Petitioner Type: State
Impact Date:
Filed Date: 03/05/2008
Most Recent Update: 05/15/2008
Determination Date: 05/15/2008
Expiration Date:
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-62,955
PITNEY BOWES
TECH CENTRAL INFRASTRUCTURE & SUPPORT SERVICES
DANBURY, CONNECTICUT
Notice of Negative Determination
on Reconsideration
On July 15, 2008, the Department issued an Affirmative
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration for the
workers and former workers of the subject firm. The notice was
published in the Federal Register on July 21, 2008 (73 FR 42368).
The initial investigation resulted in a negative
determination based on the finding that worker group does not
produce an article within the meaning of Section 222 for the
Trade Act of 1974. The investigation revealed that workers of
Pitney Bowes, Tech Central Infrastructure & Support Services,
Danbury, Connecticut performed IT technical support for Pitney
Bowes, Inc., which included tech support for the mainframe,
network, and supporting software, including upgrades, installs,
patches, maintenance, help desk support and repair.
In the request for reconsideration the petitioner stated
that workers of Tech Central Infrastructure & Support Services
are Computer Operations Management and Staff, Server Engineering
and Support, Network Engineering and Support, Telecommunications
Engineering and Support and various Application Support group
(HR, SAP, Lotus Notes, etc.) The petitioner further alleged that
the workers of the subject firm supported production of Postage
Meters by building custom servers, applications and
infrastructure, “built the physical equipment that allows Pitney
Bowes to offer additional products and services” and “supported
production of custom stamps by designing, implementation, storage
and support of this product.”
On reconsideration, the Department contacted a company
official and requested additional information regarding the
production of various products by Pitney Bowes and whether
workers of the subject firm supported production of the above
mentioned products.
The company official stated that Pitney Bowes, Inc. bought
servers from a third-party vendor and in no sense built these
servers or develop applications or code. Furthermore, the
company official stated that the workers of the subject firm
neither built physical equipment nor designed or created the
Stamp products. The company official stated that some of the
petitioning workers may have loaded software of the Stamp
Expressions product on the servers and/or connected the software
to the network.
The petitioner further alleged that production of the above-
mentioned articles has been shifted to India and thus workers of
the Tech Central Infrastructure & Support Services, Danbury,
Connecticut should be eligible for TAA.
The company official denied this allegation and stated that
production of postage meters, custom stamps, and similar Pitney
Bowes equipment is continuing to be produced in the United States
and that there was no shift in production of these articles to
India or any other foreign country.
The company official stated that some information support
functions have been outsourced to a third party vendor, both in
the United States and India. However, this outsourcing does not
include any outsourcing in production.
The allegation of a shift to another country might be
relevant if it was determined that workers of the subject firm
produced an article. Since the investigation determined that
workers of Pitney Bowes, Tech Central Infrastructure & Support
Services, Danbury, Connecticut do not produce an article, there
can not be imports nor a shift in production of an “article”
abroad within the meaning of the Trade Act of 1974 in this
instance.
Conclusion
After reconsideration, I affirm the original notice of
negative determination of eligibility to apply for worker
adjustment assistance for workers and former workers of Pitney
Bowes, Tech Central Infrastructure & Support Services, Danbury,
Connecticut.
Signed at Washington, D.C. this 9th day of September, 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-62,955
PITNEY BOWES
TECH CENTRAL INFRASTRUCTURE & SUPPORT SERVICES
DANBURY, CONNECTICUT
Negative Determination 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 investigation was initiated on March 5, 2008, in response
to a petition filed by the Connecticut Rapid Response Coordinator
on behalf of workers of Pitney Bowes Tech Central, Infrastructure &
Support Services (ISS), Danbury, Connecticut. The workers
performed information technology technical support.
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 domestically and there must be a
relationship between the workers' work and the article produced
by the workers' firm or appropriate subdivision. The
investigation revealed that although production of articles
occurred within the firm, the Tech Central Infrastructure &
Support Services do not support production of a trade-impacted
article. Furthermore, ISS services were outsourced to a third
party supplier. Thus the worker group can not be considered
import impacted or affected by a shift in production of an
article by the subject firm.
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 Pitney Bowes Tech
Central Infrastructure & Support Services, Danbury, Connecticut
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 15th day of May 2008
/s/Richard Church
______________________________
RICHARD CHURCH
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
- 5 -
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-62,955
PITNEY BOWES
TECH CENTRAL INFRASTRUCTURE & SUPPORT SERVICES
DANBURY, CONNECTICUT
Notice of Negative Determination
on Reconsideration
On July 15, 2008, the Department issued an Affirmative
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration for the
workers and former workers of the subject firm. The notice was
published in the Federal Register on July 21, 2008 (73 FR 42368).
The initial investigation resulted in a negative
determination based on the finding that worker group does not
produce an article within the meaning of Section 222 for the
Trade Act of 1974. The investigation revealed that workers of
Pitney Bowes, Tech Central Infrastructure & Support Services,
Danbury, Connecticut performed IT technical support for Pitney
Bowes, Inc., which included tech support for the mainframe,
network, and supporting software, including upgrades, installs,
patches, maintenance, help desk support and repair.
In the request for reconsideration the petitioner stated
that workers of Tech Central Infrastructure & Support Services
are Computer Operations Management and Staff, Server Engineering
and Support, Network Engineering and Support, Telecommunications
Engineering and Support and various Application Support group
(HR, SAP, Lotus Notes, etc.) The petitioner further alleged that
the workers of the subject firm supported production of Postage
Meters by building custom servers, applications and
infrastructure, “built the physical equipment that allows Pitney
Bowes to offer additional products and services” and “supported
production of custom stamps by designing, implementation, storage
and support of this product.”
On reconsideration, the Department contacted a company
official and requested additional information regarding the
production of various products by Pitney Bowes and whether
workers of the subject firm supported production of the above
mentioned products.
The company official stated that Pitney Bowes, Inc. bought
servers from a third-party vendor and in no sense built these
servers or develop applications or code. Furthermore, the
company official stated that the workers of the subject firm
neither built physical equipment nor designed or created the
Stamp products. The company official stated that some of the
petitioning workers may have loaded software of the Stamp
Expressions product on the servers and/or connected the software
to the network.
The petitioner further alleged that production of the above-
mentioned articles has been shifted to India and thus workers of
the Tech Central Infrastructure & Support Services, Danbury,
Connecticut should be eligible for TAA.
The company official denied this allegation and stated that
production of postage meters, custom stamps, and similar Pitney
Bowes equipment is continuing to be produced in the United States
and that there was no shift in production of these articles to
India or any other foreign country.
The company official stated that some information support
functions have been outsourced to a third party vendor, both in
the United States and India. However, this outsourcing does not
include any outsourcing in production.
The allegation of a shift to another country might be
relevant if it was determined that workers of the subject firm
produced an article. Since the investigation determined that
workers of Pitney Bowes, Tech Central Infrastructure & Support
Services, Danbury, Connecticut do not produce an article, there
can not be imports nor a shift in production of an “article”
abroad within the meaning of the Trade Act of 1974 in this
instance.
Conclusion
After reconsideration, I affirm the original notice of
negative determination of eligibility to apply for worker
adjustment assistance for workers and former workers of Pitney
Bowes, Tech Central Infrastructure & Support Services, Danbury,
Connecticut.
Signed at Washington, D.C. this 9th day of September, 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-62,955
PITNEY BOWES
TECH CENTRAL INFRASTRUCTURE & SUPPORT SERVICES
DANBURY, CONNECTICUT
Negative Determination 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 investigation was initiated on March 5, 2008, in response
to a petition filed by the Connecticut Rapid Response Coordinator
on behalf of workers of Pitney Bowes Tech Central, Infrastructure &
Support Services (ISS), Danbury, Connecticut. The workers
performed information technology technical support.
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 domestically and there must be a
relationship between the workers' work and the article produced
by the workers' firm or appropriate subdivision. The
investigation revealed that although production of articles
occurred within the firm, the Tech Central Infrastructure &
Support Services do not support production of a trade-impacted
article. Furthermore, ISS services were outsourced to a third
party supplier. Thus the worker group can not be considered
import impacted or affected by a shift in production of an
article by the subject firm.
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 Pitney Bowes Tech
Central Infrastructure & Support Services, Danbury, Connecticut
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 15th day of May 2008
/s/Richard Church
______________________________
RICHARD CHURCH
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
- 5 -