Petitioner Type: Workers
Impact Date:
Filed Date: 02/11/2014
Most Recent Update: 12/04/2015
Determination Date: 03/20/2014
Expiration Date:
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-85,064
SOUTHSIDE MANUFACTURING
BLAIRS, VIRGINIA
Notice of Negative 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 February 11, 2014,
resulted in a negative determination, issued on March 20, 2014,
that was based on imports not increasing and no company shifts in
production to a foreign country. The determination was applicable
to workers and former workers of Southside Manufacturing, Blairs,
Virginia (herein referred to as “Southside Manufacturing”). The
workers’ firm was engaged in activities related to the production
of cabinets and casework.
The petitioner originally alleged that there was a loss of
business that was caused by foreign trade. Based on information
reviewed during the reconsideration investigation, the Department of
Labor determines that there were no shifts in production to a foreign
country, no acquisitions of articles from a foreign country, no company
or customer imports, no final affirmative determination of the firm by
the International Trade Commission, and no firm qualification as
Supplier or Downstream Producer.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that imports have not increased in January 2014
compared to January 2013. The firm did not import articles like or
directly competitive to the workers’ firm’s production. Furthermore,
contracts not won by the worker’s firm were awarded to firms
manufacturing within the United States.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the firm did not shift the production of
cabinets and casework or like or directly competitive articles to a
foreign country or acquire cabinets and casework or like or directly
competitive articles from a foreign country.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the investigation
revealed that Southside Manufacturing is not a Supplier or 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 publicly 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 Southside
Manufacturing, Blairs, Virginia, who were engaged in employment
related to the production of cabinets and casework to apply for
adjustment assistance, in accordance with Section 223 of the Act,
19 U.S.C. § 2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 4th day of December, 2015
/s/Hope D. Kinglock
______________________________
HOPE D. KINGLOCK
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-85,064
SOUTHSIDE MANUFACTURING
BLAIRS, VIRGINIA
Negative Determinations 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 February 11, 2014 on behalf of workers of Southside
Manufacturing, Blairs, Virginia (Southside Manufacturing). The
workers' firm is engaged in activities related to the production
of cabinets and case work.
During the course of the investigation, information was
collected from the workers' firm and customers of the firm.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Southside Manufacturing did not
shift production of cabinets and case work to a foreign country
during the relevant period.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(iii), the
investigation revealed that increased imports did not
contribute importantly to the worker separations and loss of
business at the subject firm. Rather, the investigation
confirmed that the workers' firm lost bids to potential
customers to other competitors within the United States.
The investigation revealed that Southside Manufacturing is
not a Supplier or 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).
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 Southside
Manufacturing, Blairs, Virginia 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 March 2014
/s/ Michael W. Jaffe
______________________________
MICHAEL W. JAFFE
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-85,064
SOUTHSIDE MANUFACTURING
BLAIRS, VIRGINIA
Notice of Negative 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 February 11, 2014,
resulted in a negative determination, issued on March 20, 2014,
that was based on imports not increasing and no company shifts in
production to a foreign country. The determination was applicable
to workers and former workers of Southside Manufacturing, Blairs,
Virginia (herein referred to as “Southside Manufacturing”). The
workers’ firm was engaged in activities related to the production
of cabinets and casework.
The petitioner originally alleged that there was a loss of
business that was caused by foreign trade. Based on information
reviewed during the reconsideration investigation, the Department of
Labor determines that there were no shifts in production to a foreign
country, no acquisitions of articles from a foreign country, no company
or customer imports, no final affirmative determination of the firm by
the International Trade Commission, and no firm qualification as
Supplier or Downstream Producer.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that imports have not increased in January 2014
compared to January 2013. The firm did not import articles like or
directly competitive to the workers’ firm’s production. Furthermore,
contracts not won by the worker’s firm were awarded to firms
manufacturing within the United States.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the firm did not shift the production of
cabinets and casework or like or directly competitive articles to a
foreign country or acquire cabinets and casework or like or directly
competitive articles from a foreign country.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the investigation
revealed that Southside Manufacturing is not a Supplier or 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 publicly 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 Southside
Manufacturing, Blairs, Virginia, who were engaged in employment
related to the production of cabinets and casework to apply for
adjustment assistance, in accordance with Section 223 of the Act,
19 U.S.C. § 2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 4th day of December, 2015
/s/Hope D. Kinglock
______________________________
HOPE D. KINGLOCK
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-85,064
SOUTHSIDE MANUFACTURING
BLAIRS, VIRGINIA
Negative Determinations 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 February 11, 2014 on behalf of workers of Southside
Manufacturing, Blairs, Virginia (Southside Manufacturing). The
workers' firm is engaged in activities related to the production
of cabinets and case work.
During the course of the investigation, information was
collected from the workers' firm and customers of the firm.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Southside Manufacturing did not
shift production of cabinets and case work to a foreign country
during the relevant period.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(iii), the
investigation revealed that increased imports did not
contribute importantly to the worker separations and loss of
business at the subject firm. Rather, the investigation
confirmed that the workers' firm lost bids to potential
customers to other competitors within the United States.
The investigation revealed that Southside Manufacturing is
not a Supplier or 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).
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 Southside
Manufacturing, Blairs, Virginia 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 March 2014
/s/ Michael W. Jaffe
______________________________
MICHAEL W. JAFFE
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance