DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-85,019

SALIENCE INSIGHT, INC.
F/K/A KD PAINE & PARTNERS, INC.
A SUBSIDIARY OF NEWS GROUP INTERNATIONAL, DUBAI UAE
BERLIN, NEW HAMPSHIRE

Notice of Revised Determination
After Statutory Reconsideration

As required by the Trade Adjustment Assistance Reauthorization
Act of 2015 (TAARA 2015), which was enacted as Title IV of the
Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law No. 114-27,
section 405(a)(1)(A), 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 TAARA
2015, to the facts of this petition (statutory reconsideration).

The initial investigation, initiated on January 17, 2014,
resulted in a negative determination, issued on February 24,
2014, based on the finding that the workers’ firm does not
produce an article. The determination was applicable to workers
and former workers of Salience Insight, Inc., formerly known
as KD Paine & Partners, Inc., a subsidiary of News Group
International, Berlin, New Hampshire (“Salience” or “workers’
firm” or “subject firm”). The workers of the subject firm are
engaged in activities related to the supply of media measurement
and analysis services. The worker group does not include
on-site leased workers.

Based on information reviewed during the reconsideration
investigation, the Department of Labor determines that the subject
firm shifted to a foreign country the supply of services like or
directly competitive with media measurement and analysis services
supplied by the subject workers which contributed importantly to
worker separations.

Section 222(a)(1) has been met because a significant
number or proportion of the workers in such workers’ firm have
become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to
become totally or partially separated.

Section 222(a)(2)(B) has been met because the workers’
firm shifted the supply of services like or directly competitive
with the media measurement and analysis services supplied by
the workers which contributed importantly to worker group
separations at Salience.

Conclusion

After careful review, I determine that workers of Salience
Insight, Inc., f/k/a KD Paine & Partners, Inc., a subsidiary
of News Group International, Dubai UAE, Berlin, New Hampshire,
who are engaged in activities related to the supply of media
measurement and analysis services, 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 Salience Insight, Inc., f/k/a KD Paine
& Partners, Inc., a subsidiary of News Group International,
Dubai UAE, Berlin, New Hampshire, who became totally or
partially separated from employment on or after January 16,
2013, 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 in Washington, D.C., this 16th day of October, 2015


/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-85,019

SALIENCE INSIGHT, INC.
F/K/A KD PAINE & PARTNERS, INC.
A SUBSIDIARY OF NEWS GROUP INTERNATIONAL
BERLIN, NEW HAMPSHIRE

Notice of Negative Determination
on Reconsideration

On April 11, 2014, the Department of Labor issued an Affirmative
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration for the
workers and former workers of Salience Insight, Inc., formerly
known as KD Paine & Partners, Inc., a subsidiary of News Group
International, Berlin, New Hampshire (subject firm). The
Department’s Notice of determination was published in the
Federal Register on May 7, 2014 (79 FR 26268).

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 Trade Act of 1974, as amended (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 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 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 initial investigation resulted in a negative
determination based on the findings that the subject firm supplies
services related to media measurement and analysis and, therefore,
does not produce an article within the meaning of Section 222(a) or
Section 222(b) of the Act. 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. The definition of a firm
includes an individual proprietorship, partnership, joint venture,
association, corporation (including a development corporation),
business trust, cooperative, trustee in bankruptcy, and receiver
under decree of any court.

In the request for reconsideration, a former worker alleged that
workers at the subject firm produce software and indicated that
the worker group at the subject firm is similar to the worker group
at Computer Sciences Corporation, Financial Services Group, East
Hartford, Connecticut (TA-W-53,209; U.S. Court of International
Trade case No. 04-00149), which is eligible to apply for Trade
Adjustment Assistance (TAA).

In TA-W-53,209, the Department determined that articles can be
either tangible or intangible, that the workers produced an
article (software), that production shifted to a foreign country,
and that imports of like or directly competitive articles increased
following the shift in production. The Department also determined
that “the provision of a service may result in the incidental
creation of an article. For example, accountants provide services
for the purposes of the Act even though, in the course of providing
those services, they may generate audit reports or similar financial
documents that might be articles on the Harmonized Tariff Schedule
of the United States.” See TA-W-53,209 Computer Sciences Corporation,
Financial Group, East Hartford, Connecticut, Notice of Revised
Determination on Remand.

During the reconsideration investigation, the Department contacted
the former worker to discuss the allegations, confirmed previously
collected information, collected new information from the subject
firm, and obtained additional information to specifically address
the allegations made by the former worker.

Information obtained during the reconsideration investigation
confirmed that the workers of the subject firm provide services
related to media measurement and analysis and that workers at
the subject firm do not produce an article, including software.
The workers use existing software for analysis and creation of
reports and documents that are created incidentally to the
provision of media measurement and analysis services. Consequently,
the workers do not produce an article, within the meaning of the
Trade Act.

Therefore, after careful review of the request for reconsideration,
the Department determines that the criteria of subsection (a) and (b)
of Section 222 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a) and (b) have not been
met.

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 Salience
Insight, Inc., formerly known as KD Paine & Partners, Inc., a
subsidiary of News Group International, Berlin, New Hampshire, to
apply for adjustment assistance, in accordance with Section 223
of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2273
.
Signed in Washington, D.C. on this 4th day of June, 2014

/s/Del Min Amy Chen
_______________________________
DEL MIN AMY CHEN
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
4510-FN-P



U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-85,019

SALIENCE INSIGHT, INC.
F/K/A KD PAINE & PARTNERS, INC.
A SUBSIDIARY OF NEWS GROUP INTERNATIONAL
BERLIN, NEW HAMPSHIRE

Notice of Affirmative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

By application dated March 25, 2014, a state workforce official
requested administrative reconsideration of the negative
determination regarding workers’ eligibility to apply for Trade
Adjustment Assistance (TAA) applicable to workers and former
workers of the subject firm. The determination was issued on
February 24, 2014. The subject firm is engaged in activity
related to the supply of media measurement and analysis services.
The initial investigation resulted in a negative determination
based on the findings that the workers at the subject firm do
not produce an article as defined by the Trade Act of 1974, as
amended.
Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c) reconsideration may be granted under
the following circumstances:
(1) If it appears on the basis of facts not previously
considered that the determination complained of
was erroneous;
(2) If it appears that the determination complained of
was based on a mistake in the determination of facts
not previously considered; or
(3) If in the opinion of the Certifying Officer, a
misinterpretation of facts or of the law justified
reconsideration of the decision.
The request for reconsideration alleges that the negative
determination is erroneous because it is based on a mistake
in facts not previously considered.
Specifically, the request states that “the firm produces
computer software including but not limited to a produce
known as dlyDashboard which an article under the Trade Act”
and referenced U.S. Court of International Trade slip opinion
05-49 in support of the allegation.

The Department has carefully reviewed the request for
reconsideration and the existing record, and will conduct
further investigation to determine if the workers meet the
eligibility requirements of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended.

Conclusion

After careful review of the application, I conclude that the
claim is of sufficient weight to justify reconsideration of
the U.S. Department of Labor's prior decision.
The application is, therefore, granted.

Signed at Washington, D.C., this 11th day of April, 2014

/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-85,019

SALIENCE INSIGHT, INC.
F/K/A KD PAINE & PARTNERS, INC.
A SUBSIDIARY OF NEWS GROUP INTERNATIONAL
BERLIN, NEW HAMPSHIRE


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 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. § 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 January 17, 2014 by a state workforce office on behalf of workers
of Salience Insight, Inc., f/k/a KD Paine & Partners, Inc., a
subsidiary of News Group International, Berlin, New Hampshire
(hereafter referred to “Salience” or “the subject firm”). The
workers’ firm is engaged in activities related to the supply of media
measurement and analysis services. Specifically, the subject firm
measures and analyzes media tapes for the news industry. The worker
group does not include leased workers.
The petition states “The coders in the UK and Dubai offices are
. . . independent contractors . . . are being paid less.”
During the course of the investigation, information was
collected from the workers’ firm.
The investigation revealed that Salience does not produce an
article within the meaning of Section 222(a) or Section 222(b) of the
Act. 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. The definition of a firm includes an individual
proprietorship, partnership, joint venture, association, corporation
(including a development corporation), business trust, cooperative,
trustee in bankruptcy, and receiver under decree of any court.
During the investigation, the Department obtained information
that revealed that the workers’ firm did not produce an article;
instead, the workers’ firm supplies services related to the supply of
media measurement and analysis services.
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 (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 Salience Insight, Inc., f/k/a KD
Paine & Partners, Inc., a subsidiary of News Group International,
Berlin, New Hampshire, 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 24th day of February, 2014


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