Aircraft maintenance and repair services (except factory conversion, factory overhaul, factory rebuilding) · California

LAX

Los Angeles, CA · ~569 workers · 9 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
12.3
Avg TCR
4.5
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

LAX runs at 274% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Aircraft maintenance and repair services (except factory conversion, factory overhaul, factory rebuilding) workplace, earning a grade F.

LAX: 12.3 TCR = 274% of Aircraft maintenance and repair services (except factory conversion, factory overhaul, factory rebuilding) BLS 4.5 · 9y Form 300A (see methodology below)

LAX safety composite

LAX scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 4%), 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).

F

24/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 12.35 per 100 workers

Safer than 4% of industry peers

DART rate
F 3.09 per 100 workers

Safer than 27% 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%).

LAX held a steady TCR band

LAX's TCR held near 0.3 from 6.0 in 2016 to 5.8 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2022 at 35.4 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.25× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=6.0 · 2017=11.4 · 2018=2.4 · 2019=12.4 · 2020=15.0 · 2021=2.9 · 2022=35.4 · 2023=19.9 · 2024=5.8

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 488190 · Los Angeles, CA ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade F · TCR 12.3 · 274% of ind

  • DART 3.1 DART
  • RANK #112/120
  • PHOTO ACI Jet Maintenance
  • BOOK 9y book
  • INJ 516 inj
  • SIZE ~569 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: ACI Jet Maintenance (0.0 TCR gap)

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

LAX in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows LAX averages 12.3 TCR (274% of the Aircraft maintenance and repair services (except factory conversion, factory overhaul, factory rebuilding) BLS benchmark).

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

LAX TCR series: 2016=6 · 2017=11.4 · 2018=2.4 · 2019=12.4 · 2020=15 · 2021=2.9 · 2022=35.4 · 2023=19.9 · 2024=5.8 · BLS 4.5

Where LAX falls in its industry

992 Aircraft maintenance and repai establishments

Safer than 4% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #112 safest of 120 Aircraft maintenance and repai employers in California.

LAX (569 employees, TCR 12.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 67 employees and a TCR of 3.2 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 05001,0001,500 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate LAX
LAX (569 employees, TCR 12.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 67 employees and a TCR of 3.2

LAX has more employees than the Aircraft maintenance and repair services median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.2. 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 5.8 3.1 28 0 0
2023 19.9 17.9 49 1 0
2022 35.4 24.0 50 3 0
2021 2.9 2.9 1 0 0
2020 15.0 10.0 15 0 0
2019 12.4 6.2 26 0 0
2018 2.4 0.0 1 0 0
2017 11.4 3.4 336 18 0
2016 6.0 4.4 10 1 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

488190 · CA · Los Angeles

992 Aircraft maintenance and repair services (except factory conversion, factory overhaul, factory rebuilding) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 2,064 employers in Los Angeles, 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 ACI Jet Maintenance 12.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR ORD-GH 12.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR FW American Aero Operating Company 12.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Araina Aviation 12.5 TCR
STATE-SIZE RC PACKING- SALINAS VALLEY 569 FTE
STATE-SIZE SSA Terminals, LLC A90-94 569 FTE
STATE-SIZE Redwood Empire Vineyard Management 570 FTE
STATE-SIZE MALAGA CUT/SNACK 570 FTE
CITY-NEAR Live Nation Worldwide, Inc. 50,317 FTE
CITY-NEAR UC Los Angeles 40,333 FTE
CITY-NEAR LADWP 11,717 FTE
CITY-NEAR Los Angeles Department of Water and Power 10,346 FTE
NAT-TCR Genoa Retirement Village 12.3 TCR
NAT-TCR TXS006 12.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Mosaic Axtell 12.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Fareway Stores, Inc. 179 Lincoln 12.3 TCR
NAT-SIZE Murphy Company (Missouri) 569 FTE
NAT-SIZE Northwestern Michigan College - 28999 569 FTE
NAT-SIZE Bae Systems 569 FTE
NAT-SIZE Lennox Residential - Lennox Stores 569 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, 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.