Denied
« back to search results

TAW-53702  /  Snap-on Tools Manufacturing Co (Kenosha, WI)

Petitioner Type: Union
Impact Date:
Filed Date: 12/04/2003
Most Recent Update: 02/06/2004
Determination Date: 02/06/2004
Expiration Date:

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-53,702

SNAP-ON TOOLS MANUFACTURING COMPANY
KENOSHA, WISCONSIN

Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

By application of March 5, 2004, International Association of
Machinists, District Lodge 34 requested administrative
reconsideration of the Department's negative determination regarding
eligibility for workers and former workers of the subject firm to
apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA). The denial notice was
published in the Federal Register on March 12, 2004 (69 FR 11888).
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 TAA petition, filed on behalf of workers at Snap-On
Tolls Manufacturing Company, Kenosha, Wisconsin engaged in the
production of hand tools, was denied because criteria I.C and
II.B and the "contributed importantly" group eligibility
requirement of Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended,
were not met. The “contributed importantly” test is generally
demonstrated through a survey of the workers’ firm’s customers.
The survey revealed an insignificant level of imports during the
relevant period. The subject firm imported a negligible amount of
hand tools during the relevant period.
The petitioner alleges that the company is currently in the
process of purchasing a facility in China for the purpose of
shifting some of the production from the subject facility.
A company official was contacted in regard to these
allegations. The official stated that there never was a shift of
hand tools production from Snap-On Tolls Manufacturing Company,
Kenosha, Wisconsin abroad and no plans exist to move any
production from the subject facility to China.
The petitioner further alleges that Snap-on, Inc. is
considering to discontinue the E-Line Plier line and replacing it
with foreign made products, manufactured in Sweden or Germany and
mentions Blue Point product, which was affected by the foreign
trade.
The official stated that E-Line Pliers were never
manufactured at the subject facility and that this line existed
at another Snap-on Tools, Inc. facility in Mt. Carmel, Illinois.
The official further stated that the company does import power
tools which are branded as Blue Point, however, they are not like
or directly competitive with products manufactured at Snap-On
Tolls Manufacturing Company, Kenosha, Wisconsin. The company has
been outsourcing manufacturing of the adjustable wrenches and
pliers from overseas vendors for many years, however, this
sourcing, including Blue Point tools represents less than 2
percent of the overall production of Snap-on, Inc. and did not
increase during the relevant time period.
Finally, the petitioner alleges that the subject firm lost a
considerable amount of business to its competitor, a company
which is “more price-competitive due to the use of overseas
trade.”
A review of competitors is not relevant to an investigation
concerning import impact on workers applying for trade adjustment
assistance. As noted above, “contributed importantly” test is
generally demonstrated through a survey of customers of the
workers’ firm to examine the direct import impact on a specific
firm. No imports or very insignificant amount of imports of hand
tools were evidenced during the survey of subject firm’s
customers during the original investigation.
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 decisions. Accordingly, the
application is denied.

Signed at Washington, D.C., this 30th day April 2004.
/s/ Elliott S. Kushner
_______________________
ELLIOTT S. KUSHNER
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance