Courier services (i.e., intercity network) (except establishments operating under a universal service obligation) · California

Riverlane Logistic

Los Angeles, CA · ~84 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
13.8
Avg TCR
6.5
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Riverlane Logistic runs at 212% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Courier services (i.e., intercity network) (except establishments operating under a universal service obligation) workplace, earning a grade F.

Riverlane Logistic: 13.8 TCR = 212% of Courier services (i.e., intercity network) (except establishments operating under a universal service obligation) BLS 6.5 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Riverlane Logistic safety composite

Riverlane Logistic scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 18%), 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).

F

27/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 13.78 per 100 workers

Safer than 18% of industry peers

DART rate
F 11.34 per 100 workers

Safer than 20% 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

−2.0

2022→2024

Riverlane Logistic injury rate improved

Riverlane Logistic's TCR fell 2.0 from 13.3 in 2022 to 11.3 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2023 at 16.7 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.82× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2022=13.3 · 2023=16.7 · 2024=11.3

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 492110 · Los Angeles, CA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 13.8 · 212% of ind

  • DART 11.3 DART
  • RANK #481/710
  • PHOTO CASMR - SAN MARCOS
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 30 inj
  • SIZE ~84 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: CASMR - SAN MARCOS (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Riverlane Logistic in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Riverlane Logistic averages 13.8 TCR (212% of the Courier services (i.e., intercity network) (except establishments operating under a universal service obligation) BLS benchmark).

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

Riverlane Logistic TCR series: 2022=13.3 · 2023=16.7 · 2024=11.3 · BLS 6.5

Where Riverlane Logistic falls in its industry

6,679 Courier services (i.e., interc establishments

Safer than 18% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 8.0.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #481 safest of 710 Courier services (i.e., interc employers in California.

Riverlane Logistic (84 employees, TCR 13.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 113 employees and a TCR of 8.0 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 01,0002,0003,0004,000 0102030 Average employees Total Case Rate Riverlane Logistic
Riverlane Logistic (84 employees, TCR 13.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 113 employees and a TCR of 8.0

Riverlane Logistic has fewer employees than the Courier services (i.e., intercity networ median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 8.0. 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 11.3 11.3 10 0 0
2023 16.7 16.7 13 0 0
2022 13.3 11.4 7 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

492110 · CA · Los Angeles

6,679 Courier services (i.e., intercity network) (except establishments operating under a universal service obligation) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 2,064 employers in Los Angeles, CA · 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 CASMR - SAN MARCOS 13.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR 4.52E+17 13.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR ARTEX - TEXARKANA 13.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR FedEx 34800 GODDARD ROAD 13.8 TCR
STATE-SIZE montalvo farms 84 FTE
STATE-SIZE Hansen Custom Farming, LLC 84 FTE
STATE-SIZE Hilarides Dairy 84 FTE
STATE-SIZE McIntyre Labor Service, LLC. 84 FTE
CITY-NEAR Live Nation Worldwide, Inc. 50,317 FTE
CITY-NEAR UC Los Angeles 40,333 FTE
CITY-NEAR LADWP 11,717 FTE
CITY-NEAR Los Angeles Department of Water and Power 10,346 FTE
NAT-TCR Mt. Holly 13.8 TCR
NAT-TCR MADO Healthcare Douglas Park 13.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Weldaloy Products Company 13.8 TCR
NAT-TCR ABF Freight 133 13.8 TCR
NAT-SIZE University of Hartford Magnet School 84 FTE
NAT-SIZE 135 Newport Mi 84 FTE
NAT-SIZE Greater Hartford Academy of the Arts 84 FTE
NAT-SIZE Blooming Nursery 84 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.