Petitioner Type: Union
Impact Date: 02/23/2003
Filed Date: 03/08/2004
Most Recent Update: 05/20/2004
Determination Date: 05/20/2004
Expiration Date: 07/19/2008
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-54,434
GALE GROUP, INC.
A DIVISION OF THE THOMPSON CORPORATION
BELMONT, CALIFORNIA
Notice of Revised Determination
On Remand
On June 2, 2006, the United States Court of International
Trade (USCIT) granted the Department of Labor’s motion for
voluntary remand for further investigation in Former Employees of
Gale Group, Inc. v. U.S. Secretary of Labor, Court No. 04-00374.
These workers created electronic documents and performed
electronic indexing services and occasionally wrote abstracts of
articles.
On May 20, 2004, the Department of Labor (Department) issued
a negative determination regarding eligibility to apply for Trade
Adjustment Assistance (TAA) for workers of Gale Group, A Division
of the Thompson Corporation, Belmont, California (Gale Group).
The negative determination was based on the investigation’s
finding that the workers did not produce an article in accordance
with Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974 (Trade Act). The
Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility to Apply
for Worker Adjustment Assistance for the subject firm was
published in the Federal Register on June 17, 2004 (69 FR 33940).
In response to the petitioner’s request for administrative
reconsideration, the Department affirmed its finding that the
subject workers did not produce an article within the meaning of
the Trade Act. The Department’s Dismissal of Application for
Reconsideration was issued on July 16, 2004 and the Notice of
Dismissal of Application for Reconsideration was published in the
Federal Register on July 23, 2004 (69 FR 44064).
The petitioners appealed the denial to the USCIT. The
Department made a motion for voluntary remand for further
investigation. The CIT granted the Department’s motion in an
October 25, 2004 Order. In response to that Order, the Department
conducted a further investigation to determine whether the
petitioners were eligible to apply for TAA. On January 27, 2005,
the Department affirmed its conclusion that the workers did not
produce an article within the meaning of the Trade Act. The
Department’s Notice was published in the Federal Register on
February 8, 2005 (70 FR 6732).
The CIT subsequently ruled that the Department’s denial of
TAA certification because the plaintiffs did not produce an
“article” was reasonable and supported by substantial evidence.
The petitioners appealed to the United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit.
After the case reached the Court of Appeals the Department
revised its policy to acknowledge that there are tangible and
intangible articles. Products that would have been considered an
article if embodied in a physical medium will now be considered
an article for purposes of the Trade Act even if transmitted or
stored electronically. Because it is the Department’s practice
to apply a new policy if doing so is in the best interest of the
workers, the Department requested a voluntary remand from the
Court of Appeals to determine whether, under the new policy, the
petitioners are eligible to apply for TAA. The Court of Appeals
remanded the case to the CIT which remanded it to the Department.
Upon review, the Department has determined that the subject
workers produce an intangible article (electronic documents) and
that, following the shift of production abroad, documents like or
directly competitive with those produced at the subject firm were
brought back into the United States.
Conclusion
After careful review of the facts generated through the
remand investigation, I determine that a shift in production
abroad of electronic documents like or directly competitive to
that produced at the subject facility followed by increased
imports contributed to the total or partial separation of a
significant number or proportion of workers at the subject
facilities. In accordance with the provisions of the Act, I make
the following certification:
"All workers of Gale Group, A Division of the Thompson
Corporation, Belmont, California, who became totally or
partially separated from employment on or after February 23,
2003, through two years from the issuance of this revised
determination, are eligible to apply for Trade Adjustment
Assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974."
Signed at Washington, D.C. this 19th day of July 2006.
/s/ Elliott S. Kushner
_______________________________
ELLIOTT S. KUSHNER
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-54,434
GALE GROUP
A DIVISION OF THE THOMSON CORPORATION
BELMONT, CALIFORNIA
Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility
To Apply For Worker Adjustment Assistance
In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 USC 2273), the
Department of Labor herein presents the results of an investigation regarding certification of
eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance.
The investigation was initiated on March 8, 2004 in response to a petition filed on behalf of
workers of Gale Group, a division of The Thomson Corporation, Belmont, California. The workers
performed electronic indexing services. These services involved converting paper periodicals to an
electronic format, assigning relevant index terms and occasionally writing abstracts
The investigation revealed that Gale Group, a division of The Thomson Corporation,
Belmont, California does not produce an article within the meaning of Section 222(a)(2) of the Act.
In order to be considered eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade
Act of 1974, the worker group seeking certification (or on whose behalf certification is being sought)
must work for a "firm" or appropriate subdivision that produces an article and there must be a
relationship between the workers' work and the article produced by the workers' firm or appropriate
subdivision. The petitioning worker group seeking certification does not support a firm or
appropriate subdivision that produces an article and thus the worker group can not be considered
import impacted or affected by a shift in production of an article.
Conclusion
After careful review, I determine that all workers of Gale Group, a division of The Thomson
Corporation, Belmont, California are denied eligibility to apply for adjustment assistance under
Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974.
Signed in Washington, D. C. this 20th day of May 2004.
/s/ Richard Church
______________________________
RICHARD CHURCH
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
Why not say "After the case reached the Court of Appeals?"
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-54,434
GALE GROUP, INC.
A DIVISION OF THE THOMPSON CORPORATION
BELMONT, CALIFORNIA
Notice of Revised Determination
On Remand
On June 2, 2006, the United States Court of International
Trade (USCIT) granted the Department of Labor’s motion for
voluntary remand for further investigation in Former Employees of
Gale Group, Inc. v. U.S. Secretary of Labor, Court No. 04-00374.
These workers created electronic documents and performed
electronic indexing services and occasionally wrote abstracts of
articles.
On May 20, 2004, the Department of Labor (Department) issued
a negative determination regarding eligibility to apply for Trade
Adjustment Assistance (TAA) for workers of Gale Group, A Division
of the Thompson Corporation, Belmont, California (Gale Group).
The negative determination was based on the investigation’s
finding that the workers did not produce an article in accordance
with Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974 (Trade Act). The
Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility to Apply
for Worker Adjustment Assistance for the subject firm was
published in the Federal Register on June 17, 2004 (69 FR 33940).
In response to the petitioner’s request for administrative
reconsideration, the Department affirmed its finding that the
subject workers did not produce an article within the meaning of
the Trade Act. The Department’s Dismissal of Application for
Reconsideration was issued on July 16, 2004 and the Notice of
Dismissal of Application for Reconsideration was published in the
Federal Register on July 23, 2004 (69 FR 44064).
The petitioners appealed the denial to the USCIT. The
Department made a motion for voluntary remand for further
investigation. The CIT granted the Department’s motion in an
October 25, 2004 Order. In response to that Order, the Department
conducted a further investigation to determine whether the
petitioners were eligible to apply for TAA. On January 27, 2005,
the Department affirmed its conclusion that the workers did not
produce an article within the meaning of the Trade Act. The
Department’s Notice was published in the Federal Register on
February 8, 2005 (70 FR 6732).
The CIT subsequently ruled that the Department’s denial of
TAA certification because the plaintiffs did not produce an
“article” was reasonable and supported by substantial evidence.
The petitioners appealed to the United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit.
After the case reached the Court of Appeals the Department
revised its policy to acknowledge that there are tangible and
intangible articles. Products that would have been considered an
article if embodied in a physical medium will now be considered
an article for purposes of the Trade Act even if transmitted or
stored electronically. Because it is the Department’s practice
to apply a new policy if doing so is in the best interest of the
workers, the Department requested a voluntary remand from the
Court of Appeals to determine whether, under the new policy, the
petitioners are eligible to apply for TAA. The Court of Appeals
remanded the case to the CIT which remanded it to the Department.
Upon review, the Department has determined that the subject
workers produce an intangible article (electronic documents) and
that, following the shift of production abroad, documents like or
directly competitive with those produced at the subject firm were
brought back into the United States.
Conclusion
After careful review of the facts generated through the
remand investigation, I determine that a shift in production
abroad of electronic documents like or directly competitive to
that produced at the subject facility followed by increased
imports contributed to the total or partial separation of a
significant number or proportion of workers at the subject
facilities. In accordance with the provisions of the Act, I make
the following certification:
"All workers of Gale Group, A Division of the Thompson
Corporation, Belmont, California, who became totally or
partially separated from employment on or after February 23,
2003, through two years from the issuance of this revised
determination, are eligible to apply for Trade Adjustment
Assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974."
Signed at Washington, D.C. this 19th day of July 2006.
/s/ Elliott S. Kushner
_______________________________
ELLIOTT S. KUSHNER
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-54,434
GALE GROUP
A DIVISION OF THE THOMSON CORPORATION
BELMONT, CALIFORNIA
Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility
To Apply For Worker Adjustment Assistance
In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 USC 2273), the
Department of Labor herein presents the results of an investigation regarding certification of
eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance.
The investigation was initiated on March 8, 2004 in response to a petition filed on behalf of
workers of Gale Group, a division of The Thomson Corporation, Belmont, California. The workers
performed electronic indexing services. These services involved converting paper periodicals to an
electronic format, assigning relevant index terms and occasionally writing abstracts
The investigation revealed that Gale Group, a division of The Thomson Corporation,
Belmont, California does not produce an article within the meaning of Section 222(a)(2) of the Act.
In order to be considered eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade
Act of 1974, the worker group seeking certification (or on whose behalf certification is being sought)
must work for a "firm" or appropriate subdivision that produces an article and there must be a
relationship between the workers' work and the article produced by the workers' firm or appropriate
subdivision. The petitioning worker group seeking certification does not support a firm or
appropriate subdivision that produces an article and thus the worker group can not be considered
import impacted or affected by a shift in production of an article.
Conclusion
After careful review, I determine that all workers of Gale Group, a division of The Thomson
Corporation, Belmont, California are denied eligibility to apply for adjustment assistance under
Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974.
Signed in Washington, D. C. this 20th day of May 2004.
/s/ Richard Church
______________________________
RICHARD CHURCH
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
Why not say "After the case reached the Court of Appeals?"