Packaging, foam plastics (except polystyrene), manufacturing · California

First Class Packaging

El Cajon, CA · ~34 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
7.0
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

First Class Packaging runs at 213% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Packaging, foam plastics (except polystyrene), manufacturing workplace, earning a grade F.

First Class Packaging: 7.0 TCR = 213% of Packaging, foam plastics (except polystyrene), manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

First Class Packaging safety composite

First Class Packaging scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 82% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 12%), 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

46/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 7.03 per 100 workers

Safer than 12% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 82% 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

−2.8

2017→2019

First Class Packaging injury rate improved

First Class Packaging's TCR fell 2.8 from 9.0 in 2017 to 6.2 in 2019. Peak filing year was 2017 at 9.0 TCR. In 2019, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=9.0 · 2018=5.8 · 2019=6.2

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 326150 · El Cajon, CA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 7.0 · 213% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #23/26
  • PHOTO UFP Technologies, Iowa
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 7 inj
  • SIZE ~34 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: UFP Technologies, Iowa (0.0 TCR gap)

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

First Class Packaging in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows First Class Packaging averages 7.0 TCR (213% of the Packaging, foam plastics (except polystyrene), manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

First Class Packaging TCR series: 2017=9 · 2018=5.8 · 2019=6.2 · BLS 3.3

Where First Class Packaging falls in its industry

474 Packaging, foam plastics (exce establishments

Safer than 12% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.1.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #23 safest of 26 Packaging, foam plastics (exce employers in California.

First Class Packaging (34 employees, TCR 7.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 76 employees and a TCR of 3.1 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 050100150200250 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate First Class Packaging
First Class Packaging (34 employees, TCR 7.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 76 employees and a TCR of 3.1

First Class Packaging has fewer employees than the Packaging, foam plastics (except polysty median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.1. 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 6.2 0.0 2 0 0
2018 5.8 0.0 2 0 0
2017 9.0 0.0 3 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

326150 · CA · El Cajon

474 Packaging, foam plastics (except polystyrene), manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 236 employers in El Cajon, 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 UFP Technologies, Iowa 7.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR ACA-New York 7.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR LPFP- Fort Worth Prime 7.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR Innocor Foam Technologies, LLC - Dubuque 7.2 TCR
STATE-SIZE Ardent Mills Yuba City 34 FTE
STATE-SIZE Filice Farms, L.P. 34 FTE
STATE-SIZE Alexander Ranch, Inc. 34 FTE
STATE-SIZE MFarms 34 FTE
CITY-NEAR SOUTHERN REGION : SDU 1,176 FTE
CITY-NEAR California Department of Transportation Facility 370 1,148 FTE
CITY-NEAR GKN Aerospace Chem-tronics 1,059 FTE
CITY-NEAR GKN Aerospace Chem Tronics 938 FTE
NAT-TCR Wayland Feed Mill 7.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Regal 7.0 TCR
NAT-TCR 8451 Pearl Street Operating Company, LLC d/b/a Vibra Hospital of Denver 7.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Carolina Technical Plastics Corp. 7.0 TCR
NAT-SIZE Mid Island Die Cutting 34 FTE
NAT-SIZE Sales - Depoe Bay 34 FTE
NAT-SIZE Nat Sherman - Greensboro, NC 34 FTE
NAT-SIZE MN,WESTBROOK - Medical Center Campus - General Medical and Surgical Hospitals 34 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.

Read our methodology - how this data is sourced, computed, and verified.

Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.