Industry profile · NAICS 541330

Engineering services

Workplace injury rates across 1,054 OSHA-reporting establishments in this industry, 2016–2024.

1,054
Employers
1.9
Avg TCR
0.5
BLS benchmark
4,629
Injuries

The industry picture

Employers in Engineering services average 1.9 recordable injuries per 100 workers, 3.8 times the BLS national benchmark of 0.5.

1.9
avg TCR · reporting employers
0.5
BLS national benchmark
1,054
employers reporting
4,629
recordable injuries

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

What Engineering services Safety Data Reveals

The Engineering services sector (NAICS 541330) encompasses 1,054 distinct employer establishments currently reporting to OSHA's Injury Tracking Application. Across this cohort, workers have logged 4,629 recordable injuries during the 2016–2024 reporting window, producing an industry-weighted average Total Case Rate (TCR) of 1.9 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 1.9 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 Engineering 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 3 of 23
Employer LocationGradeAvg TCR
Envista Forensics LLC Deerfield, IL F 3.7
Hi-Tech Machining & Engineering, L.L.C. Tucson, AZ F 3.6
Woolpert- Charlotte Charlotte, VA F 3.5
Ingios Geotechnics, Inc Northfield, MN F 3.5
Sodexo at Phoenix Children'S Hosp-Evs Phoenix, AZ F 3.5
Kalman & Company Inc - TX - Fort Worth Fort Worth, TX F 3.5
Danieli Ashland Service Center Ashland, KY F 3.4
Concord Office Concord, CA F 3.4
Kalman & Company Inc - GA - DARD Warehouse Albany, GA F 3.4
Maritime Applied Physics Corporation Baltimore, MD F 3.4
Carlson McCain - Blaine Blaine, MN F 3.3
Engineering California San Diego, CA F 3.3
V3 Companies - Woodridge Woodridge, IL F 3.3
Donan Engineering Louisville, KY F 3.2
B50 Livonia, MI F 3.1
Netzer-Russell Consulting Ridgecrest, CA F 3.1
CC&I Engineering Perham, MN F 3.1
BAE Systems I&S - Summerville Summerville, SC F 3.1
Borsight Inc Ogden, UT F 3.1
SRC Hurlburt Field Atlanta, GA F 3.0
Alexandria VA Alexandria, VA F 3.0
Knoxville Machine Shop Knoxville, TN F 3.0
City of Riverside Public Works Engineering, Construction Inspection, Survey Riverside, CA F 3.0
MHS Mount Washington, KY F 3.0
CTL Thompson, Inc. - Denver Denver, CO F 2.9
Ijility LLC Milton, GA F 2.9
Sodexo at Tenet Sinai Grace Hospital Evs Detroit, MI F 2.8
Santa Ana, CA Santa Ana, CA F 2.8
Florida Engineering & Development Corp Hialeah Gardens, FL F 2.8
Woolpert- Columbia Columbia, SC F 2.8
Sterling Engineering and Survey St Louis, MO F 2.8
Edge Construction USA Inc Fort Lauderdale, FL F 2.8
Garrett J. Gentry General Engineering Inc. Upland, CA F 2.8
B44 Bemidji, MN F 2.8
SRC Norfolk Norfolk, VA F 2.8
Automotive Safety Center Dearborn, MI F 2.8
Oceaneering International/Advanced Technologies San Diego, CA F 2.7
Organic Solution Management, LLC Indianapolis, IN F 2.7
Emerio design, LLC Beaverton, OR F 2.7
Schust Development, Inc Fort Wayne, IN F 2.7
Valkyrie Enterprises Virginia Beach, VA F 2.7
City of Kingman Engineering Department Kingman, AZ F 2.6
R. M. Towill Corporation Honolulu, HI F 2.6
Pacific Rim Camas, WA F 2.5
TRW Vehicle Safety Systems-Romeo Romeo, MI F 2.5
Engineering California Encinitas, CA F 2.5
California Environmental Systems, Inc. Auburn, CA F 2.5
Amee Bay LLC Hanahan, SC F 2.5
Macro Lite Lenexa, KS F 2.5
New York City Department of Design & Construction: Staten Island Staten Island, NY F 2.5
← Prev Page 3 of 23 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 Engineering services?

This sector averages 1.9 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.