Boxes, corrugated and solid fiber, made from purchased paper or paperboard · Indiana

Packaging Logic, Inc.

La Porte, IN · ~37 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
1.9
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Packaging Logic, Inc. runs at 59% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical Boxes, corrugated and solid fiber, made from purchased paper or paperboard workplace, earning a grade B.

Packaging Logic, Inc.: 1.9 TCR = 59% of Boxes, corrugated and solid fiber, made from purchased paper or paperboard BLS 3.3 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Packaging Logic, Inc. safety composite

Packaging Logic, Inc. scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 83% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 50%), 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

66/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 1.95 per 100 workers

Safer than 60% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 83% 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%).

TCR Δ

−2.9

2016→2022

Packaging Logic, Inc. injury rate improved

Packaging Logic, Inc.'s TCR fell 2.9 from 2.9 in 2016 to 0.0 in 2022. Peak filing year was 2017 at 5.2 TCR. In 2022, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=2.9 · 2017=5.2 · 2018=2.8 · 2019=0.0 · 2020=0.0 · 2021=2.8 · 2022=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 322211 · La Porte, IN AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade B · TCR 1.9 · 59% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #30/67
  • PHOTO Santa Fe Spring Cent…
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 5 inj
  • SIZE ~37 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Santa Fe Spring Central (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Packaging Logic, Inc. in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Packaging Logic, Inc. averages 1.9 TCR (59% of the Boxes, corrugated and solid fiber, made from purchased paper or paperboard BLS benchmark).

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

Packaging Logic, Inc. TCR series: 2016=2.9 · 2017=5.2 · 2018=2.8 · 2019=0 · 2020=0 · 2021=2.8 · 2022=0 · BLS 3.3

Where Packaging Logic, Inc. falls in its industry

1,338 Boxes, corrugated and solid fi establishments

Safer than 60% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.4.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Indiana alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #30 safest of 67 Boxes, corrugated and solid fi employers in Indiana.

Packaging Logic, Inc. (37 employees, TCR 1.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 102 employees and a TCR of 2.4 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 0100200300 0123456 Average employees Total Case Rate Packaging Logic, Inc.
Packaging Logic, Inc. (37 employees, TCR 1.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 102 employees and a TCR of 2.4

Packaging Logic, Inc. has fewer employees than the Boxes, corrugated and solid fiber, made median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.4. 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
2022 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2021 2.8 2.8 1 0 0
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2019 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2018 2.8 0.0 1 0 0
2017 5.2 5.2 2 0 0
2016 2.9 0.0 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

322211 · IN · La Porte

1,338 Boxes, corrugated and solid fiber, made from purchased paper or paperboard employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 12,750 rated employers in Indiana with headcount on file · 45 employers in La Porte, IN · 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 Fe Spring Central 1.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Jamestown Container Cleveland, Inc. 2.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR Elkhart (00110) Brown Box Welch Packaging 2.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR ATLANTA, GA 2.0 TCR
STATE-SIZE Utopian Plants Indiana, LLC 37 FTE
STATE-SIZE Cokenergy 37 FTE
STATE-SIZE CORE Construction Indiana, LLC 37 FTE
STATE-SIZE 1038 - BELFOR Indianapolis IN 37 FTE
CITY-NEAR La Porte Hospital Company LLC 741 FTE
CITY-NEAR Howmet - La Porte Castings 716 FTE
CITY-NEAR WM 2276 316 FTE
CITY-NEAR Holsum of Fort Wayne, INc 306 FTE
NAT-TCR 428 - Elmhurst 1.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Bettcher 1.9 TCR
NAT-TCR 555 - Pasadena 1.9 TCR
NAT-TCR 706 - Brier Creek 1.9 TCR
NAT-SIZE 1970-03534B 37 FTE
NAT-SIZE Betz Pattern 37 FTE
NAT-SIZE Packinghouse 37 FTE
NAT-SIZE Brock and Sons Inc. 37 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, 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.