Corporate, subsidiary, and regional managing offices · North Carolina

Customer Contact Center

Charlotte, NC · ~616 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
0.1
Avg TCR
0.7
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Customer Contact Center runs at 11% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Corporate, subsidiary, and regional managing offices workplace, earning a grade A.

Customer Contact Center: 0.1 TCR = 11% of Corporate, subsidiary, and regional managing offices BLS 0.7 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Customer Contact Center safety composite

Customer Contact Center scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 95% 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).

B

75/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
A 0.08 per 100 workers

Safer than 95% of industry peers

DART rate
C 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 69% 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%).

Customer Contact Center held a steady TCR band

Customer Contact Center's TCR held near 0.2 from 0.2 in 2016 to 0.0 in 2023. Peak filing year was 2016 at 0.2 TCR. In 2023, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=0.2 · 2017=0.2 · 2018=0.2 · 2019=0.0 · 2020=0.0 · 2021=0.0 · 2022=0.0 · 2023=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 551114 · Charlotte, NC AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade A · TCR 0.1 · 11% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #7/70
  • PHOTO Estee Lauder - JHL
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 3 inj
  • SIZE ~616 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Estee Lauder - JHL (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Customer Contact Center in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Customer Contact Center averages 0.1 TCR (11% of the Corporate, subsidiary, and regional managing offices BLS benchmark).

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

Customer Contact Center TCR series: 2016=0.2 · 2017=0.2 · 2018=0.2 · 2019=0 · 2020=0 · 2021=0 · 2022=0 · 2023=0 · BLS 0.7

Where Customer Contact Center falls in its industry

1,475 Corporate, subsidiary, and reg establishments

Safer than 95% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 0.7.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to North Carolina alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #7 safest of 70 Corporate, subsidiary, and reg employers in North Carolina.

Customer Contact Center (616 employees, TCR 0.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 189 employees and a TCR of 0.7 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 01,0002,0003,0004,000 0246810 Average employees Total Case Rate Customer Contact Center
Customer Contact Center (616 employees, TCR 0.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 189 employees and a TCR of 0.7

Customer Contact Center has more employees than the Corporate, subsidiary, and regional mana median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 0.7. 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
2023 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2022 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2021 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2019 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2018 0.2 0.0 1 0 0
2017 0.2 0.0 1 0 0
2016 0.2 0.0 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

551114 · NC · Charlotte

1,475 Corporate, subsidiary, and regional managing offices employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,981 rated employers in North Carolina with headcount on file · 2,058 employers in Charlotte, 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 Estee Lauder - JHL 0.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Lear Corporation - Building 400 0.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Edison Plaza 0.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Corporate Office 0.1 TCR
STATE-SIZE Support Center 616 FTE
STATE-SIZE 4538_9896 616 FTE
STATE-SIZE FUJIFILM DIOSYNTH BIOTECHNOLOGIES. NC 617 FTE
STATE-SIZE Supply Chain : Wilmington, NC 615 FTE
CITY-NEAR 1101-Carolinas Medical Center (1101) 8,444 FTE
CITY-NEAR 0001-Carolinas Medical Center 8,032 FTE
CITY-NEAR 4795-AA-CLT-CHARLOTTE-CLT-TRML 7,295 FTE
CITY-NEAR Novant Health Presbyterian Medical Center 4,973 FTE
NAT-TCR Alpharetta Headquarters 0.1 TCR
NAT-TCR ExxonMobil Chemical, Beaumont Polyethylene Plant 0.1 TCR
NAT-TCR International Flavors and Fragrances 0.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Almac Clinical Technologies LLC 0.1 TCR
NAT-SIZE Aurubis Buffalo, Inc. 616 FTE
NAT-SIZE UniFirst Corp. Loc's 616 FTE
NAT-SIZE 1855-FLPEN42 616 FTE
NAT-SIZE Zulily (OH) 616 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: 2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 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.