTE
STATE-SIZE Precision Concrete LLC 59 FTE
STATE-SIZE BrandSafway Services, LLC - Pasco Branch 59 FTE
CITY-NEAR UW Seattle 32,378 FTE
CITY-NEAR The United States of America 25,000 FTE
CITY-NEAR Starz Entertainment 25,000 FTE
CITY-NEAR UW Medical Center - Montlake and NW 11,307 FTE
NAT-TCR Metro- Oregon Convention Center 8.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Park Vista - The Legacy 8.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Philadelphia, Pa #00215 8.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Salem, or #00045 8.1 TCR
NAT-SIZE New Way Day Services Inc. 59 FTE
NAT-SIZE Thermatron Engineering Inc 59 FTE
NAT-SIZE Windchime of Chico 59 FTE
NAT-SIZE Commonwealth Senior Living at Oak Ridge 59 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: 2023, 2022, 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.