Petitioner Type: State
Impact Date:
Filed Date: 02/22/2006
Most Recent Update: 03/31/2006
Determination Date: 03/31/2006
Expiration Date:
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-58,887
HADEN SCHWEITZER CORPORATION
A DIVISION OF HADEN INTERNATIONAL GROUP
AUBURN HILLS, MICHIGAN
Negative Determinations Regarding Eligibility
To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance
And Alternative Trade 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 group eligibility requirements for directly-impacted (primary) workers under Section 222(a) the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, can be satisfied in either of two ways:
I. Section (a)(2)(A) all of the following must be satisfied:
A. a significant number or proportion of the workers in such workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the firm, have become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or partially separated;
B. the sales or production, or both, of such firm or subdivision have decreased absolutely; and
C. increased imports of articles like or directly competitive with articles produced by such firm or subdivision have contributed importantly to such workers’ separation or threat of separation and to the decline in sales or production of such firm or subdivision; or
II. Section (a)(2)(B) both of the following must be satisfied:
A. a significant number or proportion of the workers in such
workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the firm, have become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or partially separated;
B. there has been a shift in production by such workers’ firm or subdivision to a foreign country of articles like or directly competitive with articles which are produced by such firm or subdivision; and
C. One of the following must be satisfied:
1. the country to which the workers’ firm has shifted production of the articles is a party to a free trade agreement with the United States;
2. the country to which the workers’ firm has shifted production of the articles is a beneficiary country under the Andean Trade Preference Act, African Growth and Opportunity Act, or the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act; or
3. there has been or is likely to be an increase in imports of articles that are like or directly competitive with articles which are or were produced by such firm or subdivision.
The investigation was initiated on February 22, 2006 in response to a petition filed by a state agency representative on behalf of workers of Haden Schweitzer Corporation, a division of Haden International Group, Auburn Hills, Michigan. The workers produce industrial paint application equipment, mainly for automotive applications.
The investigation revealed that criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.C) and (a)(2)(B)(II.B) have not been met.
The subject facility did not import industrial paint application equipment in 2004, 2005 or January through February of 2006. Although the subject firm does import some component parts and subassemblies, these products were not themselves manufactured by the subject facility.
The subject facility did not shift production of industrial paint application equipment to a foreign country during the period under investigation.
The Department of Labor surveyed firms to which the subject facility submitted bids to produce industrial paint application equipment on a contract basis. The survey revealed either that the firms winning the contracts were located in the United States, or that the contract was for an application system facility located abroad and thus any equipment going into the project was not imported into the U.S.
In addition, in accordance with Section 246 the Trade Act of 1974 (26 USC 2813), as amended, the Department of Labor herein presents the results of its investigation regarding certification of eligibility to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance (ATAA) for older workers.
In order for the Department to issue a certification of eligibility to apply for ATAA, the worker group must be certified eligible to apply for trade adjustment assistance (TAA). Since the workers are denied eligibility to apply for TAA, the workers cannot be certified eligible for ATAA.
Conclusion
After careful review of the facts obtained in the investigation, I determine that all workers of Haden Schweitzer Corporation, a division of Haden International Group, Auburn Hills, Michigan are denied eligibility to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are also denied eligibility to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974.
Signed in Washington, D.C., this 31st day of March 2006
/s/Richard Church
______________________________
RICHARD CHURCH
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-58,887
HADEN SCHWEITZER CORPORATION
A DIVISION OF HADEN INTERNATIONAL GROUP
AUBURN HILLS, MICHIGAN
Negative Determinations Regarding Eligibility
To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance
And Alternative Trade 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 group eligibility requirements for directly-impacted (primary) workers under Section 222(a) the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, can be satisfied in either of two ways:
I. Section (a)(2)(A) all of the following must be satisfied:
A. a significant number or proportion of the workers in such workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the firm, have become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or partially separated;
B. the sales or production, or both, of such firm or subdivision have decreased absolutely; and
C. increased imports of articles like or directly competitive with articles produced by such firm or subdivision have contributed importantly to such workers’ separation or threat of separation and to the decline in sales or production of such firm or subdivision; or
II. Section (a)(2)(B) both of the following must be satisfied:
A. a significant number or proportion of the workers in such
workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the firm, have become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or partially separated;
B. there has been a shift in production by such workers’ firm or subdivision to a foreign country of articles like or directly competitive with articles which are produced by such firm or subdivision; and
C. One of the following must be satisfied:
1. the country to which the workers’ firm has shifted production of the articles is a party to a free trade agreement with the United States;
2. the country to which the workers’ firm has shifted production of the articles is a beneficiary country under the Andean Trade Preference Act, African Growth and Opportunity Act, or the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act; or
3. there has been or is likely to be an increase in imports of articles that are like or directly competitive with articles which are or were produced by such firm or subdivision.
The investigation was initiated on February 22, 2006 in response to a petition filed by a state agency representative on behalf of workers of Haden Schweitzer Corporation, a division of Haden International Group, Auburn Hills, Michigan. The workers produce industrial paint application equipment, mainly for automotive applications.
The investigation revealed that criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.C) and (a)(2)(B)(II.B) have not been met.
The subject facility did not import industrial paint application equipment in 2004, 2005 or January through February of 2006. Although the subject firm does import some component parts and subassemblies, these products were not themselves manufactured by the subject facility.
The subject facility did not shift production of industrial paint application equipment to a foreign country during the period under investigation.
The Department of Labor surveyed firms to which the subject facility submitted bids to produce industrial paint application equipment on a contract basis. The survey revealed either that the firms winning the contracts were located in the United States, or that the contract was for an application system facility located abroad and thus any equipment going into the project was not imported into the U.S.
In addition, in accordance with Section 246 the Trade Act of 1974 (26 USC 2813), as amended, the Department of Labor herein presents the results of its investigation regarding certification of eligibility to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance (ATAA) for older workers.
In order for the Department to issue a certification of eligibility to apply for ATAA, the worker group must be certified eligible to apply for trade adjustment assistance (TAA). Since the workers are denied eligibility to apply for TAA, the workers cannot be certified eligible for ATAA.
Conclusion
After careful review of the facts obtained in the investigation, I determine that all workers of Haden Schweitzer Corporation, a division of Haden International Group, Auburn Hills, Michigan are denied eligibility to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are also denied eligibility to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974.
Signed in Washington, D.C., this 31st day of March 2006
/s/Richard Church
______________________________
RICHARD CHURCH
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance