DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-91,543

MAYFLOWER VEHICLE SYSTEMS, LLC
A SUBSIDIARY OF COMMERCIAL VEHICLE GROUP, INC.
INCLUDING ON-SITE LEASED WORKERS FROM
PERSONNEL TEMP SERVICES
SHADYSIDE, OHIO

Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

By application dated August 2, 2016, the United Steel,
Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied
Industrial and Service Workers International Union requested
administrative reconsideration of the Department of Labor's
negative determination regarding eligibility to apply for worker
adjustment assistance, applicable to workers and former workers
of Mayflower Vehicle Systems, LLC, a subsidiary of Commercial
Vehicle Group, Inc., Shadyside, Ohio (subject firm). The
determination was issued on June 15, 2016. The Department’s
Notice of determination was published in the Federal Register on
July 18, 2016 (81 FR 46706).
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 mis-
interpretation of facts or of the law justified
reconsideration of the decision.
The request for reconsideration states that the negative
determination is erroneous because “the Department failed to
consider that by the Company’s major customer shifting the
production of its steel stampings to Mexico, Mayflower’s production
was clearly shifted to a foreign country.” The request asserts that
the subject firm experienced sales and production declines
beginning in January 2016. The request further asserts that the
Department’s period of investigation is incorrect and that “the
relevant period for the data is . . . May through June 2016,
compared to May through June 2015.”
A shift of production by a customer to a foreign country
cannot be the basis for certification for the subject worker group.
“Increased imports means that imports have increased either
absolutely or relative to domestic production compared to a
representative base period. The representative base period shall be
one year consisting of the four quarters immediately preceding the
date which is twelve months prior to the date of the petition.” 29
CFR 90.2
The date of the petition is February 15, 2016. Consequently,
the periods of time identified in the request for reconsideration
as relevant in determining sales/production declines and increased
imports are not consistent with applicable regulation.
The petitioner did not supply facts not previously
considered; nor provide additional documentation indicating that
there was either 1) a mistake in the determination of facts not
previously considered or 2) a misinterpretation of facts or of
the law justifying reconsideration of the initial determination.
Based on these findings, the Department determines that 29 CFR
90.18(c) has not been met.
Conclusion
After careful review of the application and investigative
findings, I conclude that there has been no error or
misinterpretation of the law or of the facts which would justify
reconsideration of the Department of Labor's prior decision.
Accordingly, the application is denied.

Signed in Washington, D.C., this 4th day of November, 2016

/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-91,543

MAYFLOWER VEHICLE SYSTEMS, LLC
A SUBSIDIARY OF COMMERCIAL VEHICLE GROUP, INC.
INCLUDING ON-SITE LEASED WORKERS FROM
PERSONNEL TEMP SERVICES
SHADYSIDE, OHIO

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
filed on March 3, 2016, by the company official on behalf of
workers of Mayflower Vehicle Systems, LLC, a subsidiary of
Commercial Vehicle Group, Inc., including on-site leased
workers from Personnel Temp Services, Shadyside, Ohio (herein
known as “Mayflower Vehicle Systems, LLC”). The workers’ firm
is engaged in activities related to the production of steel
stampings and light assemblies for the truck industry. Workers
are not separately identifiable by the articles produced.
The petitioner alleged that their customer decided to
have another stamping company stamp the parts and moved their
stamping tool to another stamping supplier in Monterrey,
Mexico.
During the course of the investigation, information was
collected from the workers’ firm and the petitioner.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(i) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Mayflower Vehicle Systems, LLC has
not experienced a decline in the sales or production of steel
stampings and light assemblies during the relevant period under
investigation, full year 2015, compared to full year 2014.
The increase in sales and production does not allow for the
address of the petitioner’s allegation and consideration of
increased imports contributing importantly to worker
separations.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Mayflower Vehicle Systems, LLC did
not shift the production of steel stampings and light assemblies
to a foreign country or acquire steel stampings and light
assemblies from a foreign country.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Mayflower Vehicle Systems, LLC 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 Mayflower Vehicle Systems, LLC
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 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 Mayflower Vehicle
Systems, LLC, a subsidiary of Commercial Vehicle Group, Inc.,
including on-site leased workers from Personnel Temp Services,
Shadyside, Ohio, engaged in activities related to the production
of steel stampings and light assemblies to apply for adjustment
assistance, in accordance with Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C.
§ 2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 15th day of June 2016.

/s/Hope D. Kinglock
______________________________
HOPE D. KINGLOCK
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance