DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-80,239

EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY
WWRO SERVICE & SUPPORT DIVISION
NATIONAL SERVICE SPECIALIST TEAM
TELEWORKERS ACROSS THE UNITED STATES REPORTING TO
ROCHESTER, NEW YORK

Notice of Negative Determination
on Reconsideration

The initial investigation, initiated June 17, 2011, resulted in
a negative determination, issued on July 20, 2011, that was based on
the finding that the subject firm did not increase imports and/or
shift production to a foreign country. The determination was
applicable to workers and former workers of Eastman Kodak Company,
WWRO Service & Support Division, National Service Specialists Team,
teleworkers across the United States reporting to, Rochester, New
York (Eastman-National Service Specialists Team). The notice of
negative determination was published in the Federal Register on
August 12, 2011 (76 FR 50270). Workers of Eastman-National Service
Services Team are engaged in activities related to the supply of
retail print customer support services within the National Service
Specialist Team in the WWRO Service & Support Division of Eastman
Kodak Company. The subject worker group includes teleworkers located
across the United States reporting to Rochester, New York, and does
not include any leased or temporary workers.
As required by the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) Extension
Act of 2011 (the TAAEA), the investigation into this petition was
reopened for a reconsideration investigation to apply the
requirements for worker group eligibility under chapter 2 of title II
of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended by the TAAEA, to the facts of
this petition.
Based on information reviewed during the reconsideration
investigation, the Department of Labor determines that the worker
separations within Eastman-National Service Specialists Team were
not related to a shift to/acquisition from a foreign country by
Eastman Kodak Company of customer support services or increased
imports of like or directly competitive services.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the
investigation revealed no increased imports of services like or
directly competitive with services supplied to Kodak Retail Print
customers by the subject worker group. Rather, the worker
separations within Eastman-National Service Specialists Team were
due to a company reorganization due to the decline of retail print
business.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Eastman Kodak Company did not shift
to/acquire from a foreign country the supply of retail print customer
support services (like or directly competitive services).
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the investigation
revealed that the workers’ firm is not a Supplier 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).
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the investigation
revealed that the workers’ firm does not act as a Downstream
Producer to a firm (or subdivision, whichever is applicable) 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).
Finally, the group eligibility requirements under Section 222(e)
of the Act, have not been satisfied because the workers’ firm has not
been publically identified by name by the International Trade
Commission as a member of a domestic industry in an investigation
resulting in an affirmative finding of serious injury, market
disruption, or material injury, or threat thereof.
Conclusion
After careful review, I determine that the requirements of
Section 222 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272, have not been met and,
therefore, deny the petition for group eligibility of Eastman Kodak
Company, WWRO Service & Support Division, National Service
Specialists Team, teleworkers across the United States reporting
to, Rochester, New York, to apply for adjustment assistance, in
accordance with Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 25th day of November, 2011

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




DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-80,239

EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY
WWRO SERVICE & SUPPORT DIVISION
NATIONAL SERVICE SPECIALISTS
TELEWORKERS ACROSS THE UNITED STATES
REPORTING TO ROCHESTER, NEW YORK

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 (“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) and (b) of
Section 222 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a) and (b). 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:
(1) The first criterion (set forth in Section 222(a)(1) of the Act,
19 U.S.C. § 2272(a)(1)) requires that 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
(2) 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) imports of articles like or directly competitive with
articles produced by such firm or subdivision have
increased; and
(iii) the increase described in clause (ii) contributed
importantly to such workers’ separation or threat of
separation and to the decline in the sales or production of
such firm or subdivision.

(B) Shift in Production Path:
(i) 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
(ii)(I) 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;
(II)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
(III)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.

For the Department to issue a secondary worker certification
under Section 222(b) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(b), 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 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.

Section 222(c) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(c), defines the
terms “Supplier” and “Downstream Producer.”
The investigation was initiated in response to a petition filed
on June 17, 2011 by a California state workforce official on behalf
of workers of Eastman Kodak Company, WWRO Service & Support
Division, National Service Specialists, teleworkers across the
United States reporting to Rochester, New York. The WWRO Service &
Support Division is engaged in activities related to the supply of
customer support services.
The petitioner alleges that the firm is acquiring customer
support services from a foreign country. During the course of the
investigation, information was collected from the workers’ firm.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the workers’ firm did not shift customer
support services to a foreign country.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that imports of customer support services
have not increased. Rather, the investigation confirmed that the
customer support services supplied by the worker group are now
supplied by other domestic employees.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the investigation
revealed that the WWRO Service & Support Division is not 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).
In order for the Department to issue a certification of
eligibility to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance
(ATAA), the worker group must be certified eligible to apply for
trade adjustment assistance. 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 Eastman Kodak Company, WWRO Service
& Support Division, National Service Specialists, teleworkers
across the United States reporting to Rochester, New York, who are
engaged in activities related to customer support services, are
denied eligibility to apply for adjustment assistance under Section
223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, and are also denied
eligibility to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance
under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974, amended.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 20th day of July, 2011


/s/Michael W. Jaffe
______________________________
MICHAEL W. JAFFE
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance




- 4 -