Industry profile · NAICS 541712

Electronic research and development laboratories or services

Workplace injury rates across 468 OSHA-reporting establishments in this industry, 2016–2024.

468
Employers
1.3
Avg TCR
0.5
BLS benchmark
2,639
Injuries

The industry picture

Employers in Electronic research and development laboratories or services average 1.3 recordable injuries per 100 workers, 2.5 times the BLS national benchmark of 0.5.

1.3
avg TCR · reporting employers
0.5
BLS national benchmark
468
employers reporting
2,639
recordable injuries

OSHA-reporting establishments skew toward larger, higher-hazard sites, so the reporting average runs above the BLS all-establishment benchmark.

What Electronic research and development laboratories or services Safety Data Reveals

The Electronic research and development laboratories or services sector (NAICS 541712) encompasses 468 distinct employer establishments currently reporting to OSHA's Injury Tracking Application. Across this cohort, workers have logged 2,639 recordable injuries during the 2016–2024 reporting window, producing an industry-weighted average Total Case Rate (TCR) of 1.3 injuries per 100 full-time workers per year. Because OSHA's ITA mandates submission from establishments with 250+ employees plus all high-hazard industries at 20+ employees, this dataset represents a structural slice of U.S. workplace risk rather than a voluntary sample.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes a separate national benchmark TCR of 0.5 for this NAICS code, derived from the BLS Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses. Comparing the two, the ITA-reported rate of 1.3 is higher than the BLS benchmark, a gap that typically widens when the industry contains many large, high-exposure establishments required to file ITA reports. Employers in the table below are sorted so you can see how far individual establishments deviate from both the industry average and the national benchmark.

The practical value of industry-level safety data is threefold. First, jobseekers can gauge whether a prospective employer is better or worse than its industry peers, not just absolute injury counts, which tilt toward larger payrolls. Second, insurers and workers' compensation carriers use sector TCR as a baseline for experience-modification adjustments. Third, safety professionals benchmark their own programs against the cohort median. Use the grade-sorted employer list below to identify specific establishments within Electronic research and development laboratories or services that outperform or underperform the sector average, and click through to each record for year-by-year injury, illness, and fatality breakdowns.

Employers in this industry, by injury rate

Page 2 of 10
Employer LocationGradeAvg TCR
Groton CT Groton, CT F 2.2
Interventional Urology Business Unit (IUBU) Pleasanton, CA F 2.2
UHM/CTAHR/TPSS Honolulu, HI F 2.1
Parent/Research - H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center Tampa, FL F 2.1
Calspan Corporation - Niagara Niagara Falls, NY F 2.1
IfA-Hilo Hilo, HI F 2.1
Master Builders Solutions - Shakopee Shakopee, MN F 2.1
Concord Biosciences Concord, OH F 2.0
Millipore Sigma 75 Sylvan Street Danvers Danvers, MA F 2.0
PD&I Hickory, NC F 2.0
Hoffman Estates Hoffman Estates, IL F 1.9
Memphis 5650 Memphis, TN F 1.9
Honolulu Community College Honolulu, HI F 1.9
Eli Lilly - Lilly Corp Center Indianapolis, IN F 1.9
Snug Harbor/Marine Ctr Honolulu, HI F 1.9
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Woods Hole, MA F 1.8
Agricenter International Memphis, TN F 1.8
Rockford Lab Rockford, IL F 1.8
Fortitude (BSA) Mesa, AZ F 1.8
ICM, Inc. Technology Development Saint Joseph, MO F 1.8
CTI-SF South San Francisco, CA F 1.8
Lankenau Institute for Medical Research (LIMR) Wynnewood, PA F 1.8
Imiloa Astronomy Center of HI Hilo, HI F 1.7
Topography Health, Inc. Los Angeles, CA F 1.7
EVERSANA Life Science Services LLC - Memphis, TN Memphis, TN F 1.7
PVE C2 - Product Validation Engineering Portland, OR F 1.7
Silicon Mountain Contract Svcs Nampa, ID F 1.7
10 Tyler Street Somerville, MA F 1.6
Corteva - Marion, IA Marion, IA F 1.6
Saint-Gobain, Plymouth MN Minneapolis, MN F 1.6
Hyster-Yale Group - Fairview, Oregon Fairview, OR F 1.6
C6-NC Elizabeth City, NC F 1.6
EMD Millipore-Springfield Sites West Springfield, MA F 1.5
PBRC Honolulu, HI F 1.5
Walt Disney Imagineering Research & Development, Inc. Glendale, CA F 1.5
Colket Translational Research Philadelphia, PA F 1.4
Cooper Standard Livonia Livonia, MI F 1.4
Windward Community College Kaneohe, HI F 1.4
Ennis-Flint R&D Thomasville, NC F 1.4
IBC Materials & Technologies Inc. Lebanon, IN F 1.3
Frontage Laboratories, Inc. - 700 Exton, PA F 1.3
DMCR Tomball Tomball, TX F 1.3
CIMAR Honolulu, HI F 1.3
Huntsman Corporation - Merrimack Merrimack, NH F 1.3
Frontage Laboratories, Inc. - 760 Exton, PA F 1.3
Rocky Mountain Scientific Laboratory Littleton, CO F 1.3
Americas Resins and Global FM : Springfield RD Lab Springfield, OR F 1.3
Novartis Institutes of Biomedical Research San Diego, CA F 1.3
Dynetics Technical Solutions Huntsville, AL F 1.3
Mallard Creek Polymers LLC - Research Charlotte, NC F 1.3
← Prev Page 2 of 10 Next →
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details. Retrieved and formatted by PlainSafetyScore Editorial

Verify with BLS →

Verify with OSHA →

Working in Electronic research and development laboratories or services?

This sector averages 1.3 against a BLS benchmark of 0.5 - but individual employers span the full A-to-F range.

Sector figures use the credible-subset mean across reporting employers; a benchmark is not any single establishment's measured rate.

Every figure and grade on PlainSafetyScore is computed directly from OSHA's published Injury Tracking Application data and BLS industry benchmarks, no number is typed in by an editor. See our editorial standards & corrections policy, the methodology behind these safety grades, or report a data error. Data current as of 2016-2024 OSHA ITA release.