DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-73,323

US AIRWAYS, INC.
PASSENGER SERVICE AGENTS
PITTSBURGH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA

Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility
To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance

In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as
amended ("Act"), 19 U.S.C. § 2273, the Department of Labor
herein presents the results of an investigation regarding
certification of eligibility to apply for worker adjustment
assistance.
Workers of a firm may be eligible for worker adjustment
assistance if they satisfy the criteria of subsection (a), (c)
or (f) of Section 222 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a), (c), (f).
For the Department of Labor to issue a certification for workers
under Section 222(a) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a), the
following three criteria must be met:
I. The first criterion (set forth in Section 222(a)(1) of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2282(a)(1)) requires that a significant
number or proportion of the workers in the workers' firm
must have become totally or partially separated or be
threatened with total or partial separation.

II. The second criterion (set forth in Section 222(a)(2) of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a)(2)) may be satisfied in one of two
ways:
(A) Increased Imports Path:
(i) sales or production, or both, at the workers' firm
must have decreased absolutely, AND
(ii) (I) imports of articles or services like or directly
competitive with articles or services produced or
supplied by the workers' firm have increased, OR
(II)(aa) imports of articles like or directly
competitive with articles into which the
component part produced by the workers' firm was
directly incorporated have increased; OR
(II)(bb) imports of articles like or directly
competitive with articles which are produced
directly using the services supplied by the
workers' firm have increased; OR
(III) imports of articles directly incorporating
component parts not produced in the U.S. that are
like or directly competitive with the article
into which the component part produced by the
workers' firm was directly incorporated have
increased.

(B) Shift in Production or Supply Path:
(i)(I) there has been a shift by the workers' firm to a
foreign country in the production of articles or
supply of services like or directly competitive with
those produced/supplied by the workers' firm; OR
(i)(II) there has been an acquisition from a foreign
country by the workers' firm of articles/services that
are like or directly competitive with those
produced/supplied by the workers' firm.

III. The third criterion requires that the increase in imports
or shift/acquisition must have contributed importantly to
the workers' separation or threat of separation. See
Sections 222(a)(2)(A)(iii) and 222(a)(2)(B)(ii) of the Act,
19 U.S.C. §§ 2272(a)(2)(A)(iii), 2272(a)(2)(B)(ii).

Section 222(d) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(d), defines the
terms "Supplier" and "Downstream Producer." For the Department
to issue a secondary worker certification under Section 222(c)
of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(c), to workers of a Supplier or a
Downstream Producer, the following criteria must be met:
(1) a significant number or proportion of the workers in
the workers' firm or an appropriate subdivision of the
firm have become totally or partially separated, or
are threatened to become totally or partially
separated;

(2) the workers' firm is a Supplier or Downstream Producer
to a firm that employed a group of workers who
received a certification of eligibility under Section
222(a) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a), and such
supply or production is related to the article or
service that was the basis for such certification; and

(3) either
(A) the workers' firm is a supplier and the component
parts it supplied to the firm described in paragraph
(2) accounted for at least 20 percent of the
production or sales of the workers' firm; or
(B) a loss of business by the workers' firm with the firm
described in paragraph (2) contributed importantly to
the workers' separation or threat of separation.

Workers of a firm may also be considered eligible if they
are publicly identified by name by the International Trade
Commission as a member of a domestic industry in an
investigation resulting in a category of determination that is
listed in Section 222(f) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(f).
The group eligibility requirements for workers of a firm
under Section 222(f) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(f), can be
satisfied if the following criteria are met:
(1) the workers' firm is publicly identified by name by
the International Trade Commission as a member of a
domestic industry in an investigation resulting in--
(A) an affirmative determination of serious injury or
threat thereof under section 202(b)(1);
(B) an affirmative determination of market disruption
or threat thereof under section 421(b)(1); or
(C) an affirmative final determination of material
injury or threat thereof under section
705(b)(1)(A) or 735(b)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of
1930 (19 U.S.C. 1671d(b)(1)(A) and
1673d(b)(1)(A));
(2) the petition is filed during the 1-year period
beginning on the date on which--
(A) a summary of the report submitted to the
President by the International Trade Commission
under section 202(f)(1) with respect to the
affirmative determination described in paragraph
(1)(A) is published in the Federal Register under
section 202(f)(3); or
(B) notice of an affirmative determination described
in subparagraph (1) is published in the Federal
Register; and
(3) the workers have become totally or partially
separated from the workers' firm within--
(A) the 1-year period described in paragraph (2); or
(B) notwithstanding section 223(b)(1), the 1-year
period preceding the 1-year period described in
paragraph (2).

The investigation was initiated in response to a petition
filed on January 21, 2010 by the Communication Workers of
America, Local 13302 (CWA) on behalf of workers of US Airways,
Inc., Passenger Service Agents, Pittsburgh International
Airport, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (US Airways). The workers
are engaged in activities related to passenger services,
specifically ticketing, checking bags, irregular operations,
departure gate processing and lost baggage desk.
The CWA alleges that, "services are being outsourced to a
foreign country. US Airways has created a desk called the SSC
desk and passengers are now being directed to call the toll free
800 number to be re-booked on alternate flights instead of
dealing with a customer service agent. The SSC desk is located
in Tempe, Arizona, but most calls are directed overseas with
passengers talking to reservation agents in Bangalore, India and
San Salvatore. There have been two rounds of layoffs due to
this outsourcing to a foreign country."
The investigation included contact and requests for data
from a company representative of US Airways, Inc..
With respect to Section 222(a) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that criteria II and III have not been
met.
Criterion II has not been met because there was no increase
in imports by the workers firm or customers or a
shift/acquisition by workers' firm from 2008 through 2009. US
Airways representative has confirmed on the request for data
that there were no imports of passenger services like those
provided by US Airways, Inc. during the relevant period. The
representative also has confirmed that US Airways, Inc. did not
shift or acquire passenger services from a foreign country used
to replace workers at US Airways, Inc. during the relevant
period.
In response to the CWA Allegations, the company official
has reported that US Airways call centers located outside the
United States have been established on May 2005. The company
does have the capability to route a call outside the United
States but will only perform that operation under extreme
circumstances where it will only be used when the company's
ability to service the call in the United States is limited.
These call centers were not used to replace employment done by
the workers at Pittsburgh. Most of the passenger services are
done on-site at Pittsburgh or at the corporate headquarters in
Tempe, Arizona.
Criterion III has not been met because the workers'
separations were not related to an increase in imports or
shift/acquisition of passenger services like those provided by
US Airways.
With respect to Section 222(c) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that criterion (2) has not been met
because the workers did not produce an article or supply a
service that was used by a firm with TAA-Certified workers in
the production of an article or supply of service that was the
basis for TAA-Certification.
Finally, the group eligibility requirements under Section
222(f) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(f), have not been satisfied
because US Airways has not been identified in an affirmative
finding of injury by the International Trade Commission.


Conclusion
After careful review of the facts obtained in the
investigation, I determine that workers of US Airways, Inc.,
Passenger Service Agents, Pittsburgh International Airport,
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania who are engaged in activities related
to passenger services are denied eligibility to apply for
adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. §
2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C., this 7th day of May, 2010


/s/Elliott S. Kushner
______________________________
ELLIOTT S. KUSHNER
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance