Management Resources Group, Inc., Including Workers in the States of Georgia and New York Reporting to Southbury, CT; Notice of Revised Determination on Remand, 16450-16451 [2011-6803]
Download as PDF
16450
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 23, 2011 / Notices
The following certifications have been
issued. The requirements of Section
222(c) (supplier to a firm whose workers
are certified eligible to apply for TAA)
of the Trade Act have been met.
TA–W No.
Subject firm
Location
75,161 ............
75,161A ..........
Continental Plastics Company, Leased Workers from ETS Staffing
Continental Plastics Company, Leased Workers from Randstad
Staffing and Recruiting.
Continental Plastics Company, Chesterfield, Inc., Leased Workers
from ETS Staffing.
Continental Coatings, LLC, Leased Workers from ETS Staffing .....
Continental Industries, LLC, Leased Workers from ETS Staffing ....
Fraser, MI ....................................
Alpharetta, GA .............................
January 31, 2010.
January 31, 2010.
Chesterfield, MI ...........................
January 31, 2010.
China Township, MI ....................
Benzonia, MI ...............................
January 31, 2010.
January 31, 2010.
75,161B ..........
75,161C ..........
75,161D ..........
Negative Determinations for Worker
Adjustment Assistance
In the following cases, the
investigation revealed that the eligibility
criteria for worker adjustment assistance
have not been met for the reasons
specified.
The investigation revealed that the
criterion under paragraph (a)(1), or
TA–W No.
JLG Industries, Inc., Access Division; Oshkosh Corporation ...........
BancTec, Field Service Representatives ..........................................
(b)(1), or (c)(1) (employment decline or
threat of separation) of section 222 has
not been met.
Subject firm
75,131 ............
75,310 ............
The investigation revealed that the
criteria under paragraphs(a)(2)(A)
Location
Subject firm
74,894 .........
Cross Creek Furniture ........................................................................
Determinations Terminating
Investigations of Petitions for Worker
Adjustment Assistance
country) of section 222 have not been
met.
Location
because the petitions are the subject of
ongoing investigations under petitions
filed earlier covering the same
petitioners.
TA–W No.
Subject firm
Location
75,269 .........
Evergreen Solar, Inc., 112 Barnum Road; Leased Workers Advantage Technical Resources and Kelly Service.
Evergreen Solar, Inc., Leased Workers from Advantage Technical
Resources.
Devens, MA ..................................
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
75,272 .........
I hereby certify that the
aforementioned determinations were
issued during the period of March 7,
2011 through March 11, 2011. Copies of
these determinations may be requested
under the Freedom of Information Act.
Requests may be submitted by fax,
courier services, or mail to FOIA
Disclosure Officer, Office of Trade
Adjustment Assistance (ETA), U.S.
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210 or
tofoiarequest@dol.gov. These
determinations also are available on the
Department’s Web site at https://
www.doleta.gov/tradeact under the
searchable listing of determinations.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:46 Mar 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
Impact date
Hudson, NC.
on the Department’s Web site, as
required by Section 221 of the Act (19
U.S.C. 2271), the Department initiated
investigations of these petitions.
The following determinations
terminating investigations were issued
After notice of the petitions was
published in the Federal Register and
Impact date
Hagerstown, MD.
N/A, NC.
(increased imports) and (a)(2)(B) (shift
in production or services to a foreign
TA–W No.
Impact date
Impact date
February 11, 2010.
Marlboro, MA.
Dated: March 16, 2011.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment
Assistance.
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
[FR Doc. 2011–6804 Filed 3–22–11; 8:45 am]
[TA–W–73,938]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
PO 00000
Employment and Training
Administration
Management Resources Group, Inc.,
Including Workers in the States of
Georgia and New York Reporting to
Southbury, CT; Notice of Revised
Determination on Remand
On January 13, 2011, the United
States Court of International Trade
(USCIT) granted the Department of
Labor’s request for voluntary remand to
conduct further investigation in Former
Employees of Management Resources
Group, Inc. v. United States Secretary of
Labor, Court No. 10–00345.
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM
23MRN1
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 23, 2011 / Notices
On April 15, 2010, a State of
Connecticut Workforce Office
representative filed a petition for Trade
Adjustment Assistance (TAA) with the
Department of Labor (Department) on
behalf of workers and former workers of
Management Resources Group, Inc.,
Southbury, Connecticut (subject firm).
Workers at the subject firm (subject
worker group) are engaged in
employment related to the supply of
asset reliability engineering consulting
services. The worker group does not
include on-site leased workers.
The Department’s initial findings
revealed that the subject firm did not
import services like or directly
competitive with the engineering
consulting services supplied by the
workers, shift the supply of these
services abroad, or acquire from a
foreign country the supply of these
services, during the period under
investigation. Further, the Department
surveyed the subject firm’s major
declining customers regarding imports
of engineering consulting services
during the relevant time period. The
survey revealed that none of the
customers imported services like or
directly competitive with those
supplied by the subject firm.
Consequently, the Department
determined that the group eligibility
requirements under Section 222 of the
Trade Act, as amended (the Act), had
not been met.
On September 16, 2010, the
Department issued a Negative
Determination regarding eligibility to
apply for TAA applicable to workers
and former workers of the subject firm.
The Department’s Notice of
Determination was published in the
Federal Register on September 29, 2010
(75 FR 60145).
The Department did not receive a
request for administrative
reconsideration.
In the complaint to the USCIT, the
Plaintiffs claimed that subject firm
workers were impacted by a shift in
services to a foreign country as
‘‘[Management Resources Group, Inc.]
outsourced work previously done by
Plaintiffs to a firm in India * * *.’’
On January 11, 2011, the Department
requested voluntary remand to conduct
further investigation to address the
Plaintiffs’ allegations, to determine
whether the subject worker group is
eligible to apply for TAA, and to issue
an appropriate determination. On
January 13, 2011, the USCIT granted the
Department’s Motion for Voluntary
Remand.
To apply for worker adjustment
assistance under Section 222(a) of the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:46 Mar 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
Act, 19 U.S.C. 2272(a), the following
criteria must be met:
I. 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.
II. The second criterion (set forth in
Section 222(a)(2) of the Act, 19 U.S.C.
2272(a)(2)) may be satisfied if either:
(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
(i)(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.
III. The third criterion requires that
the shift/acquisition must have
contributed importantly to the workers’
separation or threat of separation. See
Section 222(a)(2)(B)(ii) of the Act, 19
U.S.C. 2272(a)(2)(B)(ii).
The intent of the Department is for a
certification to cover all workers of the
subject firm, or appropriate subdivision,
who were adversely affected by
increased imports of services like or
directly competitive with those
supplied by the subject worker group or
a shift to or acquisition from a foreign
country of the service supplied by the
workers, based on the investigation of
the TAA petition.
During the remand investigation, the
Department carefully reviewed
previously submitted information,
obtained additional information from
the subject firm, and solicited input
from the Plaintiffs.
Based on the information collected
during the remand investigation, the
Department determined that a
significant number or proportion of the
workers at the subject firm was totally
or partially separated, or threatened
with such separation. Further, the
Department determined that workers in
the Inventory Services Group, which
performs activities related to
Maintenance, Repair, and Operations,
were impacted by a shift in the supply
of services abroad and that the shift
contributed importantly to worker
separations at the subject firm. The
functions of the other groups within the
subject firm also support activities
related to supply of asset reliability
engineering consulting services, and are
included under this petition.
Specifically, during the period under
investigation, the subject firm shifted to
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 9990
16451
India the supply of services like or
directly competitive with those
supplied by the Inventory Services
Group. Information collected revealed
evidence of a foreign contract in
conjunction with declines in domestic
employment.
The subject worker group includes all
workers at the Southbury, Connecticut
location and employees who worked
remotely in the States of Georgia and
New York and reported to Southbury,
Connecticut during the relevant time
period. The subject worker group does
not include on-site leased workers.
After careful review on remand, the
Department has determined that a
significant number or proportion of the
workers at the subject firm was
separated. Further, the Department has
determined that a shift abroad of
services like or directly competitive
with the services supplied by the
subject worker group contributed
importantly to worker group
separations. Therefore, the Department
has determined that the group eligibility
requirements, under Section
222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, have been met.
Conclusion
After careful review of the facts
during the remand investigation, I
determine that Management Resources
Group, Inc., Southbury, Connecticut,
has shifted to a foreign country the
supply of services like or directly
competitive with the engineering
consulting services supplied by the
subject worker group. In accordance
with the provisions of the Act, I make
the following certification:
All workers of Management Resources
Group, Inc., Southbury, Connecticut,
including workers in Georgia and New York
who report to the subject firm, who are
engaged in employment related to the supply
of asset reliability engineering consulting
services and became totally or partially
separated from employment on or after April
15, 2008, through two years from the date of
this revised certification, and all workers in
the group threatened with total or partial
separation from employment on date of
certification through two years from the date
of certification, are eligible to apply for
adjustment assistance under Chapter 2 of
Title II of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended.
Signed at Washington, DC this 10th day of
March 2011.
Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment
Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2011–6803 Filed 3–22–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM
23MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 56 (Wednesday, March 23, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16450-16451]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-6803]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-73,938]
Management Resources Group, Inc., Including Workers in the States
of Georgia and New York Reporting to Southbury, CT; Notice of Revised
Determination on Remand
On January 13, 2011, the United States Court of International Trade
(USCIT) granted the Department of Labor's request for voluntary remand
to conduct further investigation in Former Employees of Management
Resources Group, Inc. v. United States Secretary of Labor, Court No.
10-00345.
[[Page 16451]]
On April 15, 2010, a State of Connecticut Workforce Office
representative filed a petition for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA)
with the Department of Labor (Department) on behalf of workers and
former workers of Management Resources Group, Inc., Southbury,
Connecticut (subject firm). Workers at the subject firm (subject worker
group) are engaged in employment related to the supply of asset
reliability engineering consulting services. The worker group does not
include on-site leased workers.
The Department's initial findings revealed that the subject firm
did not import services like or directly competitive with the
engineering consulting services supplied by the workers, shift the
supply of these services abroad, or acquire from a foreign country the
supply of these services, during the period under investigation.
Further, the Department surveyed the subject firm's major declining
customers regarding imports of engineering consulting services during
the relevant time period. The survey revealed that none of the
customers imported services like or directly competitive with those
supplied by the subject firm. Consequently, the Department determined
that the group eligibility requirements under Section 222 of the Trade
Act, as amended (the Act), had not been met.
On September 16, 2010, the Department issued a Negative
Determination regarding eligibility to apply for TAA applicable to
workers and former workers of the subject firm. The Department's Notice
of Determination was published in the Federal Register on September 29,
2010 (75 FR 60145).
The Department did not receive a request for administrative
reconsideration.
In the complaint to the USCIT, the Plaintiffs claimed that subject
firm workers were impacted by a shift in services to a foreign country
as ``[Management Resources Group, Inc.] outsourced work previously done
by Plaintiffs to a firm in India * * *.''
On January 11, 2011, the Department requested voluntary remand to
conduct further investigation to address the Plaintiffs' allegations,
to determine whether the subject worker group is eligible to apply for
TAA, and to issue an appropriate determination. On January 13, 2011,
the USCIT granted the Department's Motion for Voluntary Remand.
To apply for worker adjustment assistance under Section 222(a) of
the Act, 19 U.S.C. 2272(a), the following criteria must be met:
I. 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.
II. The second criterion (set forth in Section 222(a)(2) of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. 2272(a)(2)) may be satisfied if either:
(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
(i)(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.
III. The third criterion requires that the shift/acquisition must
have contributed importantly to the workers' separation or threat of
separation. See Section 222(a)(2)(B)(ii) of the Act, 19 U.S.C.
2272(a)(2)(B)(ii).
The intent of the Department is for a certification to cover all
workers of the subject firm, or appropriate subdivision, who were
adversely affected by increased imports of services like or directly
competitive with those supplied by the subject worker group or a shift
to or acquisition from a foreign country of the service supplied by the
workers, based on the investigation of the TAA petition.
During the remand investigation, the Department carefully reviewed
previously submitted information, obtained additional information from
the subject firm, and solicited input from the Plaintiffs.
Based on the information collected during the remand investigation,
the Department determined that a significant number or proportion of
the workers at the subject firm was totally or partially separated, or
threatened with such separation. Further, the Department determined
that workers in the Inventory Services Group, which performs activities
related to Maintenance, Repair, and Operations, were impacted by a
shift in the supply of services abroad and that the shift contributed
importantly to worker separations at the subject firm. The functions of
the other groups within the subject firm also support activities
related to supply of asset reliability engineering consulting services,
and are included under this petition.
Specifically, during the period under investigation, the subject
firm shifted to India the supply of services like or directly
competitive with those supplied by the Inventory Services Group.
Information collected revealed evidence of a foreign contract in
conjunction with declines in domestic employment.
The subject worker group includes all workers at the Southbury,
Connecticut location and employees who worked remotely in the States of
Georgia and New York and reported to Southbury, Connecticut during the
relevant time period. The subject worker group does not include on-site
leased workers.
After careful review on remand, the Department has determined that
a significant number or proportion of the workers at the subject firm
was separated. Further, the Department has determined that a shift
abroad of services like or directly competitive with the services
supplied by the subject worker group contributed importantly to worker
group separations. Therefore, the Department has determined that the
group eligibility requirements, under Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act,
have been met.
Conclusion
After careful review of the facts during the remand investigation,
I determine that Management Resources Group, Inc., Southbury,
Connecticut, has shifted to a foreign country the supply of services
like or directly competitive with the engineering consulting services
supplied by the subject worker group. In accordance with the provisions
of the Act, I make the following certification:
All workers of Management Resources Group, Inc., Southbury,
Connecticut, including workers in Georgia and New York who report to
the subject firm, who are engaged in employment related to the
supply of asset reliability engineering consulting services and
became totally or partially separated from employment on or after
April 15, 2008, through two years from the date of this revised
certification, and all workers in the group threatened with total or
partial separation from employment on date of certification through
two years from the date of certification, are eligible to apply for
adjustment assistance under Chapter 2 of Title II of the Trade Act
of 1974, as amended.
Signed at Washington, DC this 10th day of March 2011.
Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2011-6803 Filed 3-22-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P