DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-81,575

WIPRO LIMITED
WIPRO TECHNOLOGIES, ALLIANCE MANAGERS
INCLUDING REMOTE WORKERS AND WORKERS IN
OAKBROOK TERRACE, ILLINOIS, MOUNTAIN VIEW, CALIFORNIA,
ATLANTA, GEORGIA, BELLEVUE, WASHINGTON, ADDISON, TEXAS, AND
BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS WHO REPORT TO
EAST BRUNSWICK, NEW JERSEY

Notice of Revised Determination
on Reconsideration

On August 23, 2012, the Department of Labor issued a Notice
of Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for
Reconsideration applicable to workers and former workers of Wipro
Limited, Wipro Technologies, Alliance Managers, including remote
workers and workers in Oakbrook Terrace, Illinois, Mountain View,
California, Atlanta, Georgia, Bellevue, Washington, Addison,
Texas, and Boston Massachusetts, who report to East Brunswick,
New Jersey (Wipro Limited, Wipro Technologies, Alliance
Managers). The Department’s Notice was published in the Federal
Register on September 6, 2012 (77 FR 54927). The suffixes used in
the initial determination to identify the workers have been
removed; however, the subject worker group remains the same.
The subject workers are engaged in activities related to the
supply of the supply of sales of alliance related services or
products through sales employees of the subject firm and are not
separately identifiable function or service supplied. The subject
worker group does not include any leased workers.
Section 222(a)(1) has been met because a significant number
or proportion of the workers in Wipro Limited, Wipro
Technologies, Alliance Managers have become totally or partially
separated, or are threatened with such separation.
Section 222(a)(2)(B) has been met because the subject firm
has shifted a portion of the supply of services like or directly
competitive with the supply of sales of alliance related services
or products through sales employees of the subject firm, which
contributed importantly to worker group separations at Wipro
Limited, Wipro Technologies, Alliance Managers.
Conclusion
After careful review of the additional facts obtained during
the reconsideration investigation, I determine that workers of
Wipro Limited, Wipro Technologies, Alliance Managers, who were
engaged in employment related to the supply of sales of alliance
related services or products through sales employees of the
subject firm, meet the worker group certification criteria under
Section 222(a) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a). In accordance
with Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2273, I make the
following certification:




"All workers of Wipro Limited, Wipro Technologies, Alliance
Managers, including remote workers and workers in Oakbrook
Terrace, Illinois, Mountain View, California, Atlanta,
Georgia, Bellevue, Washington, Addison, Texas, and Boston
Massachusetts, who report to East Brunswick, New Jersey, who
became totally or partially separated from employment on or
after May 6, 2011, through two years from the date of
certification, and all workers in the group threatened with
total or partial separation from employment on the date of
certification through two years from the date of
certification, are eligible to apply for adjustment
assistance under Chapter 2 of Title II of the Trade Act of
1974, as amended.”
Signed at Washington, D.C., this 11th day of February, 2013

/s/ Del Min Amy Chen
______________________________
DEL MIN AMY CHEN
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
4510-FN-P
?
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-81,575

WIPRO LIMITED
WIPRO TECHNOLOGIES, ALLIANCE MANAGERS
INCLUDING WORKERS WORKING REMOTELY IN NEW JERSEY
EAST BRUNSWICK, NEW JERSEY

TA-W-81,575A

WIPRO LIMITED
WIPRO TECHNOLOGIES, ALLIANCE MANAGERS
INCLUDING WORKERS WORKING REMOTELY IN ILLINOIS
OAKBROOK TERRACE, ILLINOIS

TA-W-81,575B

WIPRO LIMITED
WIPRO TECHNOLOGIES, ALLIANCE MANAGERS
INCLUDING WORKERS WORKING REMOTELY IN CALIFORNIA
MOUNTAIN VIEW, CALIFORNIA

TA-W-81,575C

WIPRO LIMITED
WIPRO TECHNOLOGIES, ALLIANCE MANAGERS
WORKERS WORKING REMOTELY IN GEORGIA
ATLANTA, GEORGIA

TA-W-81,575D

WIPRO LIMITED
WIPRO TECHNOLOGIES, ALLIANCE MANAGERS
WORKERS WORKING REMOTELY IN WASHINGTON
BELLVUE, WASHINGTON

TA-W-81,575E

WIPRO LIMITED
WIPRO TECHNOLOGIES, ALLIANCE MANAGERS
WORKERS WORKING REMOTELY IN TEXAS
ADDISON, TEXAS


TA-W-81,575F

WIPRO LIMITED
WIPRO TECHNOLOGIES, ALLIANCE MANAGERS
WORKERS WORKING REMOTELY IN MASSACHUSETTS
BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS

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), (b) or
(e) of Section 222 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a), (b) and (e).
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 criteria must be met:
(1) 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.

(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) (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.
(iii) the increase in imports 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.

(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
(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; and
(ii) the shift described in clause (i)(I) or the acquisition
of articles or services described in clause (i)(II)
contributed importantly to such workers’ separation or
threat of separation.

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 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.

Section 222(c) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(c), defines the
terms “Supplier” and “Downstream Producer.”
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(e) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(e).
The group eligibility requirements for workers of a firm
under Section 222(e) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(e), 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 May 7, 2012 on behalf of workers of Wipro Limited, Wipro
Technologies, Alliance Managers, including workers working
remotely in New Jersey, East Brunswick, New Jersey (TA-W-81,575),
Wipro Limited, Wipro Technologies, Alliance Managers, including
workers working remotely in Illinois, Oakbrook Terrace, Illinois
(TA-W-81,575A), Wipro Limited, Wipro Technologies, Alliance
Managers, including workers working remotely in California,
Mountain View, California (TA-W-81,575B), Wipro Limited, Wipro
Technologies, Alliance Managers, workers working remotely in
Georgia, Atlanta, Georgia (TA-W-81,575C), Wipro Limited, Wipro
Technologies, Alliance Managers, workers working remotely in
Washington, Bellvue, Washington (TA-W-81,575D), Wipro Limited,
Wipro Technologies, Alliance Managers, workers working remotely
in Texas, Addison, Texas (TA-W-81,575E), and Wipro Limited, Wipro
Technologies, Alliance Managers, workers working remotely in
Massachusetts, Boston, Massachusetts (TA-W-81,575F) (Wipro). The
workers’ firm is engaged in activities related to the supply of
sales of alliance related services or products through sales
employees of the company.
The petitioners allege work responsibilities of the worker
groups under investigation moved abroad.
During the course of the investigation, information was
collected from the workers’ firm.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the firm did not import sales of
alliance related services or products through sales employees of
the company or a like or directly competitive service.
Furthermore, a survey was not conducted, as the supply of sales
of alliance related services or products through sales employees
of the company is for internal purposes only.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the firm did not shift the supply of
sales of alliance related services or products through sales
employees of company or a like or directly competitive service to
a foreign country or acquire sales of alliance related services
or products through sales employees of the company or a like or
directly competitive service from a foreign country.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Wipro 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 Wipro does not act as a 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).
Finally, the group eligibility requirements under Section
222(e) of the Act, have not been satisfied either because
Criterion (1) has not been met since 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 of the facts obtained in the
investigation, 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 Wipro Limited, Wipro
Technologies, Alliance Managers, including workers working
remotely in New Jersey, East Brunswick, New Jersey (TA-W-81,575),
Wipro Limited, Wipro Technologies, Alliance Managers, including
workers working remotely in Illinois, Oakbrook Terrace, Illinois
(TA-W-81,575A), Wipro Limited, Wipro Technologies, Alliance
Managers, including workers working remotely in California,
Mountain View, California (TA-W-81,575B), Wipro Limited, Wipro
Technologies, Alliance Managers, workers working remotely in
Georgia, Atlanta, Georgia (TA-W-81,575C), Wipro Limited, Wipro
Technologies, Alliance Managers, workers working remotely in
Washington, Bellvue, Washington (TA-W-81,575D), Wipro Limited,
Wipro Technologies, Alliance Managers, workers working remotely
in Texas, Addison, Texas (TA-W-81,575E), and Wipro Limited, Wipro
Technologies, Alliance Managers, workers working remotely in
Massachusetts, Boston, Massachusetts (TA-W-81,575F) engaged in
activities related to the supply of sales of alliance related
services or products through sales employees of company to apply
for adjustment assistance, in accordance with Section 223 of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 18th day of June, 2012


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



- 13 -