Beverages, soft drink (including artificially carbonated waters), manufacturing · Ohio

G&J Pepsi- Columbus

Columbus, OH · ~551 workers · 4 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
6.8
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

G&J Pepsi- Columbus runs at 207% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Beverages, soft drink (including artificially carbonated waters), manufacturing workplace, earning a grade F.

G&J Pepsi- Columbus: 6.8 TCR = 207% of Beverages, soft drink (including artificially carbonated waters), manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 4y Form 300A (see methodology below)

G&J Pepsi- Columbus safety composite

G&J Pepsi- Columbus scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 25%), 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

34/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 6.84 per 100 workers

Safer than 31% of industry peers

DART rate
F 5.87 per 100 workers

Safer than 25% 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

G&J Pepsi- Columbus: 5.1 → 8.3 TCR

Peak year 2021 @ 8.5 TCR · DART/TCR 0.86× in 2022

G&J Pepsi- Columbus's TCR rose 3.2 from 5.1 in 2019 to 8.3 in 2022. Peak filing year was 2021 at 8.5 TCR. In 2022, DART was 0.86× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 312111 · Columbus, OH ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade F · TCR 6.8 · 207% of ind

  • DART 5.9 DART
  • RANK #16/17
  • PHOTO shasta bevereages inc.
  • BOOK 4y book
  • INJ 149 inj
  • SIZE ~551 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: shasta bevereages inc. (0.0 TCR gap)

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

G&J Pepsi- Columbus in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows G&J Pepsi- Columbus averages 6.8 TCR (207% of the Beverages, soft drink (including artificially carbonated waters), manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

G&J Pepsi- Columbus TCR series: 2019=5.1 · 2020=5.5 · 2021=8.5 · 2022=8.3 · BLS 3.3

Where G&J Pepsi- Columbus falls in its industry

516 Beverages, soft drink (includi establishments

Safer than 31% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.8.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Ohio alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #16 safest of 17 Beverages, soft drink (includi employers in Ohio.

G&J Pepsi- Columbus (551 employees, TCR 6.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 149 employees and a TCR of 4.8 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 02004006008001,000 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate G&J Pepsi- Columbus
G&J Pepsi- Columbus (551 employees, TCR 6.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 149 employees and a TCR of 4.8

G&J Pepsi- Columbus has more employees than the Beverages, soft drink (including artific median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 4.8. 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
2022 8.3 5.9 48 0 0
2021 8.5 6.5 46 0 0
2020 5.5 2.6 28 1 0
2019 5.1 4.6 27 1 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

312111 · OH · Columbus

516 Beverages, soft drink (including artificially carbonated waters), manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 22,650 rated employers in Ohio with headcount on file · 1,500 employers in Columbus, OH · 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 shasta bevereages inc. 6.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Ozarks Coca-Cola/Dr Pepper Bottling Company - NWA 6.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Swire Coca-Cola of Glenwood Springs 6.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Swire Coca-Cola of Boise 6.9 TCR
STATE-SIZE GOJO Plaza 551 FTE
STATE-SIZE Shiseido Americas Distribution Center 551 FTE
STATE-SIZE Koinonia Homes, INC 551 FTE
STATE-SIZE Cleveland Sportservice, Inc. 551 FTE
CITY-NEAR Nationwide Children's Hospital 13,367 FTE
CITY-NEAR Nationwide Children's Hospital Main Campus 10,116 FTE
CITY-NEAR Riverside Methodist Hospital 9,759 FTE
CITY-NEAR North America Fulfillment Centers (FCs) : CMH1 5,057 FTE
NAT-TCR 5472-NAI-0034-0034-00730 6.8 TCR
NAT-TCR RPC Freeze Dry 6.8 TCR
NAT-TCR McCandless 6.8 TCR
NAT-TCR 142900-Kahului Po 6.8 TCR
NAT-SIZE 9277-650 Stowe 551 FTE
NAT-SIZE Miles Sand & Gravel Company 551 FTE
NAT-SIZE Navajo Express 551 FTE
NAT-SIZE Trend Offset Printing 551 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: 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.