Poultry slaughtering, dressing, and packing · Mississippi

Peco Foods- Fulton Canton Ms

Canton, MS · ~890 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
1.2
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Peco Foods- Fulton Canton Ms runs at 37% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Poultry slaughtering, dressing, and packing workplace, earning a grade A.

Peco Foods- Fulton Canton Ms: 1.2 TCR = 37% of Poultry slaughtering, dressing, and packing BLS 3.3 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Peco Foods- Fulton Canton Ms safety composite

Peco Foods- Fulton Canton Ms scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 93% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 54%), 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).

B

78/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
A 1.21 per 100 workers

Safer than 93% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0.56 per 100 workers

Safer than 78% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 54% 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%).

Peco Foods- Fulton Canton Ms held a steady TCR band

Peco Foods- Fulton Canton Ms's TCR held near 0.1 from 1.1 in 2016 to 1.3 in 2022. Peak filing year was 2019 at 1.9 TCR. In 2022, DART was 0.46× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=1.1 · 2017=1.6 · 2018=1.1 · 2019=1.9 · 2020=1.0 · 2021=0.5 · 2022=1.3

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 311615 · Canton, MS AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade A · TCR 1.2 · 37% of ind

  • DART 0.6 DART
  • RANK #1/41
  • PHOTO Pilgrims Nacogdoches…
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 66 inj
  • SIZE ~890 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Pilgrims Nacogdoches Complex (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Peco Foods- Fulton Canton Ms in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Peco Foods- Fulton Canton Ms averages 1.2 TCR (37% of the Poultry slaughtering, dressing, and packing BLS benchmark).

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

Peco Foods- Fulton Canton Ms TCR series: 2016=1.1 · 2017=1.6 · 2018=1.1 · 2019=1.9 · 2020=1 · 2021=0.5 · 2022=1.3 · BLS 3.3

Where Peco Foods- Fulton Canton Ms falls in its industry

509 Poultry slaughtering, dressing establishments

Safer than 93% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Mississippi alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #1 safest of 41 Poultry slaughtering, dressing employers in Mississippi.

Peco Foods- Fulton Canton Ms (890 employees, TCR 1.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 619 employees and a TCR of 3.5 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 05001,0001,5002,000 0510152025 Average employees Total Case Rate Peco Foods- Fulton Canton Ms
Peco Foods- Fulton Canton Ms (890 employees, TCR 1.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 619 employees and a TCR of 3.5

Peco Foods- Fulton Canton Ms has more employees than the Poultry slaughtering, dressing, and pack median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.5. 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 1.3 0.6 5 4 0
2021 0.5 0.2 4 0 0
2020 1.0 0.7 8 3 0
2019 1.9 1.2 18 1 0
2018 1.1 1.0 10 1 0
2017 1.6 0.9 13 3 0
2016 1.1 0.8 8 2 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

311615 · MS · Canton

509 Poultry slaughtering, dressing, and packing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 4,083 rated employers in Mississippi with headcount on file · 38 employers in Canton, MS · 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 Pilgrims Nacogdoches Complex 1.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Case Farms Goldsboro Processing Plant 1.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Shenandoah Valley Organic 1.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Case Farms morganton processing 1.2 TCR
STATE-SIZE WM 6011 884 FTE
STATE-SIZE Franklin Corporation 879 FTE
STATE-SIZE Steel Dynamics, Inc. - Flat Roll Group - Columbus 905 FTE
STATE-SIZE Ashley Furniture Ind. LLC Ripley Facility 865 FTE
CITY-NEAR Canton Vehicle Assembly 4,703 FTE
CITY-NEAR Amazon.com Services LLC - JAN1 2,034 FTE
CITY-NEAR Canton Distribution Center 376 FTE
CITY-NEAR 30661 - Nissan Canton 375 FTE
NAT-TCR Sodexo at Imf Penn Ave Janitorial 1.2 TCR
NAT-TCR 1047 Charleston 1.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Sodexo at Brandeis Univ Einsteins 1.2 TCR
NAT-TCR HMI Utilities, Richmond, VA 1.2 TCR
NAT-SIZE Zeiders Enterprises Inc. 890 FTE
NAT-SIZE Sussex Campus 890 FTE
NAT-SIZE ADB Companies, LLC 890 FTE
NAT-SIZE South Carolina Department of Public Safety - Highway Patrol 890 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.