Workers' Compensation
JUST SALAD
Risk Intelligence Dashboard · 2021–2026
5-Year Program Loss & Exposure Analysis
Carrier AmTrust · 76 store locations · 7 states · Effective 9/30 program year
Valued04.15.2026
Prepared byHUB · Brady Risk
01 · Executive Summary

A fresh look at five years of workers' comp.

Across 249 reported claims over policy years 2021 through 2026, Just Salad's program shows steadily improving net rates against rising payroll, with concentrated exposure in Fall, Slip, or Trip losses driving 63% of total incurred dollars.

5-Year Program

Valued 04.15.2026
AmTrust · 76 stores · 7 states
Total Claim Count
249
233 closed · 16 open
Total Paid
$474k
Net of recoveries
Total Reserves
$339k
Concentrated in 2025–26
Total Incurred
$813k
Ultimate $1.86M developed
Open Claims
16
11 in current policy year
Where the dollars live
Slip-and-fall is the story.
Falls represent only 26% of claim count but 63% of total incurred. The next four cause categories combined account for under 32% of dollars. Targeted floor-management and training programs at high-loss stores would compound across the entire portfolio.
  • $515,929 incurred from 65 Fall, Slip, or Trip claims · avg $7,937 per claim
  • Three of the top five locations show repeat liquid-or-grease falls
  • Open Fall reserves alone total $183,151, suggesting more development
Pricing & rate trajectory
Net rate cut by more than half over five years.
Net rate has compressed from 1.62 in 2021–22 to 0.71 in 2025–26 as payroll grew from $27.0M to $60.6M. The 2026–27 loss pick of $424,109 implies a 1.17 net rate at the 60% UW ratio target — leaving meaningful negotiation room above the 0.71 expiring.
  • 5-year cumulative loss ratio 36.3% · indicates underwriting headroom
  • 2025–26 reserves at $208,830 — heaviest of any program year
  • NY drives 72% of claims and 63% of incurred dollars
Five-year at-a-glance
Total Incurred & Net Rate trajectory
Total Incurred & Net Rate by Policy Period
Reported losses against the rate trajectory · ultimate development overlaid
02 · Loss & Exposure

Rate & exposure trends.

Net rate, loss rate, and the underlying payroll exposure across five policy periods. Despite a doubling of payroll, premium has stayed in a tight $407k–$536k band, reflecting the broker-led rate pressure on AmTrust.

5 Policy Years

Net Rate · Loss Rate
Payroll · Annual Premium
Net Rate by Policy Period
Premium per $100 of payroll · trending downward as payroll scales
Loss Rate by Policy Period
Incurred losses per $100 of payroll · year-over-year volatility
Payroll vs. Annual Premium
Exposure growth alongside premium development across the program · dual-axis
Underlying exposure data
Per-period detail
03 · Cause of Injury Analysis

Where injuries originate.

Sixteen distinct cause categories. Fall-related claims dominate dollar exposure; cuts and burns dominate frequency. The split matters for safety program design — frequency drivers respond to training, severity drivers respond to engineering controls.

16 Causes

Top: Fall, Slip, Trip
63% of incurred · 26% of claims
Total Incurred by Cause
Severity ranking · dollars at risk
Claim Count by Cause
Frequency ranking · how often each occurs
Cause of injury summary table
All 16 causes · ranked by total incurred
04 · Location Summary

Loss by store.

All 76 store locations with claim activity. Store 73 (Huntington) leads at $143,812 driven by a single open Fall claim. The top 10 stores account for 83% of total incurred — concentrated risk that responds well to targeted intervention.

76 Locations

Top: Store 73 Huntington
$143,812 incurred
Top 15 Locations by Incurred
Highest-loss stores in the program
Full location summary
All 76 stores · scrollable
05 · Losses by State

A seven-state footprint.

New York anchors the program at 72% of claims and 63% of incurred dollars. Connecticut and Pennsylvania punch above their weight on severity per claim, while Florida and Massachusetts contribute frequency without material dollar exposure.

7 States

Top: New York
$509,377 incurred · 179 claims
Total Incurred by State
Dollar exposure across the seven-state footprint
Claim Count by State
Frequency distribution
State summary table
7 states · ranked by total incurred
06 · Top 10 Losses

The shock losses.

Ten claims accounting for $629,727 — roughly 77% of total incurred dollars. Eight of the top ten are Fall, Slip, or Trip events; six are still open with active reserves. These are the file-level claims to manage closely with the TPA.

Top 10

6 open · 4 closed
$629,727 combined incurred
07 · Open Claims

Active claim watchlist.

Sixteen open claims totaling $488,229 in incurred and $338,981 in reserves. Eleven sit in the current policy year and will drive 2025–26 development. Reserve concentration in Fall and Struck-By claims at recently-opened files merits a TPA review before the next valuation.

16 Open

$339k reserves · $488k incurred
11 in current policy year
Open Count
16
Across 4 policy periods
Paid to Date
$149k
On open claims
Reserves
$339k
Outstanding case reserves
Total Incurred
$488k
Open-claim exposure
Open claim detail
All 16 active claims · ranked by incurred
08 · Loss Stratification

Layers of severity.

All 249 claims sorted into eight severity bands. The distribution is dramatic: 207 claims (83%) close at $1,000 or under, contributing only 4% of dollars. The 11 claims above $25k contribute roughly 75% of total incurred. This is the same Pareto story as the concentration curve, but stratified into operational bands the safety team can act on.

8 Severity Bands

Banded by Total Incurred
All 249 claims · 5-year program
Claim Count by Severity Band
Where the volume sits · most claims are small
Total Incurred by Severity Band
Where the dollars sit · severity dominates
Stratification detail table
8 bands · paid · reserves · incurred
09 · Deep Analytics

The data-driven advantage.

Beyond the standard loss summary, here's how Brady Risk thinks about Just Salad's program. Frequency-severity quadrants reveal where to spend remediation dollars; a Pareto curve quantifies claim concentration; loss development factors flag where reserves are still maturing; and benchmarking exposes outlier states. This is where strategy lives.

Advanced

Severity Matrix · Pareto
Development · Benchmarks
Frequency Trend
0.61
60% improvement since 2021
Claims per $1M of payroll, current PY. Down from 1.52 in 2021–22.
Loss Concentration
82%
Top 5% of claims
12 claims drive 82% of total dollars. Classic Pareto. Severity strategy works.
Closure Rate
93.6%
233 of 249 closed
Strong claim-closing pace overall. Current PY at 65% reflects ordinary maturity.
Avg Severity
$3,267
Per-claim composite
Overall average. Range: $241 (MA) to $16,271 (PA). State mix matters.
The frequency-severity matrix
Every cause plotted · bubble size = total $
Severity vs. Frequency Quadrants
Top-right = engineering controls. Bottom-right = training programs. Top-left = file-level claim management.
Frequency Rate per $1M Payroll
Normalized claim frequency · how risk scales with growth
Pareto: Claim Concentration
Cumulative % of dollars vs. % of claims · the 80/20 curve in action
What the Pareto curve tells us
A handful of claims drive almost everything.
The Pareto principle (the "80/20 rule") plays out almost perfectly in Just Salad's loss data, except even more concentrated than the textbook case. Read the curve as: the X% of claims with the highest severity account for Y% of total dollars. Just 12 claims out of 249 drive over four-fifths of the entire 5-year program loss. This is exactly the pattern that justifies focused safety investment: rather than spreading remediation dollars uniformly across all claims, targeting the conditions that produce the small number of catastrophic events (Fall, Slip, or Trip in particular) compounds returns. It also informs claim-handling priority — the top 5% of files deserve direct file-level oversight with the TPA, not just batch reporting. And for renewal pricing, it explains why a single bad open claim like the Reyes file can tilt the entire loss pick.
Top 5% of claims
82% of dollars
Top 10% of claims
92% of dollars
Top 20% of claims
96% of dollars
Cost-per-claim by jurisdiction
Where severity lives
Average Cost per Claim by State
Severity benchmarking across the seven-state footprint · Pennsylvania & Connecticut are the outliers
Loss development triangle
How each program year is maturing
Paid & Reserves vs. Ultimate Incurred
2021–23 are mature (paid = incurred = ultimate). 2025–26 has 75% still to develop — the dashed line shows projected ultimate.
The Brady Risk · HUB advantage
This is what an actuarial-quality loss read looks like.
Most brokers stop at the loss run. We translate it. The metrics on this tab — severity matrix, Pareto concentration, frequency normalization, and development factors — let us argue collateral with carriers, defend reserve adequacy with TPAs, and target safety dollars at the highest-yield interventions. For Just Salad, that means a 2026–27 negotiation built on the data, not a flat "renewal flat" conversation.
10 · 2026–27 Loss Projection

Pricing the renewal.

A $424,109 loss pick built from a 5-year average pure loss rate of 0.70 applied to projected payroll of $60.6M. Three premium scenarios at 60%, 65%, and 70% UW ratios bracket the renewal conversation, against an expiring net rate of 0.67 (calculated on basic + terror premium, since the loss projection itself excludes taxes & fees).

2026–27 Pick

$424,109 projected losses
Three UW scenarios

Pure Loss Pick · 5-Year Average

$60.6M projected payroll · 0.70 pure loss rate · benchmarks for the renewal conversation

2026–27 Loss Pick
$424,109
Expiring Net Rate (BT)
0.67
Three premium scenarios
UW ratio drives the price · trade-offs vs. carrier rate concession
Most Aggressive
60%
UW Ratio
Estimated Premium
$706,848
Net Rate
1.17
vs. Expiring
+75%
Mid-Range Target
65%
UW Ratio
Estimated Premium
$652,475
Net Rate
1.08
vs. Expiring
+61%
Most Favorable
70%
UW Ratio
Estimated Premium
$605,870
Net Rate
1.00
vs. Expiring
+49%
Note · Audited Payroll Variance
2024–25 audited payroll ran ~$12M higher than the 2025–26 estimate.
2024–25 closed at $72,402,942 in audited payroll versus the 2025–26 estimate of $60,586,960, a swing of approximately $11.8M. The renewal projection uses the lower 2025–26 figure as the exposure base. If 2026–27 audited payroll trends back toward the 2024–25 level, premium dollars will scale up correspondingly even at the same net rate. Worth flagging to the carrier so the rate negotiation isn't conflated with payroll movement.
Note · 2025–26 Development Factor Inflation
The current PY's 4.06x development factor is artificially elevated.
Losses on this dashboard are valued 4/15/2026, but the 2025–26 policy period runs through 9/30/2026. That leaves roughly 5.5 months of additional exposure where losses can still occur, be reported (IBNR), and develop on existing open files. The 4.06x factor reflects this immaturity, not a deteriorating book of business. By 9/30/2026 valuation, the factor would typically settle into the 2.5–3.5x range as IBNR materializes and reserves develop. Renewal pricing should anchor on the 5-year average pure rate of 0.70, not be over-weighted by this PY's projected ultimate.
Policy period claims summary
Reported vs. ultimate development
Loss projection by cause of injury
$424,109 allocated across 7 contributing causes
Note · Why 104% UW Ratio
The per-cause premium column shows the rate-flat scenario.
The premium column in the table below is calculated at a 104% UW ratio (premium = projected losses ÷ 1.04). At that ratio, total premium comes to roughly $407,797, which is essentially equal to the expiring premium of $407,650. In other words, this column answers the question "what does premium need to be at to hold the rate flat at expiring?" The answer is that the carrier would have to accept a 104% loss ratio, paying out more than they take in. That's why the three scenarios above (60%, 65%, 70% UW) all imply rate increases off expiring. The per-cause premium here is the floor — the price at which we'd keep the rate, but no carrier will write a program at that ratio.
Projected Losses by Cause
Pure-rate allocation against 2026–27 estimated payroll · % of pick shown alongside
11 · The Remedy

Six recipes that move the loss pick.

For each top cause of injury, here's the recipe: ingredients (the targeted interventions), the investment estimate, the expected reduction percentage, and the year-1 dollar savings tied directly to the 2026–27 loss pick. Then below, the same logic applied at the store level for the five highest-priority locations.

Action Plan

6 cause recipes
5 store interventions

Conservative gains on a well-priced program.

Just Salad's WC program is already operating at a strong baseline: a 36% cumulative loss ratio, net rate compression from 1.62 to 0.71, and a 60% improvement in frequency rate per $1M of payroll. The easy gains have been captured — the recipes here represent conservative, defensible reductions stacked on top of an already favorable rate. If implemented across all six causes, projected savings against the 2026–27 loss pick come to $77,854 on an investment of $59,000 — a 1.3x year-one return, with compounding effects over three years as cultural changes settle in and influence the experience mod.

Year-1 ROI
1.3x
Conservative · stacked on a strong baseline
Cause-level recipes
Six recipes · ranked by % of loss pick addressed
Store-level interventions
Five priority sites · ranked by exposure & urgency
Investment vs. Projected Year-1 Savings
Cause-by-cause comparison · Fall/Slip/Trip drives the bulk of the year-1 return; Burn and Lifting earn back over years 2–3
The Brady Risk · HUB closing
From loss read to action plan, in one document.
The recipes here are not aspirational. They're calibrated to Just Salad's specific exposure profile — Fall/Slip/Trip dominance, fast-food kitchen hazards, and a high-frequency / lower-severity ancillary tail. Investments shown are on the conservative end of estimates and assume rollout phased across the top 10 locations first. The 2026–27 negotiation walks into the room with this in hand.
JUST SALAD
× HUB
All figures derived from the Just Salad WC loss run valued 04.15.2026, covering policy periods 9/30/2021 through 9/30/2026 written through AmTrust. Incurred values reflect carrier reporting and are subject to development. Ultimate incurred uses 5-year industry development factors; pure loss rate of 0.70 reflects the all-data composite. Reserves on the current policy year remain heavily weighted toward open Fall, Slip, or Trip and Struck or Injured By claims and should be revisited at the next valuation. Remedy investment estimates and reduction percentages are directional, based on industry benchmarks for QSR/foodservice safety programs, and intended to frame conversation rather than substitute for vendor-specific pricing. Prepared by Richard Patrizio, Senior Risk Analyst, Brady Risk Management, a division of HUB International.