UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-96,641
HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE

POINTNEXT - TECHNOLOGY SERVICES AMS DELIVERY OPS

COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO
Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility
To Apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance for Workers

In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended ("Act"), 19 U.S.C.
§ 2273, the Department of Labor ("Department") herein presents the results of an investigation
regarding certification of eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance ("TAA") for
workers.

The investigation was initiated in response to a TAA petition dated December 7, 2020 and
filed on December 8, 2020 by a State Workforce Office, on behalf of workers and former workers
of Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Pointnext -Technology Services AMS Delivery Ops, Colorado
Springs, Colorado (hereafter referred to as a "group of workers"). In accordance with 20 C.F.R.
618 a group of workers is defined as, ""¦inclusive of teleworkers and staffed workers."

The group of workers is engaged in activities related to the supply of technical assistance
and consulting services to HPE customer base as it relates to HPE equipment and are not separately
identifiable by service.

The petition alleged that worker separations, or threats thereof, were due to due to pressure
to reduce payroll by using foreign workers, mostly from India (software development and support),
China (hardware design, development) and Costa Rica (support), which has opened the door to
HPE investment in teleworker infrastructure, foreign worker training services, foreign worker
facilities, etc. Furthermore, it was alleged that the Pointnext support organization has benefited
from remote and in-CONUS foreign labor over the years from HPE Pointnext leadership to
individual contributors.

During the course of the investigation, the Department collected information from the
petitioner(s), the workers' firm, and other relevant sources.

Workers of a firm may be eligible for TAA if they satisfy the criteria of subsection (a), (b)
or (e) of Section 222 of the Trade Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a), (b) and (e).

For the Department to issue a certification for workers under Section 222(a) of the Trade
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a), the following criteria must be met:

Employment Criterion

(1) 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.
20 C.F.R. 618.225(a)(2)(i)(B) states that an "analysis of separation data must generally
consist of a: (1) Comparison of employment on the petition date to employment on the date that is
1 year prior to the petition date; (2) Review of employment activity during the 1-year period prior
to the petition date; and (3) Review of evidence provided by the workers' firm regarding actual
and threatened separations that occur, or are scheduled to occur, after the petition date."

The Department determines that the employment criterion has not been met. The
investigation revealed that only 1 worker was separated and/or threatened with total separation
during the period relevant to the investigation. Furthermore, partial separations did not occur.

Decreased Sales or Production Criterion

(2)(A)(i) The sales or production, or both, of such firm have decreased absolutely.

The Department did not make a determination on whether the sales or production criterion
was met because the employment criterion was not met.

Increased Imports Criterion

(2)(A)(ii)(I) Imports of articles or services like or directly competitive with articles
produced or services supplied by such firm have increased;

(II)(aa) imports of articles like or directly competitive with articles into which one
or more component parts produced by such firm are directly incorporated have
increased;

(bb) imports of articles like or directly competitive with articles which are produced
directly using services supplied by such firm, have increased;

(III) imports of articles directly incorporating one or more component parts produced
outside the United States that are like or directly competitive with imports of articles
incorporating one or more component parts produced by such firm have increased.

The Department did not make a determination on whether the increased imports criterion
was met because no finding regarding the decreased sales or production criterion was made.

Contributed Importantly Criterion
(2)(A)(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.

The Department did not make a determination on whether the contributed importantly
criterion was met because no finding regarding the increased imports criterion was made.

Shift/Acquisition Criterion
(2)(B)(i)(I) there has been a shift by the workers' firm to a foreign country in the production
of articles or the supply of services like or directly competitive with articles which
are produced or services which are supplied by such firm; or

(II) such workers' firm has acquired from a foreign country articles or services that
are like or directly competitive with articles which are produced or services which
are supplied by such firm;
The Department did not make a determination on whether the shift/acquisition criterion
was met because the employment criterion was not met.

Contributed Importantly Criterion

(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.
The Department did not make a determination on whether the contributed importantly
criterion was met because no finding regarding the shift/acquisition criterion was made.

For the Department to issue a certification for workers under Section 222(b) of the Trade

Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(b), the following criteria must be met:

Employment Criterion

(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.
20 C.F.R. 618.225(a)(2)(i)(B) states that an "analysis of separation data must generally
consist of a: "(1) Comparison of employment on the petition date to employment on the date that is

1 year prior to the petition date; (2) Review of employment activity during the 1-year period prior
to the petition date; and (3) Review of evidence provided by the workers' firm regarding actual
and threatened separations that occur, or are scheduled to occur, after the petition date."

The Department determines that the employment criterion has not been met. The
investigation revealed that only 1 worker was separated and/or threatened with total separation
during the period relevant to the investigation. Furthermore, partial separations did not occur.

Supplier/Downstream Producer Criterion

(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 subsection (a), and such supply
or production is related to the article or service that was the basis for such certification
(as defined in subsection (c) (3)and (4)); and
The Department did not make a determination on whether the supplier/downstream
producer criterion was met because the employment criterion was not met.

20% or Contributed Importantly Criterion

(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 determined
under paragraph (I).
The Department did not make a determination on whether the 20% or contributed
importantly criterion was met because no finding regarding the supplier/downstream producer
criterion was made.

For the Department to issue a certification for workers under Section 222(e) of the Act, 19

U.S.C. § 2272(e), the following criteria must be met:
Member of Domestic Industry Criterion

(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));
The Department determines that the member of a domestic industry criterion has not been
met. The workers' firm was not named as a part of a domestic industry in an ITC final determination.

Timely Petition Filing Criterion

(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 (B) or (C) of
paragraph (1) is published in the Federal Register; and
The Department did not make a determination on whether the timely petition filing criterion
was met because the member of domestic industry criterion was not met.

Employment Criterion

(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 Department did not make a determination on whether the employment criterion was
met because no finding regarding the timely petition filing criterion was made.

Conclusion

After careful review of the facts obtained in the investigation, I determine that the
requirements of Section 222 of the Trade Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272, have not been met and, therefore,
deny the petition for group eligibility of Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Pointnext -Technology
Services AMS Delivery Ops, Colorado Springs, Colorado, who are engaged in activities related
to the supply of technical assistance and consulting services to HPE customer base as it relates to
HPE equipment to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance for workers, in accordance with Section
223 of the Trade Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 11th day of May, 2021

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