SECURE 2025 · TRIR
1.40
Per 200,000 exposure hours
PublishedIndependent analysis | Public sources only | October 26, 2026
SECURE | Safety Performance & Reporting Outlook
SECURE historical safety performance, operational exposures and future reporting concepts. GFL results provide acquisition context.
Reporting context
GFL acquired SECURE on September 1, 2026
GFL's acquisition of SECURE has closed. Figures below refer to separately reported historical periods before the transaction, not the combined 2026 group. A future common scorecard would require aligned definitions, exposure hours and reporting boundaries.
SECURE 2025 · Vehicle rate
0.88
Preventable events / million km
PublishedSECURE 2025 · SIF rate
0.10
Actual 2025; historical SIF(P) not comparable
CautionGFL 2025 · TRIR
2.78
Historical reporting perimeter
Published01 / What the public data shows
Two organizations. One reporting year.
2025 reported TRIR is available for both companies. GFL historical results below use its restated Solid Waste series.
SECURE
2024 · historical1.17TRIR
▲ +54% vs 2023 (0.76)
Reported employee and contractor recordables per 200,000 exposure hours. The rate increased within SECURE's historical reporting boundary.
GFL
2025 · reported2.78TRIR
▼ −8.9% vs 2024 (3.05, restated)
2025 Solid Waste reporting; earlier GFL values were restated to exclude Environmental Services, divested March 2025.
Read the trend, not the apparent gap. SECURE rose from 0.76 to 1.40 (2023–2025); GFL declined from 3.67 to 2.78 on its restated Solid Waste basis. These are separate operating portfolios and reporting populations. Numerically lower TRIR does not prove lower risk, stronger controls or better reporting culture. Both horizontal bars use a 0-to-3 rate scale, not a safety grading system.
Latest validated SECURE2025 TRIR: 1.40
Another increase in published TRIR, alongside zero reported fatalities in 2023–2025.
GFL 2025 · confirmed direction2025 TRIR: 2.78
GFL 2025 Solid Waste TRIR was 2.78, down from restated 3.05 in 2024 and 3.67 in 2023. Historical reporting scopes differ from SECURE.
Ownership changeSeptember 1, 2026
Acquisition closed. Historical results remain distinct; no post-close combined safety metric is inferred.
What the reports describe, side by side
Different levels of disclosure are part of the comparison, not missing values to estimate.
| Dimension | SECURE | GFL | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Published TRIR trend | 0.76 → 1.17 → 1.402023, 2024, 2025 | 3.67 → 3.05 → 2.782023–2025; GFL historical figures restated for Environmental Services divestiture | Trend directions differ. Check changes in portfolio, exposure and case definition before comparing. |
| Serious incident lens | 0.102025 actual SIF rate / 200,000 hours | Not pairedNo equivalent value validated in this prototype | SECURE changed SIF reporting from earlier SIF(P) including potential outcomes. |
| Vehicle exposure | 0.882025 preventable MVIR / million km | Fleet automationDescribed in GFL 2024 report | Both face road and mobile-equipment hazards, but disclosed measures are not a matched metric. |
| Learning and competence | 14.46 h2025 safety and competency training per employee | Safe For LifeProgram and Life Saving Rules described | Training activity and written programs do not establish verified competency or barrier reliability. |
| Reporting perimeter | 2025 health and safety reporting excludes specified acquired metals sites pending integration. | GFL 2023 and 2024 TRIR restated to exclude Environmental Services; 2025 Solid Waste perimeter. | Separate boundary changes may influence rates and make aggregation premature. |
Source trail: SECURE ESG metrics / notes · GFL 2025 data summary · GFL 2025 reporting library
SECURE · Historical performance
Safety measures in context
Published annual metrics, 2023–2025. Different charts emphasize SECURE's direction, year-to-year change, and training patterns. GFL appears only as a separately reported benchmark.
Reported recordable incident rate | SECURE first
Annual TRIR per 200,000 exposure hours. SECURE and GFL use different reporting populations, so the two series should not be treated as a safety ranking.
SECUREGFL (restated Solid Waste)
SECURE 2025 Sustainability Report; GFL 2025 Data Summary, page 9.
SECURE TRIR | Year-to-year movement
Waterfall format shows the published increase in TRIR from 0.76 in 2023 to 1.40 in 2025.
Net change: +0.64 TRIR, or +84.2% from 2023 to 2025.
SECURE 2025 Sustainability Report.
SECURE training | Two reported measures
Grouped bars compare training hours per employee. Measures are displayed separately, not stacked, because categories may overlap.
Safety and competency hours decreased 14.4%; LMS safety hours increased 7.9%. Neither change alone demonstrates a change in competence.
SECURE 2025 Sustainability Report.
SECURE indicators | Pareto of disclosed change magnitudes
Pareto-style view ranks the largest published changes across SECURE’s disclosed indicators. This is not an incident-cause Pareto, because public incident category counts are not available.
Use this as a discussion aid only: it highlights where the published movement is largest, not why incidents occurred.
Derived from SECURE 2025 Sustainability Report year-over-year and two-year published changes.
Because verified incident category counts are not publicly available, the Pareto chart above ranks indicator change magnitude rather than injury causes. Serious incident measures with changed definitions are still not plotted as a continuous comparable series.
Historical direction, not a league table
Compare direction and definition, not a ranking of safety performance
GFL EnvironmentalSECURE
Period and scope matter. GFL reports a 2025 TRIR of 2.78, with its earlier TRIR restated to 3.67 for 2023 and 3.05 for 2024 to reflect the Environmental Services divestiture. SECURE's 2025 scope excludes specified acquired metals sites. These are pre-acquisition metrics from different portfolios, not a combined benchmark.
Move your mouse over a point, or tap it on a phone, for definitions and sources.
SECURE training mix
Published hours per employee
Training time is an activity measure, not proof that competency or critical controls improved. Compare with field verification, observed task performance and learning outcomes.
GFL safety reporting
2025 data and restated historical comparison
GFL reports the following total recordable incident rates for its Solid Waste reporting perimeter.
2023 · 3.67
Restated historical total recordable incident rate.
2024 · 3.05
Restated historical total recordable incident rate.
2025 · 2.78
2025 reported total recordable incident rate; 8.9% below 2024.
GFL explicitly recalculated its 2022–2024 TRIR to account for the divestiture of Environmental Services. These restated values supersede the earlier companywide series for this comparison. GFL 2025 Sustainability Data Summary, page 9 ↗.
02 / Relative changes
Changes within each reporting series
Percent change measures direction within a company's own data—not relative safety between companies.
TRIR · 2023 to 2024
Percent change versus each company’s 2023 rate
Uses GFL’s restated 2023–2024 Solid Waste TRIR; changes do not measure relative operating risk.
SECURE · 2024 to 2025
Changes in independently reported indicators
Different denominators: TRIR per exposure hours, MVIR per kilometres, training per employee. Never sum these rates.
One organization, different exposure profiles
Qualitative exposure map. Business lines overlap. The cards are not a ranking of relative safety.
GFL-heavy exposureCollection and public-road interface
Collection vehicle movement, reversing, struck-by exposure, route design, manual handling and traffic interfaces.
Relevant controls: route risk assessments, separation, vehicle systems, supervision and competency.
Shared exposureLandfills, transfer and waste handling
Heavy mobile equipment, traffic segregation, unstable ground, tipping areas, hazardous materials and contractor interfaces.
Relevant controls: exclusion zones, ground assurance, traffic plans and contractor verification.
SECURE-heavy exposureIndustrial waste processing and energy systems
Pressurized equipment, hazardous substances, stored energy, isolation, confined spaces and loss-of-containment potential.
Relevant controls: isolation verification, integrity, process safety barriers and emergency readiness.
SECURE exposureMetals recycling and material handling
Scrap handling, shears, loaders, cranes, vehicle-pedestrian interface, pinch points, stored energy and falling material.
Relevant controls: traffic segregation, lift planning, guarding, energy isolation and field verification.
SECURE exposureChemical sales, distribution and field services
Chemical transport, transfers, blending or handling as applicable, hoses, pumps, pressure, compatibility and accidental release.
Relevant controls: SDS/compatibility, transfer checklists, hose integrity, containment, transport and spill response.
These are illustrations of different operational exposure profiles, not measured relative risk scores. Both organizations manage potentially fatal and high-consequence hazards. No published aggregate TRIR can substitute for verification of critical controls.
03 / Potential reporting structures
Potential post-acquisition reporting models
Three possible scorecard architectures. No public commitment is implied. Select an option to explore its management implications.
Option A · Separate scorecards
Preserve each business's existing measures
Maintain distinct metrics while integration teams reconcile definitions, exposure hours and operating portfolios.
- Protects the context behind both historical series.
- Requires a common metric dictionary before roll-up.
- May limit consolidated leadership visibility in the short term.
GFL legacy portfolioOperational risk + historical metrics
SECURE portfolioOperational risk + historical metrics
↓
Shared leadership discussionDefinitions and risks stay visible
Recordability, contractors, hours, SIF versus SIF(P), high-potential events and business-unit boundaries.
Keep process containment and stored-energy barriers visible alongside fleet, traffic and mobile-equipment controls.
Translate metrics into field verification, barrier improvement, learning and clear operational accountability.
Potential reporting structures should preserve operational context, common definitions and business-unit visibility.
From measurement to action
Data validation, operational verification and continuous improvement.
01 · UNDERSTANDValidate the signal
What changed in the definition, denominator, scope, event classification or reporting behaviour? Is this a real control concern or a data-quality issue?
02 · VERIFYLook at the work
Review critical controls in the field with operations and safety advisors. Examine high-potential events, isolation, mobile equipment and process barriers.
03 · IMPROVEAgree action and check effectiveness
Remove barriers, assign accountable actions, reinforce operational ownership, then check whether the control actually improved. Use Plan-Do-Check-Act.
Interpretation: A scorecard tells leaders where to look. Verification and learning establish what needs to change. The goal is effective controls, not reporting for reporting's sake.
Comparison boundaries and data quality
Interpret these historical disclosures before drawing conclusions or setting targets.
Not a ranking
TRIR is a lagging indicator influenced by definitions, exposure and reporting culture. Do not use the two published rates to rank performance.
Different portfolios and years
GFL’s displayed 2023–2025 series uses restated historical Solid Waste values from its 2025 Data Summary. SECURE data runs to 2025. The 2026 acquisition is not reflected in either historical rate.
Definition break for SIF
SECURE notes that its 2023 and 2024 SIF(P) included potential serious injuries and fatalities. Its 2025 SIF represents actual events. The apparent drop is not an apples-to-apples comparison.
SECURE data boundary
SECURE excludes specified acquired metals facilities from its 2025 health and safety dataset until full operational integration.
Training measures activity
Training hours and LMS use can describe delivery, not necessarily skill retention or critical-control performance.
Leading indicator opportunity
A useful management scorecard could pair lagging rates with verified critical controls, closure effectiveness, leader field engagement and quality of learning.
Source documentation
Click through to the underlying company publications
Prototype calculations use only published aggregate metrics; they do not infer incident counts or exposure hours.