Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and parts (except engines) manufacturing · California

Aero Arc Inc.

Gardena, CA · ~32 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
3.3
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Aero Arc Inc. runs at 100% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and parts (except engines) manufacturing workplace, earning a grade C.

Aero Arc Inc.: 3.3 TCR = 100% of Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and parts (except engines) manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Aero Arc Inc. safety composite

Aero Arc Inc. scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 80% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 26%), 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).

D

51/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 3.31 per 100 workers

Safer than 26% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 80% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 50% 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

−5.1

2017→2024

Aero Arc Inc. injury rate improved

Aero Arc Inc.'s TCR fell 5.1 from 5.1 in 2017 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2020 at 5.9 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=5.1 · 2018=2.9 · 2019=2.9 · 2020=5.9 · 2021=3.2 · 2022=3.2 · 2023=3.3 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 336413 · Gardena, CA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade C · TCR 3.3 · 100% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #69/104
  • PHOTO Kaiser Aircraft Ind.…
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 9 inj
  • SIZE ~32 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Kaiser Aircraft Ind. Inc. (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Aero Arc Inc. in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Aero Arc Inc. averages 3.3 TCR (100% of the Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and parts (except engines) manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Aero Arc Inc. TCR series: 2017=5.1 · 2018=2.9 · 2019=2.9 · 2020=5.9 · 2021=3.2 · 2022=3.2 · 2023=3.3 · 2024=0 · BLS 3.3

Where Aero Arc Inc. falls in its industry

650 Aircraft assemblies, subassemb establishments

Safer than 26% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #69 safest of 104 Aircraft assemblies, subassemb employers in California.

Aero Arc Inc. (32 employees, TCR 3.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 130 employees and a TCR of 1.9 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 05001,0001,5002,000 0246810 Average employees Total Case Rate Aero Arc Inc.
Aero Arc Inc. (32 employees, TCR 3.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 130 employees and a TCR of 1.9

Aero Arc Inc. has fewer employees than the Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.9. 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 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2023 3.3 3.3 1 0 0
2022 3.2 0.0 1 0 0
2021 3.2 0.0 1 0 0
2020 5.9 5.9 2 0 0
2019 2.9 2.9 1 0 0
2018 2.9 2.9 1 0 0
2017 5.1 5.1 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

336413 · CA · Gardena

650 Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and parts (except engines) manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 223 employers in Gardena, 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 Kaiser Aircraft Ind. Inc. 3.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Sensata Technologies Inc 3.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR TTS Forest 3.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Bell - RTI 3.3 TCR
STATE-SIZE Schreiner Farms 32 FTE
STATE-SIZE FIVE POINTS T.I.C. 32 FTE
STATE-SIZE OFFICE 32 FTE
STATE-SIZE Brocchini Farms Inc. 32 FTE
CITY-NEAR California Department of Transportation Facility 602 2,621 FTE
CITY-NEAR Ono-030 909 FTE
CITY-NEAR GARDENA HUB (CAGAR) 809 FTE
CITY-NEAR CAGAR - GARDENA HUB 794 FTE
NAT-TCR Charles T. Driscoll Masonry Restoration Co., Inc. 3.3 TCR
NAT-TCR John H. Lyman and Sons, Inc. 3.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Refrigeration Research, Inc. 3.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Swanson & Youngdale, Inc. 3.3 TCR
NAT-SIZE Public Works Garage 32 FTE
NAT-SIZE Town of Voluntown 32 FTE
NAT-SIZE Ridgeland 32 FTE
NAT-SIZE Hilton Head 32 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.