Waste collection services, nonhazardous solid · California

Mission Trail Waste Systems

Santa Clara, CA · ~78 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
6.2
Avg TCR
2.6
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Mission Trail Waste Systems runs at 237% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Waste collection services, nonhazardous solid workplace, earning a grade F.

Mission Trail Waste Systems: 6.2 TCR = 237% of Waste collection services, nonhazardous solid BLS 2.6 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Mission Trail Waste Systems safety composite

Mission Trail Waste Systems scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 52% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 10%), 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

32/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 6.16 per 100 workers

Safer than 38% of industry peers

DART rate
F 10.78 per 100 workers

Safer than 10% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 52% 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

Mission Trail Waste Systems: 9.3 → 12.0 TCR

Peak year 2024 @ 12.0 TCR · DART/TCR 1.75× in 2024

Mission Trail Waste Systems's TCR rose 2.7 from 9.3 in 2017 to 12.0 in 2024. In 2024, DART was 1.75× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 562111 · Santa Clara, CA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 6.2 · 237% of ind

  • DART 10.8 DART
  • RANK #116/247
  • PHOTO S09761 - Los Angeles…
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 44 inj
  • SIZE ~78 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: S09761 - Los Angeles City Hauling (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Mission Trail Waste Systems in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Mission Trail Waste Systems averages 6.2 TCR (237% of the Waste collection services, nonhazardous solid BLS benchmark).

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

Mission Trail Waste Systems TCR series: 2017=9.3 · 2018=8.3 · 2019=4.3 · 2020=4.7 · 2021=5.9 · 2022=2.4 · 2023=2.4 · 2024=12 · BLS 2.6

Where Mission Trail Waste Systems falls in its industry

2,322 Waste collection services, non establishments

Safer than 38% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 5.1.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #116 safest of 247 Waste collection services, non employers in California.

Mission Trail Waste Systems (78 employees, TCR 6.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 55 employees and a TCR of 5.1 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 0100200300400 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Mission Trail Waste Systems
Mission Trail Waste Systems (78 employees, TCR 6.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 55 employees and a TCR of 5.1

Mission Trail Waste Systems has more employees than the Waste collection services, nonhazardous median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 5.1. 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
2024 12.0 10.8 10 0 0
2023 2.4 0.0 2 0 0
2022 2.4 2.4 2 0 0
2021 5.9 2.4 5 0 0
2020 4.7 3.5 4 0 0
2019 4.3 2.1 4 0 0
2018 8.3 4.2 8 0 0
2017 9.3 8.3 9 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

562111 · CA · Santa Clara

2,322 Waste collection services, nonhazardous solid employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 332 employers in Santa Clara, 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 S09761 - Los Angeles City Hauling 6.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR S11135 - White Mountain Hauling 6.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR S10303 - Blue Ridge Hauling 6.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR RIR - Trash Inc. 6.2 TCR
STATE-SIZE California Endive Farms 78 FTE
STATE-SIZE VF - Napa 78 FTE
STATE-SIZE Russell Harris Farms 78 FTE
STATE-SIZE Hadley Date Gardens, Inc. 78 FTE
CITY-NEAR Mission Campus 6,222 FTE
CITY-NEAR Pure Storage 5,595 FTE
CITY-NEAR 2032-02120751 3,887 FTE
CITY-NEAR 0206-02620751 3,154 FTE
NAT-TCR HEC Mfg 6.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Valley Sales, Inc 6.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Fairchild Airforce Base Custodial Grounds 6.2 TCR
NAT-TCR South Lyon Medical Center 6.2 TCR
NAT-SIZE Simmons Knife & Saw 78 FTE
NAT-SIZE CW Young Construction, LP 78 FTE
NAT-SIZE L.A. Barrier & Son, Inc. 78 FTE
NAT-SIZE Sodexo at Holmes Regional Med Ctr Evs 78 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.