Agilent Technologies, Inc., Global Infrastructure Organization, Palo Alto, CA; Notice of Termination of Investigation, 19896 [E6-5769]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
19896
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 18, 2006 / Notices
to insure employees are paid in
compliance with FLSA.
Darrin A. King,
Acting Departmental Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. E6–5771 Filed 4–17–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–27–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–59,024]
Agilent Technologies, Inc., Global
Infrastructure Organization, Palo Alto,
CA; Notice of Termination of
Investigation
Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade
Act of 1974, as amended, an
investigation was initiated on March 14,
2006 in response to a worker petition
filed on behalf of workers at Agilent
Technologies, Inc., Global Infrastructure
Organization, headquartered in Palo
Alto, California. The workers were
employed as information technology
specialists, telecommuting from their
homes, but reporting to different
facilities.
The petition regarding the
investigation has been deemed invalid.
Petitioners do not constitute a valid
worker group of three or more
associated workers working at the same
facility. Consequently, the investigation
has been terminated.
Signed at Washington, DC, this 6th day of
April 2006.
Richard Church,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E6–5769 Filed 4–17–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–30–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–58,620]
hsrobinson on PROD1PC68 with NOTICES
Bankers Trust Services A/K/A
Deutsche Bank Services Tennessee,
Inc., Nashville, TN; Notice of Negative
Determination Regarding Application
for Reconsideration
By application dated February 22,
2006 a petitioner requested
administrative reconsideration of the
Department’s negative determination
regarding eligibility for workers and
former workers of the subject firm to
apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance
(TAA). The denial notice applicable to
workers of Bankers Trust Services,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:03 Apr 17, 2006
Jkt 208001
a/k/a Deutsche Bank Services
Tennessee, Inc., Nashville, Tennessee
was signed on January 26, 2006 and
published in the Federal Register on
February 10, 2006 (71 FR 7077).
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 misinterpretation of facts or of
the law justified reconsideration of the
decision.
The TAA petition filed on behalf of
workers at Bankers Trust Services,
a/k/a Deutsche Bank Services
Tennessee, Inc., Nashville, Tennessee
were engaged in providing general
banking and financial services to the
public and were denied because the
petitioning workers did not produce an
article within the meaning of section
222 of the Act.
The petitioner contends that the
Department erred in its interpretation of
work performed at the subject facility as
providing a service and further conveys
that workers of the subject firm
‘‘produced individualized billing
models with separate tangible file
folders’’. The petitioner further states
that ‘‘billing would have been
impossible without the production of
these individualized billing models’’.
A company official was contacted for
clarification in regard to the nature of
the work performed at the subject
facility. The official stated that the
subject firm does not manufacture
products that are sold on the open
market. The official further clarified that
workers of the subject firm entered
account information into an in-house
billing system for the purpose of billing
external clients. The copies of the work
that was entered into the system was
kept in a tangible file folder at the
subject firm for reference purposes.
The sophistication of the work
involved is not an issue in ascertaining
whether the petitioning workers are
eligible for trade adjustment assistance,
but whether they produce an article
within the meaning of section 222 of the
Trade Act of 1974.
Entering accounting information into
the billing system and making copies of
the billing financial data for filing
purposes is not considered production
of an article within the meaning of
section 222 of the Trade Act. Petitioning
workers do not produce an ‘‘article’’
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
within the meaning of the Trade Act of
1974.
The investigation on reconsideration
supported the findings of the primary
investigation that the petitioning group
of workers does not produce an article.
Furthermore, workers of the subject firm
did not support production of an article
at any affiliated facility.
The petitioner further alleges that
because workers lost their jobs due to a
transfer of job functions to India,
petitioning workers should be
considered import impacted.
The company official stated that such
functions as entry of accounting
information into a Deutsche Bank
billing system for the purpose of billing
external clients were shifted to India.
Your petition allegation of jobs
transferred to a foreign country might be
relevant if all other worker group
eligibility requirements for trade
adjustment assistance were met.
However, workers of the subject firm are
engaged in data entry of the account
information into the in-house billing
system and do not meet the requirement
of producing an article as established in
section 222 of the Trade Act. Thus, the
workers in this case do not meet the
worker group eligibility requirements of
TAA.
Service workers can be certified only
if worker separations are caused by a
reduced demand for their services from
a parent or controlling firm or
subdivision whose workers produce an
article domestically who meet the
eligibility requirements, or if the group
of workers are leased workers who
perform their duties at a facility that
meet the eligibility requirements.
Conclusion
After 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 at Washington, DC, this 11th day of
April, 2006.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E6–5764 Filed 4–17–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–30–P
E:\FR\FM\18APN1.SGM
18APN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 74 (Tuesday, April 18, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Page 19896]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-5769]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-59,024]
Agilent Technologies, Inc., Global Infrastructure Organization,
Palo Alto, CA; Notice of Termination of Investigation
Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an
investigation was initiated on March 14, 2006 in response to a worker
petition filed on behalf of workers at Agilent Technologies, Inc.,
Global Infrastructure Organization, headquartered in Palo Alto,
California. The workers were employed as information technology
specialists, telecommuting from their homes, but reporting to different
facilities.
The petition regarding the investigation has been deemed invalid.
Petitioners do not constitute a valid worker group of three or more
associated workers working at the same facility. Consequently, the
investigation has been terminated.
Signed at Washington, DC, this 6th day of April 2006.
Richard Church,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E6-5769 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P
