Petitioner Type: Union
Impact Date:
Filed Date: 07/16/2001
Most Recent Update: 02/13/2002
Determination Date: 02/13/2002
Expiration Date:
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-39,659
AND
NAFTA-05058
TOWER AUTOMOTIVE
SEBEWAING, MICHIGAN
Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration
By application of March 6, 2002, the Paper, Allied-
Industrial, Chemical and Energy Workers International Union, AFL-
CIO-CLC, Local 6-0111 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) under petition TA-W-39,659 and North
American Free Trade Agreement-Transitional Adjustment Assistance
(NAFTA-TAA) under petition NAFTA-5058. The TAA and NAFTA-TAA
denial notices applicable to workers of Tower Automotive,
Sebewaing, Michigan, were signed on February 13, 2002 and
published in the Federal Register on February 28, 2002 (67 FR
9326 & 9327, respectively).
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 TAA petition, filed on behalf of workers at Tower
Automotive, Sebewaing, Michigan engaged in employment related to
the production of metal stamping for the automobile industry, was
denied because the "contributed importantly" group eligibility
requirement of Section 222(3) of the Trade Act of 1974, as
amended, was not met. The "contributed importantly" test is
generally demonstrated through a survey of the workers' firm's
customers. The survey revealed that none of the respondents
imported products like or directly competitive with what the
subject plant produced during the relevant period.
The NAFTA-TAA petition for the same worker group was denied
because criteria (3) and (4) of the group eligibility
requirements in paragraph (a)(1) of Section 250 of the Trade Act,
as amended, were not met. The survey revealed that none of the
respondents increased their imports of products like or directly
competitive with what the subject plant produced from Canada or
Mexico during the relevant period. The subject firm did not
import from Canada or Mexico products like or directly
competitive with what the subject plant produced, nor was the
subject plant's production shifted from the workers' firm to
Mexico or Canada.
The petitioner alleges that the Dodge pickup inner box panel
jobs that left the plant in mid 2001 went to the Chrysler plant
in Saltillo, Mexico.
Review of the initial investigation and data supplied by the
respondents during the corresponding survey indicate that the
customer of the Dodge pickup inner box panel ceased purchasing
the product from the subject firm during July 2001, in favor of
purchasing the product from other domestic sources.
Further review of the findings in the initial decision,
indicate that the company did not shift production of Dodge
pickup inner box panels to Mexico or Canada, nor did they import
the panels from Mexico or Canada during the relevant period.
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 decisions. Accordingly, the
application is denied.
Signed at Washington, D.C., this 9th day of May, 2002.
/s/ Edward A. Tomchick
_______________________
EDWARD A. TOMCHICK
Director, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-39,659
TOWER AUTOMOTIVE
SEBEWAING, MICHIGAN
Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility
To Apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance
In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19
USC 2273) as amended by the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act
of 1988 (P. L. 100-418), the Department of Labor herein presents
the results of an investigation regarding certification of
eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance.
In order to make an affirmative determination and issue a
certification of eligibility to apply for adjustment assistance,
each of the group eligibility requirements of Section 222 of the
Act must be met:
(1) that a significant number or proportion of the workers
in the workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision
thereof, have become totally or partially separated, or
are threatened to become totally or partially
separated;
(2) that sales or production, or both, of the firm or
subdivision have decreased absolutely; and
(3) that increases of imports of articles like or directly
competitive with articles produced by the firm or
appropriate subdivision have contributed importantly to
the separations, or threat thereof, and to the absolute
decline in sales or production.
The investigation was initiated on July 16, 2001 in response
to a petition filed by the Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical and
Energy Workers International Union on behalf of workers at Tower
Automotive, Sebewaing, Michigan. The workers produce metal
stampings for the automotive industry.
The investigation revealed that criterion (3) has not been
met.
The Department conducted a survey of the major declining
customer of the subject firm regarding their purchases of
automotive stampings. The survey revealed that the customer is
not importing stampings that are like or directly competitive
with those made by the subject firm but is, in fact, acquiring
those stampings from other domestic sources as they have
curtailed purchases from Tower Automotive.
Conclusion
After careful review, I determine that all workers of Tower
Automotive, Sebewaing, Michigan, are denied eligibility to apply
for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of
1974.
Signed in Washington, D. C. this 13th day of February, 2002
/s/ Linda G. Poole
______________________________
LINDA G. POOLE
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-39,659
AND
NAFTA-05058
TOWER AUTOMOTIVE
SEBEWAING, MICHIGAN
Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration
By application of March 6, 2002, the Paper, Allied-
Industrial, Chemical and Energy Workers International Union, AFL-
CIO-CLC, Local 6-0111 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) under petition TA-W-39,659 and North
American Free Trade Agreement-Transitional Adjustment Assistance
(NAFTA-TAA) under petition NAFTA-5058. The TAA and NAFTA-TAA
denial notices applicable to workers of Tower Automotive,
Sebewaing, Michigan, were signed on February 13, 2002 and
published in the Federal Register on February 28, 2002 (67 FR
9326 & 9327, respectively).
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 TAA petition, filed on behalf of workers at Tower
Automotive, Sebewaing, Michigan engaged in employment related to
the production of metal stamping for the automobile industry, was
denied because the "contributed importantly" group eligibility
requirement of Section 222(3) of the Trade Act of 1974, as
amended, was not met. The "contributed importantly" test is
generally demonstrated through a survey of the workers' firm's
customers. The survey revealed that none of the respondents
imported products like or directly competitive with what the
subject plant produced during the relevant period.
The NAFTA-TAA petition for the same worker group was denied
because criteria (3) and (4) of the group eligibility
requirements in paragraph (a)(1) of Section 250 of the Trade Act,
as amended, were not met. The survey revealed that none of the
respondents increased their imports of products like or directly
competitive with what the subject plant produced from Canada or
Mexico during the relevant period. The subject firm did not
import from Canada or Mexico products like or directly
competitive with what the subject plant produced, nor was the
subject plant's production shifted from the workers' firm to
Mexico or Canada.
The petitioner alleges that the Dodge pickup inner box panel
jobs that left the plant in mid 2001 went to the Chrysler plant
in Saltillo, Mexico.
Review of the initial investigation and data supplied by the
respondents during the corresponding survey indicate that the
customer of the Dodge pickup inner box panel ceased purchasing
the product from the subject firm during July 2001, in favor of
purchasing the product from other domestic sources.
Further review of the findings in the initial decision,
indicate that the company did not shift production of Dodge
pickup inner box panels to Mexico or Canada, nor did they import
the panels from Mexico or Canada during the relevant period.
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 decisions. Accordingly, the
application is denied.
Signed at Washington, D.C., this 9th day of May, 2002.
/s/ Edward A. Tomchick
_______________________
EDWARD A. TOMCHICK
Director, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-39,659
TOWER AUTOMOTIVE
SEBEWAING, MICHIGAN
Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility
To Apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance
In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19
USC 2273) as amended by the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act
of 1988 (P. L. 100-418), the Department of Labor herein presents
the results of an investigation regarding certification of
eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance.
In order to make an affirmative determination and issue a
certification of eligibility to apply for adjustment assistance,
each of the group eligibility requirements of Section 222 of the
Act must be met:
(1) that a significant number or proportion of the workers
in the workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision
thereof, have become totally or partially separated, or
are threatened to become totally or partially
separated;
(2) that sales or production, or both, of the firm or
subdivision have decreased absolutely; and
(3) that increases of imports of articles like or directly
competitive with articles produced by the firm or
appropriate subdivision have contributed importantly to
the separations, or threat thereof, and to the absolute
decline in sales or production.
The investigation was initiated on July 16, 2001 in response
to a petition filed by the Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical and
Energy Workers International Union on behalf of workers at Tower
Automotive, Sebewaing, Michigan. The workers produce metal
stampings for the automotive industry.
The investigation revealed that criterion (3) has not been
met.
The Department conducted a survey of the major declining
customer of the subject firm regarding their purchases of
automotive stampings. The survey revealed that the customer is
not importing stampings that are like or directly competitive
with those made by the subject firm but is, in fact, acquiring
those stampings from other domestic sources as they have
curtailed purchases from Tower Automotive.
Conclusion
After careful review, I determine that all workers of Tower
Automotive, Sebewaing, Michigan, are denied eligibility to apply
for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of
1974.
Signed in Washington, D. C. this 13th day of February, 2002
/s/ Linda G. Poole
______________________________
LINDA G. POOLE
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance