Mixed mode transit systems (e.g., bus, commuter rail, subway combinations) · California

Location 60

Los Angeles, CA · ~118 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
1.2
Avg TCR
4.5
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Location 60 runs at 28% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Mixed mode transit systems (e.g., bus, commuter rail, subway combinations) workplace, earning a grade A.

Location 60: 1.2 TCR = 28% of Mixed mode transit systems (e.g., bus, commuter rail, subway combinations) BLS 4.5 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Location 60 safety composite

Location 60 scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 94% 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

83/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
A 1.24 per 100 workers

Safer than 94% of industry peers

DART rate
A 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 93% 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

−1.8

2017→2024

Location 60 injury rate improved

Location 60's TCR fell 1.8 from 2.4 in 2017 to 0.6 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2017 at 2.4 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=2.4 · 2019=0.7 · 2020=1.0 · 2021=1.8 · 2022=2.2 · 2023=0.0 · 2024=0.6

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 485111 · Los Angeles, CA AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade A · TCR 1.2 · 28% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #5/75
  • PHOTO Midlothian, TX - Rai…
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 7 inj
  • SIZE ~118 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Midlothian, TX - Rail Port Parkway (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Location 60 in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Location 60 averages 1.2 TCR (28% of the Mixed mode transit systems (e.g., bus, commuter rail, subway combinations) BLS benchmark).

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

Location 60 TCR series: 2017=2.4 · 2019=0.7 · 2020=1 · 2021=1.8 · 2022=2.2 · 2023=0 · 2024=0.6 · BLS 4.5

Where Location 60 falls in its industry

421 Mixed mode transit systems (e. establishments

Safer than 94% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 5.8.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #5 safest of 75 Mixed mode transit systems (e. employers in California.

Location 60 (118 employees, TCR 1.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 217 employees and a TCR of 5.8 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 Location 60
Location 60 (118 employees, TCR 1.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 217 employees and a TCR of 5.8

Location 60 has fewer employees than the Mixed mode transit systems (e.g., bus, c median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 5.8. 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 0.6 0.0 1 0 0
2023 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2022 2.2 2.2 3 0 0
2021 1.8 0.9 1 1 0
2020 1.0 0.0 1 0 0
2019 0.7 0.0 1 0 0
2017 2.4 0.0 0 3 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

485111 · CA · Los Angeles

421 Mixed mode transit systems (e.g., bus, commuter rail, subway combinations) 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 Midlothian, TX - Rail Port Parkway 1.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Joppa, MD - Philadelphia, PA 1.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR San Mateo County Transit District 1.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Fife, WA- Valley Avenue 1.2 TCR
STATE-SIZE Prestige Farming inc 118 FTE
STATE-SIZE Cipponeri Orchards 118 FTE
STATE-SIZE PHC Facilities, Inc. dba The Plug DTLA 118 FTE
STATE-SIZE Plug Connection - Lodi 118 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 Wadman Corporation 1.2 TCR
NAT-TCR AMP Companies, Inc. 1.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Kalmbach Swine Management 1.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Melbourne 1.2 TCR
NAT-SIZE Wilke Window & Door 118 FTE
NAT-SIZE Town Of Hartford 118 FTE
NAT-SIZE ASAP Industries Manufacturing, Inc. 118 FTE
NAT-SIZE ZM Sheet Metal - Winchester 118 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, 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.