Denied
« back to search results

TAW-75129  /  Whirlpool Corporation (Yakima, WA)

Petitioner Type: State
Impact Date:
Filed Date: 01/24/2011
Most Recent Update: 04/29/2011
Determination Date: 04/29/2011
Expiration Date:

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-75,129

WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION
YAKIMA CALL CENTER DIVISION
CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE CENTER (CXC)
INCLUDING ON-SITE LEASED WORKERS FROM
RANDSTAD INHOUSE SERVICES, LP
YAKIMA, WASHINGTON

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 24, 2011 by a State of Washington workforce
office on behalf of workers of Randstad Inhouse Services, LP,
working on-site at the Whirlpool Corporation, Yakima Call Center
Division, Customer eXperience Center (CXC), Yakima, Washington
(Randstad). The State of Washington workforce office expanded
the petition to include all workers of the Whirlpool
Corporation, Yakima Call Center Division, Customer eXperience
Center (CXC), Yakima, Washington (Whirlpool). The workers are
engaged in activities related to the supply of call center
services. The group includes on-site leased workers from
Randstad Inhouse Services, LP on whose behalf the petition was
originally filed.
The State of Washington workforce office alleges that,
"Randstad staffs the call center for Whirlpool Appliances.
Whirlpool has three current TAA petitions in place. It is our
contention that the call center is secondarily affected by
Whirlpool's current TAA status." The allegations also included
an attachment of the certification determinations from the three
Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA)-certified firms and a letter
from the Washington State Labor Council, AFL-CIO, Olympia,
Washington.
The investigation included contacts with both Randstad and
Whirlpool officials and requests of data from both Randstad
and Whirlpool. The investigation also included an analysis of
the relationship between the subject workers and the TAA-
certified firms identified in the petition.
With respect to Section 222(a) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Criterion II has not been met
because Whirlpool did not import in 2009 and 2010 services
that were like or directly competitive with those supplied by
the subject workers. Whirlpool did not shift to a foreign
country the supply of services like or directly competitive
with those supplied by the subject workers.
With respect to Section 222(c) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that criterion (2) has not been met
because Whirlpool was not a supplier or a downstream producer
to a firm who received a certification of eligibility under
Section 222(a) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a).
The term "supplier" means a firm that produces and supplies
directly to another firm component parts for articles, or
services, used in the production of articles or supply of
services that were the basis for a certification. The term
"downstream producer" means a firm that performs additional,
value-added production processes or services (final assembly,
finishing, testing, packaging, or maintenance or transportation,
services) directly for another firm for articles and services
for another firm for articles or services with respect to which
a workers in the other firm has been certified under subsection
(a).
In response to the allegations, call center services
supplied by Whirlpool were provided to consumers of the products
produced by Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA)-certified firms
not directly to the TAA-certified firms. The call center
services were not directly incorporated into or used on the
articles that were the basis of the certifications. There was no
evidence of value-added services provided by the workers to the
articles that were the basis of TAA certifications.
Finally, the group eligibility requirements under Section
222(f) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(f), have not been met
because Whirlpool was not the subject of an affirmative
determination of injury by the International Trade Commission.
Conclusion
After careful review of the facts obtained in the
investigation, I determine that workers of Whirlpool
Corporation, Yakima Call Center Division, Customer eXperience
Center (CXC), including on-site leased workers from Randstad
Inhouse Services, LP, Yakima, Washington, who are engaged in
activities related to the supply of call center 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 29th day of April, 2011


/s/Del Min Amy Chen__________
DEL MIN AMY CHEN
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance