Diagnostic imaging equipment repair and maintenance services · Massachusetts

Philips NAM Field Sales & Service

Cambridge, MA · ~5,136 workers · 4 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
0.6
Avg TCR
2.1
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Philips NAM Field Sales & Service runs at 27% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Diagnostic imaging equipment repair and maintenance services workplace, earning a grade A.

Philips NAM Field Sales & Service: 0.6 TCR = 27% of Diagnostic imaging equipment repair and maintenance services BLS 2.1 · 4y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Philips NAM Field Sales & Service safety composite

Philips NAM Field Sales & Service scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 77% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 49%), 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).

C

60/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
B 0.56 per 100 workers

Safer than 77% of industry peers

DART rate
D 0.25 per 100 workers

Safer than 49% 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%).

Rising injury rate

Philips NAM Field Sales & Service: 0.0 → 0.5 TCR

Peak year 2021 @ 0.9 TCR · DART/TCR 0.45× in 2023

Philips NAM Field Sales & Service's TCR rose 0.5 from 0.0 in 2020 to 0.5 in 2023. Peak filing year was 2021 at 0.9 TCR. In 2023, DART was 0.45× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 811219 · Cambridge, MA AT/BELOW-IND · LARGE

Grade A · TCR 0.6 · 27% of ind

  • DART 0.3 DART
  • RANK #2/5
  • PHOTO Varian, Schiller Park
  • BOOK 4y book
  • INJ 117 inj
  • SIZE ~5,136 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Varian, Schiller Park (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Philips NAM Field Sales & Service in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Philips NAM Field Sales & Service averages 0.6 TCR (27% of the Diagnostic imaging equipment repair and maintenance services BLS benchmark).

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

Philips NAM Field Sales & Service TCR series: 2020=0 · 2021=0.9 · 2022=0.8 · 2023=0.5 · BLS 2.1

Where Philips NAM Field Sales & Service falls in its industry

56 Diagnostic imaging equipment r establishments

Safer than 77% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.1.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Massachusetts alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #2 safest of 5 Diagnostic imaging equipment r employers in Massachusetts.

Philips NAM Field Sales & Service (5,136 employees, TCR 0.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 190 employees and a TCR of 1.1 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 02,0004,0006,000 0246810 Average employees Total Case Rate Philips NAM Field Sales & Service
Philips NAM Field Sales & Service (5,136 employees, TCR 0.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 190 employees and a TCR of 1.1

Philips NAM Field Sales & Service has more employees than the Diagnostic imaging equipment repair and median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.1. 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
2023 0.5 0.3 28 0 0
2022 0.8 0.5 41 0 0
2021 0.9 0.6 48 0 0
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

811219 · MA · Cambridge

56 Diagnostic imaging equipment repair and maintenance services employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 10,108 rated employers in Massachusetts with headcount on file · 149 employers in Cambridge, MA · 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 Varian, Schiller Park 0.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Aldinger Company 0.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Varian, Milpitas 0.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR KW Corporation, INC 0.6 TCR
STATE-SIZE Philips NAM Field Sales & Service 4,812 FTE
STATE-SIZE IntelyCare, Inc. 4,725 FTE
STATE-SIZE MA-01 4,581 FTE
STATE-SIZE Raytheon_Andover_MA 4,577 FTE
CITY-NEAR Vinfen Corporation 2,662 FTE
CITY-NEAR Biogen - Cambridge 2,478 FTE
CITY-NEAR Cambridge Campus 2,473 FTE
CITY-NEAR Novartis Institutes for Biomedical Research, Inc. 2,272 FTE
NAT-TCR Charps All 0.6 TCR
NAT-TCR 3M DeKalb - DSI 0.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Shelbey Service Cemter 0.6 TCR
NAT-TCR 92 - Archer Western Construction, LLC 0.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE California Department of Transportation Facility 425 5,136 FTE
NAT-SIZE California Department of Transportation Facility 419 5,136 FTE
NAT-SIZE Edwards Lifesciences LLC 5,142 FTE
NAT-SIZE Jefferson North Assembly Plant 5,123 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.