[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 186 (Thursday, September 25, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 57580]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-22764]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-85,277]


Aegis Media Americas; a Subsidiary of Dentsu Holdings USA, Inc.; 
Including On-Site Leased Workers From Solomon Page Technology Partners; 
Boston, Massachusetts; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding 
Application for Reconsideration

    By application dated June 30, 2014, a worker requested 
administrative reconsideration of the Department of Labor's negative 
determination regarding eligibility to apply for worker adjustment 
assistance, applicable to workers and former workers of Aegis Media 
Americans, a subsidiary of Dentsu Holdings USA, Inc., including on-site 
leased workers of Solomon Page Technology Partners, Boston, 
Massachusetts (Aegis Media Americans). The determination was issued on 
May 23, 2014. The Department's Notice of determination was published in 
the Federal Register on June 6, 2014 (79 FR 32757). Aegis Media 
Americans supplies media marketing and communications strategy 
services.
    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 negative determination of the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) 
petition filed on behalf of workers at Aegis Media Americans was based 
on the findings that the subject firm does not produce an article 
within the meaning of Section 222(a) or Section 222(b) of the Trade Act 
of 1974, as amended.
    The request for reconsideration asserts that the Department made 
``an incorrect assessment of Dentsu Aegis Network's services, products 
and articles''; that information technology (IT) workers' separation 
from the subject firm was due to outsourcing to Tata Consulting 
Services (TCS); that a ``significant part of the responsibility of the 
Aegis IT workers group (IT Team) was the monitoring of major servers 
and services for Aegis''; that ``After TSC started servicing Aegis, the 
monitoring of these services was shifted to overseas teas who now 
performed the monitoring duties in India''; and that Aegis Media 
Americans produced an article because an ``article is the byproduct of 
the internal company services, processes and the product/article 
itself'' and that the articles produced are computer code & algorithms.
    The request also asserts that there should be no distinction 
between computer code for hardware and computer code for software and 
that the databases upon which services rely (such as research and 
analysis) are also articles.
    In Former Employees of Mortgage Guaranty Insurance Corporation 
(MGIC) v. United States Secretary of Labor (Court No. 07-00182), the 
Department stated the policy requiring that the firm employing the 
subject workers produce an article domestically; that workers providing 
services incidental to the provision of a services are not engaged in 
the production of an article, for the purposes of the Trade Act; and 
that the services provided by a workers' firm would not be considered 
articles, whether tangible or intangible. The Department's 
determination in the afore-mentioned case (negative determination on 
remand regarding petitioning workers' eligibility to apply for Trade 
Adjustment Assistance) was affirmed by the U.S. Court of International 
Trade.
    The petitioner did not supply facts not previously considered; nor 
provide additional documentation indicating that there was either (1) a 
mistake in the determination of facts not previously considered or (2) 
a misinterpretation of facts or of the law justifying reconsideration 
of the initial determination. Based on these findings, the Department 
determines that 29 CFR 90.18(c) has not been met.

Conclusion

    After careful 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 in Washington, DC, this 4th day of September, 2014.
Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2014-22764 Filed 9-24-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P