Bars, concrete reinforcing (rebar), made from purchased steel in steel rolling mills · Pennsylvania

Tube Methods, Inc.

Bridgeport, PA · ~143 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
6.8
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Tube Methods, Inc. runs at 207% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Bars, concrete reinforcing (rebar), made from purchased steel in steel rolling mills workplace, earning a grade F.

Tube Methods, Inc.: 6.8 TCR = 207% of Bars, concrete reinforcing (rebar), made from purchased steel in steel rolling mills BLS 3.3 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Tube Methods, Inc. safety composite

Tube Methods, Inc. scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 11%), 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

26/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 6.84 per 100 workers

Safer than 23% of industry peers

DART rate
F 5.96 per 100 workers

Safer than 11% 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

−6.6

2017→2024

Tube Methods, Inc. injury rate improved

Tube Methods, Inc.'s TCR fell 6.6 from 12.6 in 2017 to 6.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2017 at 12.6 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.87× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=12.6 · 2018=10.1 · 2019=5.2 · 2020=4.7 · 2021=2.1 · 2022=8.9 · 2023=5.2 · 2024=6.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 331221 · Bridgeport, PA ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade F · TCR 6.8 · 207% of ind

  • DART 6.0 DART
  • RANK #24/29
  • PHOTO Peninsula Steel Inc
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 74 inj
  • SIZE ~143 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Peninsula Steel Inc (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Tube Methods, Inc. in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Tube Methods, Inc. averages 6.8 TCR (207% of the Bars, concrete reinforcing (rebar), made from purchased steel in steel rolling mills BLS benchmark).

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

Tube Methods, Inc. TCR series: 2017=12.6 · 2018=10.1 · 2019=5.2 · 2020=4.7 · 2021=2.1 · 2022=8.9 · 2023=5.2 · 2024=6 · BLS 3.3

Where Tube Methods, Inc. falls in its industry

206 Bars, concrete reinforcing (re establishments

Safer than 23% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Pennsylvania alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #24 safest of 29 Bars, concrete reinforcing (re employers in Pennsylvania.

Tube Methods, Inc. (143 employees, TCR 6.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 77 employees and a TCR of 3.9 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 050100150200250 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Tube Methods, Inc.
Tube Methods, Inc. (143 employees, TCR 6.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 77 employees and a TCR of 3.9

Tube Methods, Inc. has more employees than the Bars, concrete reinforcing (rebar), made median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.9. 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 6.0 6.0 9 0 0
2023 5.2 5.2 7 0 0
2022 8.9 8.9 10 0 0
2021 2.1 2.1 3 0 0
2020 4.7 4.7 7 0 0
2019 5.2 5.2 7 0 0
2018 10.1 10.1 13 0 0
2017 12.6 4.9 18 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

331221 · PA · Bridgeport

206 Bars, concrete reinforcing (rebar), made from purchased steel in steel rolling mills employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 22,692 rated employers in Pennsylvania with headcount on file · 11 employers in Bridgeport, PA · 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 Peninsula Steel Inc 6.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Ulbrich Specialty Strip Mill 6.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Umatilla 6.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Engineered Materials Solutions Hamburg 6.8 TCR
STATE-SIZE JVI Group Inc 143 FTE
STATE-SIZE Minnotte Contracting Corporation - WV 143 FTE
STATE-SIZE Pittsburgh Region 143 FTE
STATE-SIZE Meco Constructors, Inc. 143 FTE
CITY-NEAR 6458-ZKOP 587 FTE
CITY-NEAR US Foods Bridgeport 329 FTE
CITY-NEAR 194 231 FTE
CITY-NEAR J. P. Mascaro & Sons - Bridgeport Division 229 FTE
NAT-TCR Sentry Electric, Inc. 6.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Waveny LifeCare Network 6.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Auto Pride Car Wash, Inc-Mission Car Wash 6.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Technical Services/FAC 6.8 TCR
NAT-SIZE A.C. Legg, Inc. 143 FTE
NAT-SIZE Jered LLC/PaR Marine 143 FTE
NAT-SIZE Pocatello 143 FTE
NAT-SIZE Paganini Electric Corporation 143 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.