Via Logistics Management:

At the hearing, Card requested that Congress do the following: create incentives to speed the introduction of auxiliary power units to reduce main engine idling, establish a 65 mile per hour national speed limit, and support the Environmental Protection Agency’s SmartWay Transport Program.

The concept of lowering truck speeds to conserve fuel and cut down on transportation expenses has received a fair amount of attention and consideration of late, with Con-way Freight announcing in March that it planned to reduce its speed governors to run at a maximum of 62 miles per hour—rather than 65 miles per hour—to improve fuel conservation.

A consumer apparel shipper told LM in an interview earlier today that this concept makes sense on multiple fronts.

While trucking companies and the general public like the idea of speed governors I have heard that some (many?) drivers can’t stand them. While I’ve heard a number of excuses as to why, I think the bottom line is that drivers just don’t like the idea of not having control over what speed they drive. Still, if you’re a company man and the company needs to save money - not to mention promote safety and avoid accidents - then you really don’t have much choice.

The second half of this article deals with some legislation being introduced that would require truck brokers to reveal and pass on any fuel surcharges paid by the shippers directly to the independent trucker.

The bill, entitled “S. 2910 The Trust in Reliable Understanding of Consumer Costs (TRUCC) Act,” was introduced by Senators Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine) and Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio). The senators said in a statement that this bill “would free small business operators and carriers from the stranglehold of unscrupulous brokers and middle-men who charge shippers for fuel costs but refuse to pass those costs on to operators that actually pay for the fuel.”

While this bill would clearly help owner-operator truckers recover fuel costs, it is not nearly as cut and dried, according to various industry sources.

“I believe this legislation is really about the fact that many small and medium size trucking companies have an adversarial relationship with brokers,” said Tim Miller, president & CEO, Intelligent Logistics LLC, a logistics and brokerage services provider. “Some appreciate the fact that brokers can keep their trucks moving, while other begrudge that the broker is making money for doing so.”

Miller added that if the broker is the problem, trucking companies should obtain their own customers with shippers directly rather than rely on the broker. This practice, he said, is somethingtrucking companies do, and only rely on brokers for backhaul when they find themselves in places where they are unable to secure freight directly from a shipper in a timely manner.

“It is an awful piece of legislation,” said Michael A. Regan, CEO of transportation rate analysts TranzAct Technologies.

I agree. I am generally against most kinds of legislation that seek to regulate the free market and this one appears to fall into that category. This goes back to the questions and arguments I posed back in early April when the independent truckers’ tried to organize a nationwide strike:

I’m still curious to get some questions I have answered from those in the know. From reading the comments I see people blaming everyone from the government to “evil” oil companies to truck brokers and middlemen. However, I’m still unclear as to why owner-operators can’t get their fair price.

1) I assume part of the problem is that some drivers are willing to undercut others in order to get the loads/business. I would be surprised if that doesn’t happen on a regular basis. If true, then shouldn’t the independent truckers share some of the responsibility and blame for not getting what they believe is a fair price?

2) Along those same lines, why aren’t the drivers insisting on being paid their requested fuel surcharge? The customers are certainly paying fuel surcharges, so why aren’t drivers insisting on being paid a fuel surcharge? Is it because you run the risk of one of your fellow independent drivers agreeing to a lower price and thereby “stealing” your load?

3) Unscrupulous brokers/companies/middlemen: This is a free market economy, nobody says you have to work with dishonest business partners. If someone stiffs you or you don’t feel you are getting your fair share, then find someone more reputable to do business with.

I never did get any real responses to any of those questions, I can only assume no one had a reasonable answer. This the free market at work. Independent drivers can complain all they want about not getting their fair price for loads, but then why are they agreeing to such low prices? Brokers and middlemen quote prices for loads and drivers can agree to accept the price and do the job or decline it. If the market rate is truly so low that you can’t make money, then perhaps you need to talk to your fellow drivers who are accepting such rates. Not happy about the price your broker is giving you? Don’t accept it - work with someone else. Got stiffed by a customer? Welcome to the party, pal, that’s business. It happens to every company, every industry, at least once in a while. Guess what? The wonderful thing about a free market economy is that no one can force you to do business with that customer again - you are free to stop doing business with them ever again. So legislate all you want - it will still boil down to brokers quoting a price and a driver accepting it.

Share This

Stumble it!