Intercity bus line operation · Texas

Greyhound Lines, Inc. San Antonio

San Antonio, TX · ~45 workers · 4 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
1.0
Avg TCR
4.5
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Greyhound Lines, Inc. San Antonio runs at 22% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Intercity bus line operation workplace, earning a grade A.

Greyhound Lines, Inc. San Antonio: 1.0 TCR = 22% of Intercity bus line operation BLS 4.5 · 4y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Greyhound Lines, Inc. San Antonio safety composite

Greyhound Lines, Inc. San Antonio scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 93% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 51%), 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).

C

73/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
A 1 per 100 workers

Safer than 93% of industry peers

DART rate
C 2 per 100 workers

Safer than 67% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 51% 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

Greyhound Lines, Inc. San Antonio: 0.0 → 2.0 TCR

Peak year 2021 @ 2.0 TCR · DART/TCR 2× in 2024

Greyhound Lines, Inc. San Antonio's TCR rose 2.0 from 0.0 in 2019 to 2.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2021 at 2.0 TCR. In 2024, DART was 2× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 485210 · San Antonio, TX AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade A · TCR 1.0 · 22% of ind

  • DART 2.0 DART
  • RANK #1/8
  • PHOTO NYC Port Authority
  • BOOK 4y book
  • INJ 2 inj
  • SIZE ~45 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: NYC Port Authority (0.1 TCR gap)

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

Greyhound Lines, Inc. San Antonio in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Greyhound Lines, Inc. San Antonio averages 1.0 TCR (22% of the Intercity bus line operation BLS benchmark).

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

Greyhound Lines, Inc. San Antonio TCR series: 2019=0 · 2020=0 · 2021=2 · 2024=2 · BLS 4.5

Where Greyhound Lines, Inc. San Antonio falls in its industry

161 Intercity bus line operation establishments

Safer than 93% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.4.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Texas alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #1 safest of 8 Intercity bus line operation employers in Texas.

Greyhound Lines, Inc. San Antonio (45 employees, TCR 1.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 65 employees and a TCR of 4.4 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 05001,0001,500 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Greyhound Lines, Inc. San Antonio
Greyhound Lines, Inc. San Antonio (45 employees, TCR 1.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 65 employees and a TCR of 4.4

Greyhound Lines, Inc. San Antonio has fewer employees than the Intercity bus line operation median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 4.4. 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 2.0 2.0 1 0 0
2021 2.0 2.0 1 0 0
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2019 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

485210 · TX · San Antonio

161 Intercity bus line operation employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 38,394 rated employers in Texas with headcount on file · 2,207 employers in San Antonio, 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 NYC Port Authority 1.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR 2453-00060388-0013 0.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Southeastern Stages 1.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR 201_262 0.9 TCR
STATE-SIZE Coronado Feeders 45 FTE
STATE-SIZE FireBird Energy LLC 45 FTE
STATE-SIZE Admiral Permian Resources 45 FTE
STATE-SIZE Cougar Completion Services LP 45 FTE
CITY-NEAR Bexar County Hospital District 8,703 FTE
CITY-NEAR Legend Oaks Health & Rehabilitation West San Antonio 6,953 FTE
CITY-NEAR ISS Facility Services Inc. 6,177 FTE
CITY-NEAR Buena Vida of San Antonio 5,262 FTE
NAT-TCR Carroll Construction Supply - Hamilton 1.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Himawari Saipan, Inc. 1.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Comfort Systems USA Southeast. Pensacola Div 10 1.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Thoma Electric 1.0 TCR
NAT-SIZE Kirkwood Material Supply #688 45 FTE
NAT-SIZE 1ATL Sun Chemical 45 FTE
NAT-SIZE Pomp's Tire - Omaha 142 45 FTE
NAT-SIZE Don Wood Plumbing Company, Inc. 45 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, 2021, 2020, 2019. 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.