Utility line (i.e., communication, electric power), construction · North Carolina

Haynes Electric Utility

Asheville, NC · ~128 workers · 9 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
4.2
Avg TCR
2.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Haynes Electric Utility runs at 150% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Utility line (i.e., communication, electric power), construction workplace, earning a grade D.

Haynes Electric Utility: 4.2 TCR = 150% of Utility line (i.e., communication, electric power), construction BLS 2.8 · 9y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Haynes Electric Utility safety composite

Haynes Electric Utility scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 52% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 26%), 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

35/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 4.19 per 100 workers

Safer than 26% of industry peers

DART rate
F 1.57 per 100 workers

Safer than 33% 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%).

TCR Δ

−4.4

2016→2024

Haynes Electric Utility injury rate improved

Haynes Electric Utility's TCR fell 4.4 from 7.6 in 2016 to 3.1 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2016 at 7.6 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.37× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=7.6 · 2017=6.7 · 2018=4.3 · 2019=2.7 · 2020=1.9 · 2021=6.2 · 2022=4.3 · 2023=0.9 · 2024=3.1

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 237130 · Asheville, NC ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade D · TCR 4.2 · 150% of ind

  • DART 1.6 DART
  • RANK #65/79
  • PHOTO Lewistown
  • BOOK 9y book
  • INJ 51 inj
  • SIZE ~128 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Lewistown (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Haynes Electric Utility in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Haynes Electric Utility averages 4.2 TCR (150% of the Utility line (i.e., communication, electric power), construction BLS benchmark).

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

Haynes Electric Utility TCR series: 2016=7.6 · 2017=6.7 · 2018=4.3 · 2019=2.7 · 2020=1.9 · 2021=6.2 · 2022=4.3 · 2023=0.9 · 2024=3.1 · BLS 2.8

Where Haynes Electric Utility falls in its industry

1,605 Utility line (i.e., communicat establishments

Safer than 26% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.0.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to North Carolina alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #65 safest of 79 Utility line (i.e., communicat employers in North Carolina.

Haynes Electric Utility (128 employees, TCR 4.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 74 employees and a TCR of 2.0 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 0100200300400500 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Haynes Electric Utility
Haynes Electric Utility (128 employees, TCR 4.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 74 employees and a TCR of 2.0

Haynes Electric Utility has more employees than the Utility line (i.e., communication, elect median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.0. 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 3.1 1.6 4 0 0
2023 0.9 0.9 1 0 0
2022 4.3 1.1 2 2 0
2021 6.2 1.0 6 0 0
2020 1.9 0.9 2 0 0
2019 2.7 1.4 4 0 0
2018 4.3 1.8 7 0 0
2017 6.7 2.8 12 0 0
2016 7.6 2.3 13 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

237130 · NC · Asheville

1,605 Utility line (i.e., communication, electric power), construction employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,981 rated employers in North Carolina with headcount on file · 290 employers in Asheville, NC · 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 Lewistown 4.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Design 1 of Eden Prairie, LLC 4.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR TCC-Clearwater 4.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Housley Communications, Inc. 4.2 TCR
STATE-SIZE Bridgestone Wilson 128 FTE
STATE-SIZE PBV-Winston Ops 128 FTE
STATE-SIZE Qualicaps, Inc. 128 FTE
STATE-SIZE Repackaging 128 FTE
CITY-NEAR Mission Hospital; MH Hospital Manager, LLC 8,097 FTE
CITY-NEAR Biltmore Workforce Management 1,894 FTE
CITY-NEAR Mission Medical Associates 1,336 FTE
CITY-NEAR Community Care Partners 1,018 FTE
NAT-TCR CLARO / PRT - Cayey CO 4.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Lewiston 4.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Koppers Florence 4.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Legend at Rivendell 4.2 TCR
NAT-SIZE Willow Brook Christian Home 128 FTE
NAT-SIZE Kamco Supply Corp 128 FTE
NAT-SIZE Colder's, Inc. 128 FTE
NAT-SIZE The STI Group Fab, Vidor 128 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.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.