DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-90,171

HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE
F/K/A HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY
ENTERPRISE SERVICES
APPLICATION DELIVERY MANAGEMENT
ORACLE PRACTICE UNIT
VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON

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 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 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; AND
(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.

Section 222(c) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(c), defines the
terms "Supplier" and "Downstream Producer." 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.

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), the 1-year
period preceding the 1-year period described in
paragraph (2).

The investigation was initiated in response to a petition for
Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) filed on August 28, 2015 by a
state workforce office on behalf workers of Hewlett Packard
Enterprise, f/k/a Hewlett-Packard Company, Enterprise Services,
Application Delivery Management, Oracle Practice Unit, Vancouver,
Washington. Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE) supplies business
information technology services. Workers within HPE are separately
identifiable by service supplied. The subject worker group
consists of workers within Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Enterprise
Services, Application Delivery Management, Oracle Practice Unit,
Vancouver, Washington (including remote workers).
The petition identifies the impacted workers as "All affected
workers formerly employed at the Hewlett Packard Company,
including remote workers" and identifies HPE as being located in
Palo Alto. The petition states that "company positions within the
U.S. have been reduced, while positions outside of the U.S.
(India, China, Mexico) are increasing." The letter attached to
the petition states that worker separations at HPE from March 2015
through August 2015 "has been a direct result of moving their work
to HP facilities located worldwide, but primarily to India." The
letter identified a former Hewlett-Packard Company employee able
to provide relevant information. Also attached to the petition
are copies of news articles, postings of Hewlett-Packard positions
in China, India, and Mexico, and copies of earlier TAA
certifications (TA-W-71,552; TA-W-73,911; and TA-W-81,739).
During the course of the investigation, information was
collected from the workers' firm, the petitioner, and the worker
identified in the letter attached to the petition.
With respect to Section 222(a) and Section 222(b) of the Act,
the investigation revealed that Criterion (1) has not been met
because a significant number or proportion of the workers in
Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Enterprise Services, Application
Delivery Management, Oracle Practice Unit, Vancouver, Washington
have not become totally or partially separated, nor are they
threatened to become totally or partially separated, as defined by
29 CFR 90. Specifically, fewer than three workers of Hewlett
Packard Enterprise, Enterprise Services, Application Delivery
Management, Oracle Practice Unit, Vancouver, Washington have been
totally or partially separated since August 25, 2014 or threatened
with total or partial separation.
Finally, the group eligibility requirements under Section
222(e) of the Act, have not been satisfied 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 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 Hewlett Packard Enterprise,
f/k/a Hewlett-Packard Company, Enterprise Services, Application
Delivery Management, Oracle Practice Unit, Vancouver, Washington,
to apply for adjustment assistance, in accordance with Section 223
of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 13th day of May 2016.
/s/Del Min Amy Chen
______________________________
DEL MIN AMY CHEN
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance