Long-distance telephone carriers, wired · Texas

Grande Communications Austin

Austin, TX · ~81 workers · 5 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
2.8
Avg TCR
0.7
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Grande Communications Austin runs at 404% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Long-distance telephone carriers, wired workplace, earning a grade F.

Grande Communications Austin: 2.8 TCR = 404% of Long-distance telephone carriers, wired BLS 0.7 · 5y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Grande Communications Austin safety composite

Grande Communications Austin scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 20%), 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

32/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 2.83 per 100 workers

Safer than 31% of industry peers

DART rate
F 2.61 per 100 workers

Safer than 20% 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%).

Grande Communications Austin held a steady TCR band

Grande Communications Austin's TCR held near 0.3 from 2.3 in 2016 to 2.6 in 2020. Peak filing year was 2017 at 5.5 TCR. In 2020, DART was 0.92× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=2.3 · 2017=5.5 · 2018=2.4 · 2019=1.3 · 2020=2.6

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 517110 · Austin, TX ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 2.8 · 404% of ind

  • DART 2.6 DART
  • RANK #53/61
  • PHOTO Santa Rosa Telephone…
  • BOOK 5y book
  • INJ 12 inj
  • SIZE ~81 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Santa Rosa Telephone Cooperative Inc. (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Grande Communications Austin in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Grande Communications Austin averages 2.8 TCR (404% of the Long-distance telephone carriers, wired BLS benchmark).

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

Grande Communications Austin TCR series: 2016=2.3 · 2017=5.5 · 2018=2.4 · 2019=1.3 · 2020=2.6 · BLS 0.7

Where Grande Communications Austin falls in its industry

537 Long-distance telephone carrie establishments

Safer than 31% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.3.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Texas alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #53 safest of 61 Long-distance telephone carrie employers in Texas.

Grande Communications Austin (81 employees, TCR 2.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 276 employees and a TCR of 1.3 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 01,0002,0003,000 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Grande Communications Austin
Grande Communications Austin (81 employees, TCR 2.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 276 employees and a TCR of 1.3

Grande Communications Austin has fewer employees than the Long-distance telephone carriers, wired median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.3. 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
2020 2.6 2.6 2 0 0
2019 1.3 1.3 1 0 0
2018 2.4 2.4 2 0 0
2017 5.5 5.5 5 0 0
2016 2.3 1.1 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

517110 · TX · Austin

537 Long-distance telephone carriers, wired employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 38,394 rated employers in Texas with headcount on file · 1,645 employers in Austin, 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 Santa Rosa Telephone Cooperative Inc. 2.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Wave Division Holdings, LLC-Port Angeles 2.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR CLARO / PRT - Centro Operaciones Guaynabo Esmeralda 2.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR CLARO / PRT - Centro Operaciones Cayey 2.9 TCR
STATE-SIZE Kraken Oil & Gas 81 FTE
STATE-SIZE Total Frac Solutions 81 FTE
STATE-SIZE ARLINGTON SERVICE CENTER 81 FTE
STATE-SIZE Karnes Electric Cooperative, Inc. 81 FTE
CITY-NEAR Ensign Services 11,325 FTE
CITY-NEAR NA-US-TX-Austin-Giga Texas 8,621 FTE
CITY-NEAR 6017-Loc: CORP LOC - US Austin 6,911 FTE
CITY-NEAR 6017-CORP LOC - USA UNITED STATES - AST 5,272 FTE
NAT-TCR Kendall Electric - EKDC 2.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Waterford Public Schools - Clark Lane Middle School 2.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Bally'S Atlantic City Hotel and Casino 2.8 TCR
NAT-TCR ABC Recovery Center, Inc. 2.8 TCR
NAT-SIZE Plant 26 81 FTE
NAT-SIZE Aegis Lodge at Totem Lake 81 FTE
NAT-SIZE Wolfeboro Bay Center 81 FTE
NAT-SIZE Plant 15 81 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: 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.