Automotive harness and ignition sets manufacturing · Texas

Continental Automotive Systems, Inc

Seguin, TX · ~1,538 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
1.4
Avg TCR
5.4
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Continental Automotive Systems, Inc runs at 26% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Automotive harness and ignition sets manufacturing workplace, earning a grade A.

Continental Automotive Systems, Inc: 1.4 TCR = 26% of Automotive harness and ignition sets manufacturing BLS 5.4 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Continental Automotive Systems, Inc safety composite

Continental Automotive Systems, Inc scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 69% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 41%), 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

54/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 1.39 per 100 workers

Safer than 69% of industry peers

DART rate
D 1.39 per 100 workers

Safer than 41% 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%).

Rising injury rate

Continental Automotive Systems, Inc: 1.2 → 1.8 TCR

Peak year 2018 @ 1.8 TCR · DART/TCR 1× in 2018

Continental Automotive Systems, Inc's TCR rose 0.6 from 1.2 in 2016 to 1.8 in 2018. In 2018, DART was 1× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 336320 · Seguin, TX AT/BELOW-IND · LARGE

Grade A · TCR 1.4 · 26% of ind

  • DART 1.4 DART
  • RANK #7/14
  • PHOTO Nidec Mobility of Am…
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 60 inj
  • SIZE ~1,538 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Nidec Mobility of America Corporation (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Continental Automotive Systems, Inc in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Continental Automotive Systems, Inc averages 1.4 TCR (26% of the Automotive harness and ignition sets manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Continental Automotive Systems, Inc TCR series: 2016=1.2 · 2017=1.2 · 2018=1.8 · BLS 5.4

Where Continental Automotive Systems, Inc falls in its industry

216 Automotive harness and ignitio establishments

Safer than 69% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Texas alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #7 safest of 14 Automotive harness and ignitio employers in Texas.

Continental Automotive Systems, Inc (1,538 employees, TCR 1.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 162 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 Continental Automotive Systems, Inc
Continental Automotive Systems, Inc (1,538 employees, TCR 1.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 162 employees and a TCR of 1.9

Continental Automotive Systems, Inc has more employees than the Automotive harness and ignition sets man median and a lower 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
2018 1.8 1.4 27 0 0
2017 1.2 1.1 17 1 0
2016 1.2 0.7 16 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

336320 · TX · Seguin

216 Automotive harness and ignition sets manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 38,394 rated employers in Texas with headcount on file · 86 employers in Seguin, TX · 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 Nidec Mobility of America Corporation 1.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Automated Wiring Systems 1.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Kokomo Components 1.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Precision Cable Assemblies 1.4 TCR
STATE-SIZE Mondelez Global Pacific Mountain - Sales 1,539 FTE
STATE-SIZE Energy Towers 1,539 FTE
STATE-SIZE Texas Health Huguley Hospital 1,537 FTE
STATE-SIZE TXFOR - INDEPENDENCE HUB 1,540 FTE
CITY-NEAR Vitesco Technologies 1,778 FTE
CITY-NEAR Vitesco Technologies USA LLC 1,735 FTE
CITY-NEAR Seguin Engine Center 1,504 FTE
CITY-NEAR GUADALUPE REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER 806 FTE
NAT-TCR Order Fulfillment Center 1.4 TCR
NAT-TCR JFSNA at Sabic Burkville 1.4 TCR
NAT-TCR AIC 1.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Norwalk (GCR) 1.4 TCR
NAT-SIZE 1969-PW1 1,538 FTE
NAT-SIZE Sonbyrne Sales Inc 1,538 FTE
NAT-SIZE Harbeson DE Processing Facility 1,537 FTE
NAT-SIZE Inova Loudoun Hospital 1,539 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: 2018, 2017, 2016. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.