Petitioner Type: Workers
Impact Date:
Filed Date: 11/18/2002
Most Recent Update: 01/17/2003
Determination Date: 01/17/2003
Expiration Date:
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-50,114
CADMUS MACK (CPS)
EAST STROUDSBURG, PENNSYLVANIA
Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration
By application postmarked February 12, 2003, the Graphic
Communications International Union (GCIU), Local 350C,
requested administrative reconsideration of the Department's
negative determination regarding eligibility to apply for Trade
Adjustment Assistance (TAA), applicable to workers and former
workers of the subject firm. The denial notice was signed on
January 17, 2003, and published in the Federal Register on
February 6, 2003 (68 FR 6211).
Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c) reconsideration may be granted
under the following circumstances:
(1) If it appears on the basis of facts not previously
considered that the determination complained of
was erroneous;
(2) if it appears that the determination complained of
was based on a mistake in the determination of facts
not previously considered; or
(3) if in the opinion of the Certifying Officer, a mis-
interpretation of facts or of the law justified
reconsideration of the decision.
The petition for the workers of Cadmus Mack, CPS), East
Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania was denied because the “contributed
importantly” group eligibility requirement of Section 222 of the
Trade Act of 1974, was not met. Imports did not contribute
importantly to the layoffs at the subject plant nor was there a
shift in production to a foreign source.
The union asserts that the loss in business at the subject
firm was directly attributable to competition with a Canadian
competitor and its “dominance in the marketplace” is responsible
for declines at the subject firm. Specifically, the union states
that this Canadian firm has been the “largest commercial printer
in the U.S. and Canada for four years in a row.”
The original investigation established that layoffs and the
closing of the East Stroudsberg facility were directly
attributable to a transfer of production to a domestic affiliate.
Further, sales and production declined minimally prior to the
domestic shift.
In addition, a review of aggregate U.S. import data of
newspapers, journals and periodicals for January through October
2002 declined in volume over the corresponding period of 2001.
Conclusion
After review of the application and investigative findings,
I conclude that there has been no error or misinterpretation of
the law or of the facts which would justify reconsideration of
the Department of Labor's prior decision. Accordingly, the
application is denied.
Signed at Washington, D.C. this 10th day of July, 2003
/s/ Elliott S. Kushner
ELLIOTT S. KUSHNER
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-50,114
CADMUS MACK (CPS)
EAST STROUDSBURG, PENNSYLVANIA
Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration
By application postmarked February 12, 2003, the Graphic
Communications International Union (GCIU), Local 350C,
requested administrative reconsideration of the Department's
negative determination regarding eligibility to apply for Trade
Adjustment Assistance (TAA), applicable to workers and former
workers of the subject firm. The denial notice was signed on
January 17, 2003, and published in the Federal Register on
February 6, 2003 (68 FR 6211).
Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c) reconsideration may be granted
under the following circumstances:
(1) If it appears on the basis of facts not previously
considered that the determination complained of
was erroneous;
(2) if it appears that the determination complained of
was based on a mistake in the determination of facts
not previously considered; or
(3) if in the opinion of the Certifying Officer, a mis-
interpretation of facts or of the law justified
reconsideration of the decision.
The petition for the workers of Cadmus Mack, CPS), East
Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania was denied because the “contributed
importantly” group eligibility requirement of Section 222 of the
Trade Act of 1974, was not met. Imports did not contribute
importantly to the layoffs at the subject plant nor was there a
shift in production to a foreign source.
The union asserts that the loss in business at the subject
firm was directly attributable to competition with a Canadian
competitor and its “dominance in the marketplace” is responsible
for declines at the subject firm. Specifically, the union states
that this Canadian firm has been the “largest commercial printer
in the U.S. and Canada for four years in a row.”
The original investigation established that layoffs and the
closing of the East Stroudsberg facility were directly
attributable to a transfer of production to a domestic affiliate.
Further, sales and production declined minimally prior to the
domestic shift.
In addition, a review of aggregate U.S. import data of
newspapers, journals and periodicals for January through October
2002 declined in volume over the corresponding period of 2001.
Conclusion
After review of the application and investigative findings,
I conclude that there has been no error or misinterpretation of
the law or of the facts which would justify reconsideration of
the Department of Labor's prior decision. Accordingly, the
application is denied.
Signed at Washington, D.C. this 10th day of July, 2003
/s/ Elliott S. Kushner
ELLIOTT S. KUSHNER
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance