Petitioner Type: Company
Impact Date:
Filed Date: 01/17/2008
Most Recent Update: 01/23/2008
Determination Date: 01/23/2008
Expiration Date:
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-62,696
J.J. PEIGER COMPANY
PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA
Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration
By application of February 15, 2008, a petitioner 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 signed on January 23,
2008 and published in the Federal Register on February 7, 2008
(73 FR 73191).
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 was filed on behalf of workers at J.J.
Peiger Company, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The workers were
engaged in the wholesale distribution of upholstery fabrics and
supplies. The denial was based on the findings that during the
relevant time period, the subject company did not separate or
threaten to separate a significant number or proportion of
workers, as required by Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974.
In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner states
that “in the past eight years, a number of JJP employees has
dropped from eleven to six.” To support his allegations, the
petitioner submitted the names of seven employees who were no
longer with the company.
When assessing eligibility for TAA, the Department
exclusively considers the relevant employment data (for one year
prior to the date of the petition and any imminent layoffs) for
the facility where the petitioning worker group was employed.
The Department contacted the company official to verify
employment numbers at the subject firm since January 15, 2007 as
well as the status of the employment of the workers provided by
the petitioner in the reconsideration request. The company
official confirmed that only one worker from the list was
separated from the subject firm in the relevant period.
Furthermore, the company official confirmed that overall
employment did not decline at the subject firm since January 2007.
As employment levels at the subject facility did not decline
during the relevant time period and there was no threat of
separations during the relevant period, criterion (1) has not been
met. Significant number or proportion of the workers in a firm or
appropriate subdivision means at least three workers in a
workforce of fewer than 50 workers, five percent of the workers in
a workforce of over 50 workers, or at least 50 workers.
Furthermore, the investigation revealed that the workers of
J.J. Peiger Company, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania are engaged in a
wholesale distribution of upholstery fabrics and supplies. These
functions, as described above, are not considered production of an
article. Therefore, workers of the worker group do not produce an
article within the meaning of Section 222 of the Trade Act of
1974.
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 4th day of March, 2008
/s/ Elliott S. Kushner
______________________
ELLIOTT S. KUSHNER
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
4510-FN-P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-62,696
J. J. PEIGER COMPANY
PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA
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 January 17, 2008, in
response to a petition filed by a company official on behalf of
workers of J.J. Peiger Company, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The
workers sell upholstery fabrics.
The investigation revealed that criteria I.A and II.A have not
been met.
The subject firm did not separate or threaten to separate a
significant number or proportion of workers as required by Section
222 of the Trade Act of 1974. Significant number or proportion of
the workers in a firm or appropriate subdivision thereof means at
least three workers with a workforce of fewer than 50 workers. Since
only one worker has been laid off during the relevant period, and
there are at present no threats of future layoffs, separations by
the subject firm do not meet the threshold level.
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 assis-
tance (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 J. J. Peiger
Company, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 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 23rd day of January, 2008
/s/Richard Church
______________________________
RICHARD CHURCH
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
- 4 -
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-62,696
J.J. PEIGER COMPANY
PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA
Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration
By application of February 15, 2008, a petitioner 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 signed on January 23,
2008 and published in the Federal Register on February 7, 2008
(73 FR 73191).
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 was filed on behalf of workers at J.J.
Peiger Company, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The workers were
engaged in the wholesale distribution of upholstery fabrics and
supplies. The denial was based on the findings that during the
relevant time period, the subject company did not separate or
threaten to separate a significant number or proportion of
workers, as required by Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974.
In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner states
that “in the past eight years, a number of JJP employees has
dropped from eleven to six.” To support his allegations, the
petitioner submitted the names of seven employees who were no
longer with the company.
When assessing eligibility for TAA, the Department
exclusively considers the relevant employment data (for one year
prior to the date of the petition and any imminent layoffs) for
the facility where the petitioning worker group was employed.
The Department contacted the company official to verify
employment numbers at the subject firm since January 15, 2007 as
well as the status of the employment of the workers provided by
the petitioner in the reconsideration request. The company
official confirmed that only one worker from the list was
separated from the subject firm in the relevant period.
Furthermore, the company official confirmed that overall
employment did not decline at the subject firm since January 2007.
As employment levels at the subject facility did not decline
during the relevant time period and there was no threat of
separations during the relevant period, criterion (1) has not been
met. Significant number or proportion of the workers in a firm or
appropriate subdivision means at least three workers in a
workforce of fewer than 50 workers, five percent of the workers in
a workforce of over 50 workers, or at least 50 workers.
Furthermore, the investigation revealed that the workers of
J.J. Peiger Company, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania are engaged in a
wholesale distribution of upholstery fabrics and supplies. These
functions, as described above, are not considered production of an
article. Therefore, workers of the worker group do not produce an
article within the meaning of Section 222 of the Trade Act of
1974.
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 4th day of March, 2008
/s/ Elliott S. Kushner
______________________
ELLIOTT S. KUSHNER
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
4510-FN-P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-62,696
J. J. PEIGER COMPANY
PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA
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 January 17, 2008, in
response to a petition filed by a company official on behalf of
workers of J.J. Peiger Company, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The
workers sell upholstery fabrics.
The investigation revealed that criteria I.A and II.A have not
been met.
The subject firm did not separate or threaten to separate a
significant number or proportion of workers as required by Section
222 of the Trade Act of 1974. Significant number or proportion of
the workers in a firm or appropriate subdivision thereof means at
least three workers with a workforce of fewer than 50 workers. Since
only one worker has been laid off during the relevant period, and
there are at present no threats of future layoffs, separations by
the subject firm do not meet the threshold level.
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 assis-
tance (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 J. J. Peiger
Company, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 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 23rd day of January, 2008
/s/Richard Church
______________________________
RICHARD CHURCH
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
- 4 -