[Federal Register: January 13, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 8)]
[Notices]
[Page 2007-2008]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr13ja04-89]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-51,368]
Mellon Bank, N.A., Pittsburgh, PA; Notice of Negative
Determination on Reconsideration on Remand
The United States Court of International Trade (USCIT) granted the
Secretary of Labor's motion for a voluntary remand for further
investigation in Former Employees of Mellon Bank, N.A. v. Elaine Chao,
U.S. Secretary of Labor, No. 03-00374.
The Department's initial negative determination for the workers of
Mellon Bank, N.A. (hereafter ``Mellon Bank'') was issued on April 14,
2003, and published in the Federal Register on May 1, 2003 (68 FR
23322). The determination was based on the finding that workers did not
produce an article within the meaning of section 222 of the Trade Act
of 1974. The Department determined that the subject worker group were
not engaged in the production of an article, but engaged in activities
related to computer technology services.
By letter to the U.S. Court of International Trade, filed on June
13, 2003, the petitioner requested administrative reconsideration. The
petitioner asserted that the workers produced a product through
development and creation of software and, therefore, were not service
providers.
On remand, the Department conducted an investigation to determine
whether the petitioners were production workers and, if so, whether the
workers were eligible to apply for TAA. The remand investigation
consisted of independent research and analysis of software as a
commodity and requesting additional information from the petitioner and
the company regarding the functions of the subject worker group and the
operations of the subject company.
The remand investigation revealed that Mellon Bank provides
financial services for corporations, institutions and wealthy
individuals. These services include asset management, trust and custody
securities lending, foreign
[[Page 2008]]
exchange, annuities, private wealth management, private banking, cash
management, and credit and capital market services. In addition, it was
determined that neither Mellon Bank nor the petitioning workers produce
an ``article'' within the meaning of the Trade Act of 1974.
The remand investigation also revealed that the petitioning workers
designed and developed computer software applications that allow the
subject company to provide financial services to its customers, such as
software that were custom-designed to fit end-users' needs and produced
reports that are electronically transmitted to the customer. These
applications are not sold as manufactured products to the general
public or sold as a component to an article that is available to the
general public.
While the Department considers workers who are engaged in the mass
copying of software and manufacturing of the medium upon which the
software is stored, such as compact disks and floppy disks, to be
production workers, the Department does not consider the design and
development of the software itself to be production and, therefore,
does not consider software designers and developers to be production
workers.
The U.S. Customs Service does not regard software design and
development as a tangible commodity and determines the value of
software based only on the cost of the carrier media, such as compact
discs, floppy disks, records, and tapes. Further, computer software is
not listed on the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTS), a code that represents an international standard maintained by
most industrialized countries as established by the International
Convention on the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding.
Throughout the Trade Act, an article is often referenced as
something that can be subject to a duty. To be subject to a duty on a
tariff schedule, an article will have a value that makes it marketable,
fungible and interchangeable for commercial purposes. While a wide
variety of tangible products are described as articles and
characterized as dutiable in the HTS, informational products that could
historically be sent in letter form and that can currently be
electronically transmitted are not listed in the HTS. Such products are
not the type of employment work products that customs officials inspect
and that the TAA program was generally designed to address.
Conclusion
After reconsideration on remand, I affirm the original notice of
negative determination of eligibility to apply for adjustment
assistance for workers and former workers of Mellon Bank, N.A.,
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Signed at Washington, DC, this 6th day of January, 2004.
Linda G. Poole,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 04-652 Filed 1-12-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P