Lands'End, A Subsidiary of Sears Roebuck and Company, Business Outfitters CAD Operations, Dodgeville, Wisconsin; Notice of Revised Determination on Remand, 18357-18358 [E6-5277]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 11, 2006 / Notices
employment occurred at the subject
facility during the relevant period.
Conclusion
After careful review of the facts
generated through the remand
investigation, I determine that a shift in
production of financial applications
software like or directly competitive to
that produced at the subject facility to
Mexico contributed importantly to the
total or partial separation of a significant
number of workers at the subject
facility. In accordance with the
provisions of the Act, I make the
following certification:
‘‘All workers of Electronic Data Systems
Corporation, I Solutions Center, Fairborn,
Ohio, who became totally or partially
separated from employment on or after
December 27, 2001, through two years from
the issuance of this revised determination,
are eligible to apply for Trade Adjustment
Assistance under Section 223 of the Trade
Act of 1974.’’
Signed at Washington, DC this 24th day of
March 2006.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E6–5279 Filed 4–10–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–30–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–56,688]
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Lands’End, A Subsidiary of Sears
Roebuck and Company, Business
Outfitters CAD Operations, Dodgeville,
Wisconsin; Notice of Revised
Determination on Remand
In an Order issued on December 7,
2005, the United States Court of
International Trade (USCIT) granted the
motion filed by the Department of Labor
(Department) for voluntary remand in
Former Employees of Lands’ End
Business Outfitters v. United States
Secretary of Labor, Court No. 05–00517.
The Department denied Trade
Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and
Alternative Trade Adjustment
Assistance (ATAA) to workers of Lands’
End, a Subsidiary of Sears Roebuck and
Company, Business Outfitters CAD
Operations, Dodgeville, Wisconsin,
(Lands’ End) because the workers’
separations were due to the subject
company’s decision to move computer
assisted design operations abroad. The
subject worker group is engaged in
computerizing embroidery and logo
designs which are utilized by the
production division of Lands’ End, also
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:37 Apr 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
located in Dodgeville, Wisconsin. The
Notice of determination was issued on
March 25, 2005, and published in the
Federal Register on May 2, 2005 (70 FR
22710).
On June 6, 2005, the Department
issued an Affirmative Determination
Regarding Application for
Reconsideration for the workers and
former workers of the subject firm. The
Notice of determination was published
in the Federal Register on June 20, 2005
(70 FR 35456). In the request for
reconsideration, the petitioners alleged
that workers produce digitized
embroidery designs, that production
shifted overseas, and that imports had
increased following the shift of
production abroad.
A negative determination on
reconsideration was issued on July 28,
2005. The Notice of determination was
published in the Federal Register on
August 9, 2005 (70 FR 46190). During
the reconsideration investigation, the
Department was informed that the
workers create digitized embroidery
designs from customers’ logos. The
designs are owned by the customers.
The digitized designs are readable by
the embroidery machines at Dodgeville,
Wisconsin, and are embroidered onto
clothing and luggage produced by
Lands’ End. Alternatively, the customer
may give the design to another apparel
manufacturer for the production of the
logo design on clothing and luggage.
The Department found that the
production of digitized embroidery
designs shifted overseas, and that the
designs are electronically returned to
Dodgeville, Wisconsin. Because the
Department’s policy required that
articles be tangible for purposes of the
Trade Act, it was determined that the
workers did not produce an article and
were not covered by the Trade Act.
Since the issuance of the voluntary
remand order, the Department has
revised its policy to acknowledge that,
at least in the context of this case, there
are tangible and intangible articles and
to clarify that the production of
intangible articles can be distinguished
from the provision of services. Software
and similar intangible goods that would
have been considered articles for the
purposes of the Trade Act if embodied
in a physical medium will now be
considered to be articles regardless of
their method of transfer.
The Department stresses that it will
continue to implement the longstanding
precedent that firms must produce an
article to be certified under the Act.
This determination is not altered by the
fact the provision of a service may result
in the incidental creation of an article.
For example, accountants provide
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
18357
services for the purposes of the Act even
though, in the course of providing those
services, they may generate audit
reports or similar financial documents
that might be articles on the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States. Because the new policy
may have ramifications beyond this case
of which the Department is not fully
cognizant, the new policy will be
further developed in rulemaking.
Moreover, because it is the
Department’s practice to apply current
policy instead of the policy which
existed during the investigative period if
doing so is favorable to the workers, the
Department conducted the remand
investigation under the new policy.
After careful review of the facts, the
Department has determined that: the
petitioners are former employees of
Land’s End Business Outfitters CAD
operations of Dodgeville, Wisconsin;
that the workers’ firm produced an
intangible article (digitized embroidery
designs) that would have been
considered an article if embodied in a
physical medium; that employment at
the subject facility declined during the
relevant period; that the workers’ firm
shifted digitized embroidery design
production abroad; and that the
workers’ firm increased imports of
articles like or directly competitive with
the digitized embroidery designs
produced at the subject facility.
In accordance with Section 246 the
Trade Act of 1974, as amended, the
Department of Labor herein presents the
results of its investigation regarding
certification of eligibility to apply
ATAA.
In order for the Department to issue
a certification of eligibility to apply for
ATAA, the group eligibility
requirements of Section 246 of the
Trade Act must be met. The Department
has determined in this case that the
requirements of Section 246 have been
met.
Additional investigation has
determined that the workers possess
skills that are not easily transferable. A
significant number or proportion of the
worker group are age fifty years or over.
Competitive conditions within the
industry are adverse.
Conclusion
After careful review of the facts
generated through the remand
investigation, I determine that increased
imports of digitized embroidery designs
like or directly competitive with those
produced by the subject firm
contributed importantly to the total or
partial separation of a significant
number of workers at the subject
facility. In accordance with the
E:\FR\FM\11APN1.SGM
11APN1
18358
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 11, 2006 / Notices
provisions of the Act, I make the
following certification:
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
‘‘All workers of Lands’ End, a Subsidiary
of Sears Roebuck and Company, Business
Outfitters CAD Operations, Dodgeville,
Wisconsin, who became totally or partially
separated from employment on or after
March 3, 2004, through two years from the
issuance of this revised determination, are
eligible to apply for Trade Adjustment
Assistance under section 223 of the Trade
Act of 1974, and are also eligible to apply for
alternative trade adjustment assistance under
Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974.’’
Signed at Washington, DC this 24th day of
March 2006.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E6–5277 Filed 4–10–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–30–P
Employment and Training
Administration
Investigations Regarding Certifications
of Eligibility To Apply for Worker
Adjustment Assistance
Petitions have been filed with the
Secretary of Labor under Section 221(a)
of the Trade Act of 1974 (‘‘the Act’’) and
are identified in the Appendix to this
notice. Upon receipt of these petitions,
the Director of the Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance, Employment
and Training Administration, has
instituted investigations pursuant to
Section 221 (a) of the Act.
The purpose of each of the
investigations is to determine whether
the workers are eligible to apply for
adjustment assistance under Title II,
Chapter 2, of the Act. The investigations
will further relate, as appropriate, to the
determination of the date on which total
or partial separations began or
threatened to begin and the subdivision
of the firm involved.
The petitioners or any other persons
showing a substantial interest in the
subject matter of the investigations may
request a public hearing, provided such
request is filed in writing with the
Director, Division of Trade Adjustment
Assistance, at the address shown below,
not later than April 21, 2006.
Interested persons are invited to
submit written comments regarding the
subject matter of the investigations to
the Director, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance, at the address
shown below, not later than April 21,
2006.
The petitions filed in this case are
available for inspection at the Office of
the Director, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance, Employment
and Training Administration, U.S.
Department of Labor, Room C–5311, 200
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20210.
Signed at Washington, DC this 29th day of
March 2006.
Erica R. Cantor
Director, Division of Trade Adjustment
Assistance.
APPENDIX—
[TAA Petitions Instituted Between 3/6/06 and 3/10/06]
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
TA-W
Subject firm
(Petitioners)
Location
58965 .......
58966 .......
58967 .......
58968 .......
58969 .......
58970 .......
58971 .......
58972 .......
58973 .......
58974 .......
58974A ....
58975 .......
58976 .......
58977 .......
58978 .......
58979 .......
58980 .......
58981 .......
58982 .......
58983 .......
58984 .......
58985 .......
58986 .......
58987 .......
58988 .......
58989 .......
58990 .......
58991 .......
58992 .......
58993 .......
58994 .......
58995 .......
Monmouth Ceramics, Inc. (Comp) ..............................................
Quintiles, Inc. (Wkrs) ..................................................................
Spectrum Brands (Wkrs) ............................................................
Maryland Plastics, Inc. (State) ....................................................
Panel Products (Wkrs) ................................................................
ADC (State) .................................................................................
Sotco, Inc. (Comp) ......................................................................
Elite Furniture Mfg. (Comp) ........................................................
Arcona Leather Technologies, LLC (Wkrs) ................................
Affinia Group (Comp) ..................................................................
Affinia Group (Comp) ..................................................................
Nazar Rubber Company (Union) ................................................
Berkshire Weaving Corp. (Comp) ...............................................
Oce’ Imagistics, Inc. (State) ........................................................
Confluent Photonics Corp. (Comp) .............................................
Tension Envelopes Corp. (State) ...............................................
Stora Enso (Comp) .....................................................................
Cardinal Brands, Inc. (Comp) .....................................................
Guildcraft of California (State) ....................................................
Hersey Meters (Comp) ...............................................................
Independent Steel Casting Co., Inc. (UAW) ...............................
York International (Wkrs) ............................................................
Galerie DBA Ross Acquisitions (Wkrs) ......................................
Lady Ester Lingerie Corporation (Comp) ....................................
Orlandi Valuta (Wkrs) .................................................................
Thermalcast, LLC (Wkrs) ............................................................
H.W. Close Plant Springs Global (Wkrs) ....................................
Lear Corporation (Wkrs) .............................................................
Georgia Pacific Corp. (Union) .....................................................
Ark-Les Custom Products Corporation (Comp) ..........................
Commercial Furniture Group, Inc. (Comp) .................................
Moore Wallace, Inc. (Comp) .......................................................
Monmouth, IL ...........................
Morrisville, NC ..........................
Fennimore, WI ..........................
Federalsburg, MD ....................
White City, OR .........................
Shakopee, MN .........................
West Paducah, KY ...................
High Point, NC .........................
Hudson, NC ..............................
North East, PA .........................
Erie, PA ....................................
Toledo, OH ...............................
Lancaster, SC ..........................
Melbourne, FL ..........................
Salem, NH ................................
Minnetonka, MN .......................
Stevens Point, WI ....................
Topeka, KS ..............................
Rancho Dominguez, CA ..........
Cleveland, NC ..........................
New Buffalo, MI ........................
Bristol, VA ................................
Wellston, OH ............................
Berwick, PA ..............................
Cerritos, CA ..............................
Worcester, MA .........................
Fort Lawn, SC ..........................
Lebanon, VA ............................
Gaylord, MI ...............................
New Berlin, WI .........................
Morristown, TN .........................
Nacogdoches, TX .....................
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:37 Apr 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00091
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\11APN1.SGM
Date of
institution
11APN1
03/06/06
03/06/06
03/06/06
03/07/06
03/07/06
03/07/06
03/07/06
03/07/06
03/07/06
03/07/06
03/07/06
03/07/06
03/07/06
03/10/06
03/10/06
03/10/06
03/10/06
03/10/06
03/10/06
03/10/06
03/10/06
03/10/06
03/10/06
03/10/06
03/10/06
03/10/06
03/10/06
03/10/06
03/10/06
03/10/06
03/10/06
03/10/06
Date of
petition
03/06/06
03/01/06
03/03/06
03/03/06
03/06/06
03/06/06
02/17/06
03/06/06
02/24/06
03/07/06
03/07/06
03/07/06
03/01/06
03/07/06
03/09/06
03/07/06
03/07/07
03/08/06
03/08/06
03/08/06
03/02/06
03/02/06
03/06/06
03/08/06
03/09/06
02/09/06
03/01/06
03/06/06
03/09/06
03/03/06
03/09/06
03/08/06
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 69 (Tuesday, April 11, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18357-18358]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-5277]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-56,688]
Lands'End, A Subsidiary of Sears Roebuck and Company, Business
Outfitters CAD Operations, Dodgeville, Wisconsin; Notice of Revised
Determination on Remand
In an Order issued on December 7, 2005, the United States Court of
International Trade (USCIT) granted the motion filed by the Department
of Labor (Department) for voluntary remand in Former Employees of
Lands' End Business Outfitters v. United States Secretary of Labor,
Court No. 05-00517.
The Department denied Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and
Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance (ATAA) to workers of Lands'
End, a Subsidiary of Sears Roebuck and Company, Business Outfitters CAD
Operations, Dodgeville, Wisconsin, (Lands' End) because the workers'
separations were due to the subject company's decision to move computer
assisted design operations abroad. The subject worker group is engaged
in computerizing embroidery and logo designs which are utilized by the
production division of Lands' End, also located in Dodgeville,
Wisconsin. The Notice of determination was issued on March 25, 2005,
and published in the Federal Register on May 2, 2005 (70 FR 22710).
On June 6, 2005, the Department issued an Affirmative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration for the workers and former
workers of the subject firm. The Notice of determination was published
in the Federal Register on June 20, 2005 (70 FR 35456). In the request
for reconsideration, the petitioners alleged that workers produce
digitized embroidery designs, that production shifted overseas, and
that imports had increased following the shift of production abroad.
A negative determination on reconsideration was issued on July 28,
2005. The Notice of determination was published in the Federal Register
on August 9, 2005 (70 FR 46190). During the reconsideration
investigation, the Department was informed that the workers create
digitized embroidery designs from customers' logos. The designs are
owned by the customers. The digitized designs are readable by the
embroidery machines at Dodgeville, Wisconsin, and are embroidered onto
clothing and luggage produced by Lands' End. Alternatively, the
customer may give the design to another apparel manufacturer for the
production of the logo design on clothing and luggage. The Department
found that the production of digitized embroidery designs shifted
overseas, and that the designs are electronically returned to
Dodgeville, Wisconsin. Because the Department's policy required that
articles be tangible for purposes of the Trade Act, it was determined
that the workers did not produce an article and were not covered by the
Trade Act.
Since the issuance of the voluntary remand order, the Department
has revised its policy to acknowledge that, at least in the context of
this case, there are tangible and intangible articles and to clarify
that the production of intangible articles can be distinguished from
the provision of services. Software and similar intangible goods that
would have been considered articles for the purposes of the Trade Act
if embodied in a physical medium will now be considered to be articles
regardless of their method of transfer.
The Department stresses that it will continue to implement the
longstanding precedent that firms must produce an article to be
certified under the Act. This determination is not altered by the fact
the provision of a service may result in the incidental creation of an
article. For example, accountants provide services for the purposes of
the Act even though, in the course of providing those services, they
may generate audit reports or similar financial documents that might be
articles on the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States.
Because the new policy may have ramifications beyond this case of which
the Department is not fully cognizant, the new policy will be further
developed in rulemaking.
Moreover, because it is the Department's practice to apply current
policy instead of the policy which existed during the investigative
period if doing so is favorable to the workers, the Department
conducted the remand investigation under the new policy.
After careful review of the facts, the Department has determined
that: the petitioners are former employees of Land's End Business
Outfitters CAD operations of Dodgeville, Wisconsin; that the workers'
firm produced an intangible article (digitized embroidery designs) that
would have been considered an article if embodied in a physical medium;
that employment at the subject facility declined during the relevant
period; that the workers' firm shifted digitized embroidery design
production abroad; and that the workers' firm increased imports of
articles like or directly competitive with the digitized embroidery
designs produced at the subject facility.
In accordance with Section 246 the Trade Act of 1974, as amended,
the Department of Labor herein presents the results of its
investigation regarding certification of eligibility to apply ATAA.
In order for the Department to issue a certification of eligibility
to apply for ATAA, the group eligibility requirements of Section 246 of
the Trade Act must be met. The Department has determined in this case
that the requirements of Section 246 have been met.
Additional investigation has determined that the workers possess
skills that are not easily transferable. A significant number or
proportion of the worker group are age fifty years or over. Competitive
conditions within the industry are adverse.
Conclusion
After careful review of the facts generated through the remand
investigation, I determine that increased imports of digitized
embroidery designs like or directly competitive with those produced by
the subject firm contributed importantly to the total or partial
separation of a significant number of workers at the subject facility.
In accordance with the
[[Page 18358]]
provisions of the Act, I make the following certification:
``All workers of Lands' End, a Subsidiary of Sears Roebuck and
Company, Business Outfitters CAD Operations, Dodgeville, Wisconsin,
who became totally or partially separated from employment on or
after March 3, 2004, through two years from the issuance of this
revised determination, are eligible to apply for Trade Adjustment
Assistance under section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are also
eligible to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance under
Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974.''
Signed at Washington, DC this 24th day of March 2006.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E6-5277 Filed 4-10-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P