Sheet metal work (except stampings) manufacturing · North Carolina

Captive-Aire Systems of California Inc

Raleigh, NC · ~149 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
3.8
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Captive-Aire Systems of California Inc runs at 115% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Sheet metal work (except stampings) manufacturing workplace, earning a grade C.

Captive-Aire Systems of California Inc: 3.8 TCR = 115% of Sheet metal work (except stampings) manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Captive-Aire Systems of California Inc safety composite

Captive-Aire Systems of California Inc scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 59% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 51%), 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).

C

56/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 3.81 per 100 workers

Safer than 59% of industry peers

DART rate
C 1.44 per 100 workers

Safer than 55% 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

−1.5

2017→2019

Captive-Aire Systems of California Inc injury rate improved

Captive-Aire Systems of California Inc's TCR fell 1.5 from 5.8 in 2017 to 4.3 in 2019. Peak filing year was 2017 at 5.8 TCR. In 2019, DART was 0.38× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=5.8 · 2018=1.3 · 2019=4.3

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 332322 · Raleigh, NC ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade C · TCR 3.8 · 115% of ind

  • DART 1.4 DART
  • RANK #20/37
  • PHOTO Johnson Contracting …
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 16 inj
  • SIZE ~149 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Johnson Contracting Company (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Captive-Aire Systems of California Inc in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Captive-Aire Systems of California Inc averages 3.8 TCR (115% of the Sheet metal work (except stampings) manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Captive-Aire Systems of California Inc TCR series: 2017=5.8 · 2018=1.3 · 2019=4.3 · BLS 3.3

Where Captive-Aire Systems of California Inc falls in its industry

1,158 Sheet metal work (except stamp establishments

Safer than 59% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to North Carolina alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #20 safest of 37 Sheet metal work (except stamp employers in North Carolina.

Captive-Aire Systems of California Inc (149 employees, TCR 3.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 58 employees and a TCR of 4.5 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 050100150200 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Captive-Aire Systems of California Inc
Captive-Aire Systems of California Inc (149 employees, TCR 3.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 58 employees and a TCR of 4.5

Captive-Aire Systems of California Inc has more employees than the Sheet metal work (except stampings) manu median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 4.5. 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
2019 4.3 1.4 6 0 0
2018 1.3 0.0 2 0 0
2017 5.8 2.9 8 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

332322 · NC · Raleigh

1,158 Sheet metal work (except stampings) manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,981 rated employers in North Carolina with headcount on file · 973 employers in Raleigh, NC · 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 Johnson Contracting Company 3.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR California Sheet Metal Works, Inc. 3.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR YC Precision Fabrication 3.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR QUAL-FAB 3.8 TCR
STATE-SIZE Samet Corporation - Greensboro 149 FTE
STATE-SIZE Johnson Modern Electric Company, INC 149 FTE
STATE-SIZE Industrial Air Inc. 149 FTE
STATE-SIZE Domino's Supply Chain Center- North Carolina 149 FTE
CITY-NEAR Headway Workforce Solutions 13,936 FTE
CITY-NEAR NC State University 11,491 FTE
CITY-NEAR UNC Rex Healthcare 7,282 FTE
CITY-NEAR SECU 6,283 FTE
NAT-TCR Dawn Food Products - York Manufacturing 3.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Precision Steel Warehouse Inc. 3.8 TCR
NAT-TCR LaRS Group, Inc. 3.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Alorton Plant 3.8 TCR
NAT-SIZE Aspen Trace Health & Living 149 FTE
NAT-SIZE Bonduelle USA 149 FTE
NAT-SIZE 240 - Boardman 149 FTE
NAT-SIZE Compression Technologies and Services : MFG-West Chester, PA-USA 149 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: 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.