Maintenance of rights-of-way and structures, railway · Kansas

L. G. Pike Construction CO Inc

Arkansas City, KS · ~46 workers · 5 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
5.2
Avg TCR
4.5
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

L. G. Pike Construction CO Inc runs at 116% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Maintenance of rights-of-way and structures, railway workplace, earning a grade C.

L. G. Pike Construction CO Inc: 5.2 TCR = 116% of Maintenance of rights-of-way and structures, railway BLS 4.5 · 5y Form 300A (see methodology below)

L. G. Pike Construction CO Inc safety composite

L. G. Pike Construction CO Inc scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 79% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (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).

D

48/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 5.24 per 100 workers

Safer than 20% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 79% 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%).

TCR Δ

−9.5

2020→2024

L. G. Pike Construction CO Inc injury rate improved

L. G. Pike Construction CO Inc's TCR fell 9.5 from 9.5 in 2020 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2020 at 9.5 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2020=9.5 · 2021=6.2 · 2022=5.4 · 2023=5.2 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 488210 · Arkansas City, KS ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade C · TCR 5.2 · 116% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #28/39
  • PHOTO Hobart
  • BOOK 5y book
  • INJ 14 inj
  • SIZE ~46 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Hobart (0.0 TCR gap)

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

L. G. Pike Construction CO Inc in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows L. G. Pike Construction CO Inc averages 5.2 TCR (116% of the Maintenance of rights-of-way and structures, railway BLS benchmark).

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

L. G. Pike Construction CO Inc TCR series: 2020=9.5 · 2021=6.2 · 2022=5.4 · 2023=5.2 · 2024=0 · BLS 4.5

Where L. G. Pike Construction CO Inc falls in its industry

409 Maintenance of rights-of-way a establishments

Safer than 20% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.8.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Kansas alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #28 safest of 39 Maintenance of rights-of-way a employers in Kansas.

L. G. Pike Construction CO Inc (46 employees, TCR 5.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 51 employees and a TCR of 2.8 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 0200400600800 02468 Average employees Total Case Rate L. G. Pike Construction CO Inc
L. G. Pike Construction CO Inc (46 employees, TCR 5.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 51 employees and a TCR of 2.8

L. G. Pike Construction CO Inc has fewer employees than the Maintenance of rights-of-way and structu median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.8. 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
2024 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2023 5.2 3.4 3 0 0
2022 5.4 0.0 3 0 0
2021 6.2 2.0 3 0 0
2020 9.5 9.5 5 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

488210 · KS · Arkansas City

409 Maintenance of rights-of-way and structures, railway employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 5,228 rated employers in Kansas with headcount on file · 32 employers in Arkansas City, KS · 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 Hobart 5.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Danville, IL Rail Shop 5.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Union Tank Car Company - El Dorado 5.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Hulcher Services Inc - Sauget 5.2 TCR
STATE-SIZE WCNOC 46 FTE
STATE-SIZE SVH HR Administration Building 46 FTE
STATE-SIZE Straub Construction Co Inc 46 FTE
STATE-SIZE Snodgrass & Sons Construction Co, Inc. 46 FTE
CITY-NEAR Creekstone Farms 1,167 FTE
CITY-NEAR Creekstone Farms Premium Beef LLC 1,049 FTE
CITY-NEAR Supply Chain : Strother, KS 775 FTE
CITY-NEAR Services : Strother, KS 663 FTE
NAT-TCR Basin Western, Inc. 5.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Flowers Bakery of Suwanee 5.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Hayesville House 5.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Angles Ductwork, LLC 5.2 TCR
NAT-SIZE Juniper Village at mount Joy 46 FTE
NAT-SIZE Generative Growth - 1107 S. Shannon 46 FTE
NAT-SIZE BYK USA Louisville 46 FTE
NAT-SIZE Holt Plumbing 46 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.