Receiver-transmitter units (i.e., transceivers) manufacturing · California

Systems Engineering & Management Company

Vista, CA · ~29 workers · 6 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
0.6
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Systems Engineering & Management Company runs at 19% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Receiver-transmitter units (i.e., transceivers) manufacturing workplace, earning a grade A.

Systems Engineering & Management Company: 0.6 TCR = 19% of Receiver-transmitter units (i.e., transceivers) manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 6y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Systems Engineering & Management Company safety composite

Systems Engineering & Management Company scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 69% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 50%), 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

62/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 0.62 per 100 workers

Safer than 64% of industry peers

DART rate
C 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 69% 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%).

TCR Δ

−3.7

2018→2024

Systems Engineering & Management Company injury rate improved

Systems Engineering & Management Company's TCR fell 3.7 from 3.7 in 2018 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2018 at 3.7 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2018=3.7 · 2020=0.0 · 2021=0.0 · 2022=0.0 · 2023=0.0 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 334220 · Vista, CA AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade A · TCR 0.6 · 19% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #14/43
  • PHOTO EF Johnson Technolog…
  • BOOK 6y book
  • INJ 1 inj
  • SIZE ~29 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: EF Johnson Technologies Irving, TX (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Systems Engineering & Management Company in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Systems Engineering & Management Company averages 0.6 TCR (19% of the Receiver-transmitter units (i.e., transceivers) manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Systems Engineering & Management Company TCR series: 2018=3.7 · 2020=0 · 2021=0 · 2022=0 · 2023=0 · 2024=0 · BLS 3.3

Where Systems Engineering & Management Company falls in its industry

247 Receiver-transmitter units (i. establishments

Safer than 64% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.1.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #14 safest of 43 Receiver-transmitter units (i. employers in California.

Systems Engineering & Management Company (29 employees, TCR 0.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 115 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 05001,0001,500 0246 Average employees Total Case Rate Systems Engineering & Management Company
Systems Engineering & Management Company (29 employees, TCR 0.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 115 employees and a TCR of 1.1

Systems Engineering & Management Company has fewer employees than the Receiver-transmitter units (i.e., transc 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
2024 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2023 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2022 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2021 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2018 3.7 3.7 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

334220 · CA · Vista

247 Receiver-transmitter units (i.e., transceivers) manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 197 employers in Vista, 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 EF Johnson Technologies Irving, TX 0.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Hughes Network Systems - Manufacturing 0.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Viasat Germantown 0.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Phoenix EMS 0.7 TCR
STATE-SIZE Sean V. Doherty Farms 29 FTE
STATE-SIZE Blanco Farms, LLC 29 FTE
STATE-SIZE CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT SHOP 29 FTE
STATE-SIZE Cottonwood Farms 29 FTE
CITY-NEAR 05-CACTUS 1,065 FTE
CITY-NEAR Cactus - 05 949 FTE
CITY-NEAR Vista HQ 758 FTE
CITY-NEAR 01-CORP 522 FTE
NAT-TCR District Service Center 0.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Air Cruisers Company / Vest Plant 0.6 TCR
NAT-TCR D.R. Reynolds Company Inc 0.6 TCR
NAT-TCR HPC Fire Inspired 0.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE Hutchinson Service Center 29 FTE
NAT-SIZE Appalachian Pallet & Precut 29 FTE
NAT-SIZE Bergeron Construction Co. Inc 29 FTE
NAT-SIZE Cashmere 29 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, 2018. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.