DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-85,612

CA TECHNOLOGIES
PLANO, TEXAS

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 October 22, 2014,
resulted in a negative determination, issued on December 4, 2014,
that was based on the fact that a significant number or proportion
of the workers have not become totally or partially separated, nor
are they threatened to become totally or partially separated.
The workers’ firm, CA Technologies, Plano, Texas, is engaged
in activities related to the production of software development.
With respect to Section 222(a) and Section 222(b) of the Act,
the investigation revealed that the requirement of Section
222(a)(1) has not been met because a significant number or
proportion of the workers in such workers’ firm as defined in 20
CFR 90.2, have not become totally or partially separated, nor are
they threatened to become totally or partially separated.
Finally, the group eligibility requirements under Section
222(e) of the Act, have not been satisfied either 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 CA
Technologies, Plano, Texas, who were engaged in employment related
to production of software development to apply for adjustment
assistance, in accordance with Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. §
2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 8th day of January, 2016

/s/Jessica R. Webster
______________________________
JESSICA R. WEBSTER
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance




DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-85,612

CA TECHNOLOGIES
PLANO, TEXAS

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 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 October 22, 2014 by a State Workforce Official on
behalf of workers of CA Technologies, Plano, Texas. The
workers' firm is engaged in activities related to production of
software.
The petitioner alleged that work was shifted to foreign
locations. 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 subject firm did shift
production of software to a foreign country. However, the shift
in production did not contribute importantly to at least three
worker separations or threat of separations, as required by
the program regulations at 29 CFR 90.2. Rather, the
investigation confirmed that the shift in production to a
foreign country led to two worker separations.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A), the investigation
revealed that imports of articles like or directly competitive
with the software produced by CA Technologies did not
contribute importantly to the separations or threat of
separations of at least three workers.
The investigation revealed that CA Technologies, Plano,
Texas, 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), and such supply is related to the finished article that
was the basis for such certification.
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 CA Technologies,
Plano, Texas, who are engaged in activities related to the
production of software 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 4th day of December 2014.

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