carriers « Road Scholar Transportation

Posts Tagged ‘carriers’

Hours-of-Service Changes: What Carriers and Shippers Can Expect

Friday, May 24th, 2013

Despite opposition from numerous trucking groups, the fifth set of changes to the hours-of-service regulations since 2003 is still on track with an effective date of July 1^st. Among the revisions include a restart provision containing two consecutive breaks between the hours of 1 a.m. and 5.am., reducing a driver’s work week from 82 to 70 hours, as well as a mandatory 30-minute break if 8 hours or less have passed since the driver’s last off-duty period.

As Ron Sucik, founder of RSE Consulting explains, while the CSA will further increase driver shortage by taking unsafe drivers off of the road, the upcoming HOS will reduce productivity of those remaining.

What Can Be Expected

Carriers can see a 5-10% loss in productivity, according to the Owner-Operator Independent Driver Association, due to scheduling and delays resulting from the HOS changes, with impacts hitting long-haul carriers hardest as well as dedicated moves which are planned with maximizing a drivers’ 11 hours within a 15 hour work day.

With a shorter workweek, and no way of guaranteeing that a driver will exactly take a 30 minute break instead of longer, appointments and routes will need to be readjusted to accommodate delivery windows.

The National Grocers Association noted that these changes would disproportionately impact its members. “Grocery stores rely on deliveries early in the morning, especially for perishable goods that have a limited shelf life and must be on the shelves when stores open. With the changes to the rule, lead times for perishable goods will increase, leading wholesalers to increase inventory levels to maintain service. All of these changes would lead to increased costs throughout the supply chain.”¹

To accommodate for the driver shortage and capacity concerns, carriers will need to recruit additional drivers to their fleet, pay current drivers more in order to retain them, as well as “add trucks to offset the decrease in available hours per driver.”²

Carriers are expecting up to a 33% loss in revenue with additional operated costs estimated to hit between $10,000-$25,000 per truck.² In order to account for these costs, shippers can expect to see rate hikes between 4-10% this year.

To help prevent your business from being caught in a driver shortage, and to save money in the long term, shippers should consider the following tips:

-Establish carrier meetings in advance. Stop bidding out your business year. Instead, establish and grow your relationship with a specific carrier(s).

-With that being said, work hand-in-hand with carriers to schedule routine shipments. If a carrier knows that a particular lane will run a specific time each week or month, they can schedule backhaul, cutting back on costs for both the carrier and shipper.

-If you do not have a load that ships on a specific time of week/month, it is best to plan your lanes ahead of time. Giving carriers a day or more notice can help them position their equipment efficiently.

-It is also beneficial to add additional carriers in cases where your primary carriers do not have the availability.

Click Image to Enlarge

To view all of the 2011 HOS Final Rule Provisions, click the image on the right.

Are you having difficulty finding experienced carriers to move your freight in times of the driver shortage? Visit www.roadscholar.com to request an LTL or truckload rate today.

How do you think the upcoming hours-of-service changes will affect your company? What are you doing to prepare for the July effective date?

¹http://logisticsviewpoints.com/2013/01/30/clock-ticking-on-hours-of-service-and-other-trucking-risks/

²http://blog.trinitylogistics.com/2013/04/regulatory-review-how-new-hours-of.html

Tags: carriers, CSA, driver shortage, HOS, hours of service, hours-of-service regulations, LTL rate, National Grocers Association, Owner-Operator Independent Driver Association, restart provision, road scholar transport, truckload rate
Posted in Freight Quotes, LTL freight, Northeast Regional Freight Quotes, Trucking Industry News | Comments Off

President Signs Highway Bill Part 2: The Effects of the 34-Hour Restart Provision on Carriers/Shippers

Wednesday, July 11th, 2012

This is the second of four articles regarding passage of the highway bill and its affects on truckers and shippers.

According to the highway bill signed by the President last Friday, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration is required to “conduct a field study on the effectiveness of the 34-hour restart provision in its hours-of-service rule.” ¹

When the FMCSA presented its hours-of-service ruling last December, it chose to revise the 34-hour restart provision to include two consecutive breaks between the hours of 1 a.m. and 5 a.m., with an effective date of 2013.

But trucking groups, such as the American Trucking Associations (ATA) as well shippers, including the shipping association NASSTRAC, have been fighting against the 34-hour restart provision, which they believe would do more harm than good.

The Effect on Truckers and Shippers

With two consecutive breaks between the hours of 1 a.m. and 5 a.m., drivers are arguing that their work week would be drastically reduced from 82 to 70 hours. Less hours equals less miles and sequentially less pay for those trying to make a living.

Not only does this decrease hit the pockets of the drivers, but in return the trucking company, which now has to account for this loss of time. As one trucking company notes, “This restriction means that the company will need between 5% and 15% more hours to get the work done.”²

In that case, it should come as no surprise that this decrease in work hours would lead to productivity problems, limiting a driver’s time on the road, which could cause delivery complications. These complications spell trouble for shippers who will be facing increased rates to get these shipments picked up and delivered on time due to driver shortages, which then trickles down higher costs to consumers.

Shippers/receivers will also face changes in scheduling, with the need of advanced notice. As one driver explains, “The changes are going to have to be made at the plants that I haul into. They are going to have to come up with an earlier schedule and stick to it some way so that we have more then a 12-hour notice of where we are loading. That way if I have to plan a camping trip in the truck then I can do so. That way I can pack a few things so that when I get off loaded then I can start heading for the next load spot and take my 10 when the clock runs out. But then they are going to have to start raising the rates because I refuse to camp in my truck for a 100-150 dollar load.” ³

Aside from higher rates and productivity problems, the ATA and others are arguing over the increased congestion and safety risks that would result. The ATA states that “by mandating drivers to include two periods between 1 a.m. and 5 a.m. as part of a ‘restart’ period, FMCSA is assuring that every day as America is commuting to work, thousands of truck drivers will be joining them, creating additional and unnecessary congestion and putting motorists and those professional drivers at greater risk.”²

In addition, the ATA goes on to state that “The largest percentage of truck-involved crashes occur between 6 a.m. and noon, so this change not only effectively destroys the provision of the current rule most cited by professional drivers as beneficial, but it will put more trucks on the road during the statistically riskiest time of the day.” ²

In order to ease concerns, the bill would require that the FMCSA do a field study that is to be completed by March 31, 2013, which either supports the rule and puts it into effect or would lead to a modification of the ruling if not supported.⁴

Have questions about the FMCSA’s 34-hour restart provision? Then check out the FMCSA’s questions and answers section regarding the ruling at http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/documents/hos/HOS_Rule_QAs.pdf.

Do you believe that the FMCSA made the right choice in revising the 34-hour restart provision in its hours-of-service rule to include two consecutive breaks between the hours of 1 a.m. and 5 a.m.? What do you consider to be the biggest circumstances of this revision? List your comments below.

Stay tuned for an upcoming article on the effects of the creation of a federal alcohol and drug clearing house.

¹http://www.ttnews.com/articles/basetemplate.aspx?storyid=29646&t=Congress-Passes-Highway-Bill

²http://www.thetrucker.com/News/Stories/2011/12/22/ATAObamaadministrationsfinalHOSruleputssafetyinthebackseat.aspx

³http://www.thetruckersreport.com/truckingindustryforum/trucking-industry-regulations/164305-fmcsa-releases-hours-service-final-rule.html

⁴http://www.truckinginfo.com/news/news-detail.asp?news_id=75960&news_category_id=3

Tags: 34-hour restart provision, ATA, carriers, federal motor carrier safety administration, FMCSA, highway bill, hours of service, NASSTRAC, road scholar transport, shippers, trucking industry, trucking news
Posted in Trucking Industry News | Comments Off

Paying Civil Penalty No Longer Offers Backdoor to Liability: FMCSA Revision Takes Effect This Month

Thursday, May 3rd, 2012

For years, carriers have been reincarnating themselves under new names in an attempt to escape out-of-service orders, penalties, shut downs, and terrible safety records, presenting a dangerous atmosphere to shippers, customers, and everyone on, and off, the road. But the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration is hoping to crack down on just that with a new revision set to take effect this May.

A Growing Problem

Chameleon carriers are becoming a serious problem in the transportation industry. A recent study conducted by the GAO found that in 2010, 1,136 new applicants were attributed as chameleon carriers, increasing by 377 since 2005, with 94% being freight carriers.¹

Take, for example, last December, when Devasko Dewayne Lewis was charged as being a chameleon carrier. Lewis operated Lewis Trucking Company, which was issued an out-of-service order in 2008 as an imminent safety hazard. Lewis formed a new trucking company, DDL Transport LLC, which was also put out-of-service in September 2011. When asked whether he had any interaction with another carrier in the past, Lewis stated that he had not, failing to mention Lewis Trucking Company. Lewis was indicted on federal charges for “making a false statement and seven counts of continuing operation after imposition of an out-of-service order.” ²

In the six year span, (2005 through 2010), the GAO reported an increased number of crashes among chameleon carriers compared to non-chameleon attributed carriers.

Click to enlarge

According to the GAO, “chameleon attributes were three times more likely than all other new applicant carriers to later be involved in a severe crash. ¹In fact, according to the report, 18% of those new applicants with chameleon attributes during 2005-2010 were involved in serious crashes compared to 6% of those with non-chameleon attributes.

So what’s being done to prevent these chameleon carriers from operating? Let’s take a look at the FMCSA’s revision process.

The Revision

In 2004, the FMCSA’s proposal stated that “Payment waives respondent's opportunity to further contest the claim, and will result in the notice of claim becoming the final agency

order,” which was then revised in 2005.³

However in a 2010 case, the FMCSA explained that by allowing a respondent’s proceedings to become terminated if they paid their penalty in full went against the FMCSA’s enforcement policy, “which requires that the Agency assess the maximum statutory penalty for each violation of law by any person who is found to have committed a pattern of violations of critical or acute regulations issued to carry out such a law or to have previously committed the same or related violation of critical or acute regulations issued to carry out such a law.”³

In response, the FMCSA stated last December that it would revise the “rules of practice for motor carrier, intermodal equipment provider, broker, freight forwarder, and hazardous materials proceedings,” holding several comment sessions. 3

Last week, the FMCSA acknowledged that it needed to “monitor the safety performance history of carriers who `reincarnate' as a new carrier when faced with enforcement action in order to focus Agency enforcement efforts,” and thus, preventing them from the ability to evade accountability, establishing procedures that would become effective May 29^th, 2012. ³

The revisions are as follows (Provided by http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FMCSA-2011-0259-0010):

-“The Agency clarifies that paying the full proposed civil penalty in an enforcement proceeding, either in response to a Notice of Claim or later in the proceeding does not allow respondents to unilaterally avoid an admission of liability for the violations charged.”

-“The Agency establishes procedures for issuing out-of-service orders to motor carriers, intermodal equipment providers, brokers, and freight forwarders it determines are reincarnations of other entities with a history of failing to comply with statutory or regulatory requirements; these procedures will provide for an administrative review before the out-of-service order takes effect.”

-“The Agency establishes a process for consolidating Agency records of reincarnated companies with their predecessor entities.”

What do you think of the FMCSA’s revisions? How do you feel chameleon carriers should dealt with?

Road Scholar Transport promotes the operation of only safe and qualified carriers on the road, that’s why we are giving you five ways in which you can help reduce the risk of hiring chameleon carriers:

-Research a carrier’s CSA (Comprehensive Safety Analysis) scores. This can be done by going to the FMCSA website (www.fmcsa.dot.gov) and clicking on Safety & Security, Company Safety Record, Safety Fitness Electronic Records System, Company Snapshot, and then entering the carrier’s DOT number, MC number, or name. By clicking on SMS Results, you will gain valuable information regarding the number of out-of-services and accidents a carrier had as well as citations, helping you choose a safe carrier.

-Receiving daily updated authority/insurance data from carriers through products such as CarrierWatch.

-Research the company’s background. How long have they been in business? Conducting business with a company who has been operating in the industry for several years and is well-established can help you avoid choosing carriers that are constantly re-incarnating themselves under new names to avoid penalties/out-of-service orders.

-Check the chameleon carrier database. CarrierWatch grants you the ability to view a list of trucking companies whose operating authority has been revoked.

-Ask around. Why not go directly to the source of who has experience using a particular carrier? Referrals are a powerful tool in receiving insider information about a carrier’s reputation.

What measures are you taking to reduce the risk of hiring chameleon carriers? Post your responses at http://gsfn.us/t/2tte9.

¹ http://www.gao.gov/assets/590/589530.pdf

² http://www.truckinginfo.com/safety-compliance/news-detail.asp?news_id=75616&news_category_id=12

³ http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FMCSA-2011-0259-0010

Tags: carriers, chameleon carrier, Comprehensive Safety Analysis, CSA, DDL Transport, federal motor carrier safety administration, FMCSA, freight, GAO, Lewis Trucking Company, liability, reincarnated carrier, road scholar transport, trucking company, trucking industry
Posted in LTL freight, Services, Trucking Industry News | Comments Off

TCP Business Expectations Survey: As Carriers Continue to Shy Away From 3PL Providers, Higher Spot Quotes Draw Brokerage Usage Up

Wednesday, April 11th, 2012

According to Transport Capital Partners (TCP)’s First Quarter 2012 Business Expectations Survey, the majority of carriers reported utilizing broker services as a means of obtaining freight lanes less within the last 90 days compared to previous months.

The survey shows that 67% of carriers have drifted away from brokers in the last three months, slightly lower than last year in which 86% acknowledged drawing away from 3^rd party logistic services in February 2011 and 82% in August 2011, yet accounting for over twice the number of carriers pulling away in May 2009 (which was around 31%). ¹

On top of that, TCP’s Richard Mikes explains that in a time where capacity is tight, more and more carriers are turning towards forming their own brokerage arms.²

And with concerns over vicarious liability, chameleon carriers, double brokerage, and false 3pls, among other issues, shippers are becoming more careful on who they trust to transport their freight, vetting out carriers based on safety scores.

Let’s look at a recent ruling involving a double brokerage scheme. Between 2004 and 2005, Kulwant Singh Gill operated as a California broker under several false names in order to obtain loads posted on brokerage loads. Presenting false social security and driver’s license numbers, Gill presented himself as transporting the loads himself, and once given the load, would then repost the lane as a broker, handing off the load to another carrier. Once the shipment was transported, Gill was paid by the original broker and never compensated the actual carrier, scheming over 100 trucking companies. ³

Gill was indicted in 2006 and again in 2008 for continuing his scheme, being found guilty in 2009. After continuing to double broker loads, the court sentenced Gill to 10 years, 10 months in jail and ordered to pay $443,388 in restitution on March 28, 2012. ³

But despite the majority of carriers shying away from brokers, better rates have led to an increase in the number of carriers using 3^rd parties.

Looking at TCP’s survey, 33% of carriers stated that they have increased their broker utilization in the last three months. This number increased from 15% in August 2011 and 12% in February 2011 but is still less than May 2009 which reported 65%. ¹

TCP gives the reasoning of higher spot quotes compared to contract rates (along with the need to fill lanes) to account for this brokerage increase. As TCP’s Lana Batts explains, trucking companies, especially larger carriers, “are going back to brokerages because there is a shortage of equipment and they are getting better spot market rates than they are getting out of their contract rates.”⁴

Although only 45% of carriers recently increased their rates, 77% believe that freight volumes will increase within the next year, which Batts believes will lead to an upward rate trend, spiking in early summer, and leading more carriers to utilize brokers since “carriers can get more money for non-contractual freight,” she states. ⁵

Need help deciding on whether to choose an asset-based carrier or a broker? We’ve constructed a list of what an asset-based carrier, such as Road Scholar Transport, can provide versus a typical 3PL broker below.

click to enlarge

From your experience, what do you consider to be the benefits of utilizing an asset-based carrier over a broker?

¹http://www.truckinginfo.com/news/news-detail.asp?news_id=76593

²http://www.truckinginfo.com/trucks-trailers/news-detail.asp?news_id=74969&news_category_id=29

³http://www.overdriveonline.com/broker-sentenced-11-years-for-defrauding-carriers/?pg=1

⁴http://www.logisticsmgmt.com/article/tcp_survey_shows_that_carriers_continue_to_be_active_in_the_spot_market/

⁵http://www.ontruck.org/imispublic/Home/AM/ContentManagerNet/ContentDisplay.aspx?Section=Home&ContentID=10822

Tags: 3PL, brokerage, brokers, Business Expectations Survey, carriers, chameleon carriers, CSA, freight, road scholar transport, safety scores, TCP, Transport Capital Partners, vicarious liability
Posted in LTL Freight Quotes, LTL freight, Services, Trucking Industry News | Comments Off

Carriers Increase Fuel Surcharges to Aid in Diesel Prices

Wednesday, April 4th, 2012

What do these three things have in common?

They are all products used by trucking companies in an effort to help reduce fuel costs.

It’s no stranger that fuel prices are rising with the price of diesel ranking in at a national average of nearly $4.15/gallon. Compare that to two years ago when diesel cost $2.99/gallon.

When looking at the price of gasoline vs. the price of diesel, consumers may be glad they don’t drive a truck. But diesel costs have not always been higher than gasoline. In fact, “diesel has historically been lower than that of gasoline” (hard to believe when looking at the last few years) but, as the Florida Trucking Association explains, diesel is also “taxed by the federal government at a rate 25 percent higher than gasoline.” ¹

Transitioning into the trucking industry, this increasing cost of fuel spells T-R-O-U-B-L-E, especially for small carriers.

According to the American Trucking Associations, nearly 97% of trucking companies in the U.S. operate with fewer than 20 trucks with almost 90% of them servicing six or fewer. ¹ With the rising costs of doing business, (equipment costs-new trucks average about $125,000 while more environmentally friendly engines “have gone up $15,000 to $20,000,” healthcare costs, fuel costs…etc.), along with stricter regulations, and driver shortage/capacity problems, these companies are being forced to shut down.

Let’s take a look at the facts. Two years ago, when diesel was at $2.80/gallon, nearly 700 trucking companies went out of business. Two years prior to that, when diesel costs $3.50/gallon, almost 1,000 carriers closed. ¹Fast forward to the present day when diesel prices cost even more. How many carriers will battle out increasing costs and how many will fail this year?

In order to cut back on fuel costs and prevent closure, carriers are being more selective on what lanes/customers they transport for, many of them turning down smaller accounts that they find to be non-profitable. As one company operating its own fleet notes, “We can’t afford to pay drivers, keep the trucks on the road and pay for gas too for some of the smaller accounts — it’s just cost prohibitive.” ²

Other carriers are increasing fuel surcharges to tackle diesel costs, which prevents them from raising freight rates due to diesel prices. Without these fees, a carrier would be forced to increase freight rates to make a profit, competing with bottom-feeder carriers.

Increasing in popularity/practice in the late 1990s, fuel surcharges have been used by carriers, allowing “the hauler to be reimbursed for excessive fuel costs incurred in the performance of hauling freight from one point to another.” ³

There are different methods carriers use in determining the fuel surcharge of their customers. One is based on the cost per mile, which is generally classified as 5-6 miles/gallon (the typical mileage of an older truck), whereas newer models can get over 7 miles/gallon. ⁴Another calculation method relies taking a percentage of the linehaul rate, which can vary depending on whether the load is an LTL or Truckload shipment.

But, as the American Trucking Association’s Bob Costello explains, “some common carriers may have as many as 100 different fee structures,” depending on the customer, shipment, and other factors.⁴And guess who these fees, in return, trickle down to? You guessed it, the consumer.

Despite fuel surcharges, many carriers are taking measures to become more fuel efficient. These include speed control, skirting on trailers (which slipstreams the trailer and reduces drag created by rushing air, increasing fuel efficiency by 4-7%), cruise control (which has a .3% fuel efficiency gain), progressive shifting, hiring “good/qualified” drivers as opposed to “cowboys” who are constantly running fast, operating newer equipment, and installing technology such as GPS (which determines the best/most efficient route) and fuel economy gauges such as the ScanGaugeD (which monitors fuel usage changes).

How are you coping with increasing fuel prices? Have you taken any changes to account for this cost?

Understanding the history of diesel fuel costs can help you better understand the reasoning behind a carrier’s fuel surcharge. That’s why we are suggesting that you show the following graph, provided by the U.S. Energy Information Administration depicting diesel fuel costs from 1994 to the present day, to your transportation manager. As the graph displays, in March 1994, diesel cost just $1.107/gal with a low of $0.959/gal in February 1999. Today, it’s nearly $4.15/gal! How high do you see the price of gasoline/diesel going?

click to enlarge

Would you be willing to extend the delivery of a shipment 24 or 48 hours if it meant saving up to 25% off the cost? Working with carriers who can consolidate freight to maximize trailer space and the related fuel consumption could be an option that benefits you as a shipper – and a small side benefit to the environment. List your comments below.

¹ http://www.theledger.com/article/20120326/NEWS/120329448

²http://www.news-journal.com/news/local/gas-prices-pinch-motorists-fleet-operators-hit-harder/article_40ef1dc6-e63a-5c0c-a7be-e593a852af89.html

³ http://www.aitaonline.com/Info/General/Fuel%20Surcharges.html

⁴http://www.palletenterprise.com/articledatabase/view.asp?articleID=3630

Tags: American trucking Associations, carriers, diesel fuel, fuel costs, fuel surcharge, GPS, LTL shipment, road scholar transport, ScanGaugeD, trucking company, trucking industry, Truckload shipment
Posted in LTL Freight Quotes, LTL freight, Services, Trucking Industry News | Comments Off

Brokers/Carriers Losing Business as More Shippers Choose Carriers Based on CSA Scores

Thursday, January 12th, 2012

CSA 2010’s Safety Measurement System (SMS), which scores carriers and drivers’ safety performance in seven BASIC categories (Unsafe Driving, Fatigued Driving/Hours of Service, Driver Fitness, Controlled Substances/Alcohol, Vehicle Maintenance, Cargo-Related, and Crash-Indicator) placing those considered a risk on “alert” status, has had members of the trucking industry arguing over a flawed system. This disapproval has grown by many brokers and carriers who are complaining that they are losing significant business with some of their major accounts due to their safety scores.

Not only are carriers losing business, but brokers are being held responsible for not researching the safety scores of the carriers they vet out. If they did they would find Road Scholar Transport to have an excellent safety rating with zero alerts and no controlled substance/alcohol violations. Check out how Road Scholar scored in each category at http://ai.fmcsa.dot.gov/SMS/Data/carrier.aspx?enc=Y8fZXERG1J+xGf6mXx3ODG9066yI6×3GHlkVnRjszjw=.

The search for finding the cheapest rate often results in choosing unsafe carriers to haul a shipper’s freight, but with the CSA 2010, shippers are becoming more aware of the process, discontinuing business with many 3pls who do not use safety measures when choosing carriers.

As Transport Topics notes, some brokers have lost thousands of shipments for this reason, defending their SMS scores stating that “shippers impose unrealistic contract requirements based on the SMS scores that bar using a carrier that has even a single infraction,” claiming that the system “unfairly taints fleet safety records.”

Brokers and truckload carriers objecting to the SMS process also did so believing that “safety should be judged by FMCSA’s professionals rather than clerical workers” (http://www.ttnews.com/articles/basetemplate.aspx?storyid=28458).

While trucking companies are being turned down for their CSA scores, Road Scholar Transport continues to provide top LTL and truckload services for our customers. Besides low SMS scores, Road Scholar has never been cited for a piece of faulty equipment in an accident and with over 31,000 delivers in 2010, only had 3 damage claims. That’s a ratio of 0.0003%.

Experience the safety and security of knowing that your freight is in good hands by visiting www.roadscholar.com today.

Do you feel that more and more carriers and brokers will lose customers/perhaps even shut their doors due to shippers choosing more secure carriers based on SMS scores? List your comments below.

Tags: BASIC categories, brokers, carriers, CSA 2010, freight hauling, freight hauling company, freight hauling quotes, ltl company, LTL freight, ltl quotes, ltl trucking, Safety Measurement System, SMS scores, truckload services
Posted in LTL freight, Services, Trucking Industry News | Comments Off

Number of Trucking Companies Declaring Bankruptcy Significantly Declines Last Quarter

Thursday, November 10th, 2011

According to Avondale Partners analyst Donald Broughton, the number of trucking companies who had no choice but to file bankruptcy last quarter has significantly decreased when compared to previous years, showing that the trucking industry is recovering.

Trucking took a hit from 2007 through 2010 due to the following: Demand, fuel and price being extraordinarily volatile, as well as “credit becoming impossible to find for some fleets and difficult to afford when it was available to others” (http://insurancenewsnet.com/article.aspx?id=297906).

For these reasons, over 8,500 carriers went out of business, taking over 325,000 trucks off the road, a decrease of 12% availability according to the report. This 12% decrease was in large part due to 12 specific carriers, who decreased their fleets by a combined total of 10,454 trucks.

Last year’s 3^rd quarter led to 330 truck companies and 10,685 trucks filing bankruptcy while this year, only 85 companies and about 1,470 trucks were shut down, a near 90% decrease, Avondale Partners notes.

Looking further, the 3^rd quarter proved significantly more successful than this year’s 2^nd quarter, when 240 carriers and 3,955 trucks exited the industry.

So why the improvement in statistics all of a sudden? Rising rates due to tighter capacity restraints play a large hand, proving to be of notable profit to carriers.

Since the start of 2010 through today, “truckload rates have increased about 11%, excluding fuel surcharges,” the report notes, with an estimated 3-5% truckload and up to 10% LTL rate increase per year.

Broughton explains that “shippers are willing to pay higher prices because they have recognized the increasing labor, fuel, depreciation, maintenance and insurance costs that fleets face” and offered hope in saying “If [fleets] made it this far through the tough times, then they can make it through the better times” (http://insurancenewsnet.com/article.aspx?id=297906).

Looking for a qualified, reputable LTL and Truckload carrier? Then look no further than Road Scholar Transport. Don’t take our word for it, but customers like yourselves. Here’s what one company had to say about us.

“It is so easy for someone to sit down and write a “canned” letter of appreciation and commend a company on a job well done. In the case of Road Scholar Transport, to just say thanks for your excellent, quality service would lead most people to think you’ve done an excellent job in the transportation industry, which in fact, you have. It is an area in which you excel and quite honestly, it’s the part of your business that comes easiest to you.”

Check out more testimonials from Road Scholar’s customers at http://www.roadscholar.com/freighthaulingtestimonials.php.

Would you risk shipping with a company on the verge of bankruptcy just to achieve a low rate or would you rather ship with a trustworthy, stable company? List your comments below.

Tags: Avondale Partners, bankruptcy, carriers, Donald Broughton, fleets, fuel, fuel surcharge, LTL freight, road scholar transport, testimonial, tractor trailers, trucking company, trucking industry, trucking news, truckload freight, trucks
Posted in LTL freight, Services, Trucking Industry News | Comments Off

Carriers Urged to Distribute $100 Bills to Employees in Attempt to “Pay it Forward”

Tuesday, July 26th, 2011

It’s an initiative that has put smiles on faces, tears to the eyes, and even saved lives. It’s called the “Pay it Forward Challenge” and it has now entered into the trucking industry.

We’ve seen it done by Oprah back in 2006 when she handed over 300 people $1,000 and challenged them to use the money to help others in need. We’ve even seen the release of the “Pay it Forward” movie in 2000.

Whether it be paying for a cup of coffee for the person behind you at the drive-through or buying a meal for a homeless person, acts such as these have been making news for years now, especially around Christmas time.

And it’s not any different for the trucking industry. For the past two years, trucking companies have been handing out money to their employees asking them to; in return, use it as a charitable donation towards others.

The challenge has been widely successful, even helping save people’s lives. As one trucking company notes, one of their employees forwarded their money onto a man in need of a dentist. It turned out that the man had oral cancer and would not have known it if he didn’t receive the money to go in the first place (http://www.truckinginfo.com/news/news-detail.asp?news_id=74265).

But there are so many people in need of help. That’s why the Truckload Carriers Association (TCA) has presented a “Pay it Forward” challenge to all carriers.

The challenge asks carriers to distribute $100 to randomly selected employees of their company with the purpose of these people spending all of the money on a charitable cause/purpose. According to truckinginfo.com, the TCA recommends that the money be given three weeks prior to the December holiday season, with those participating reporting one month later on what they spent the money on and what difference it made in the person(s)’ lives.

As the TCA adds, not only will the “Pay it Forward” initiative aid many who are in need, it will also help the trucking industry’s reputation, truckinginfo.com states.

Road Scholar Transport is one trucking company that has been helping those in need for years with its 10 Million Miles to a Cure Awareness Campaign.

It started with a single pink tractor trailer dedicated to Breast Cancer awareness and has grown to supporting close to two dozen (and growing) different charities/organizations in need of help.

Traveling nationwide to deliver your LTL and Truckload freight, stopping at events along the way, Road Scholar is spreading a message for Autism Speaks, Make-a-Wish Foundation, The Children’s Craniofacial Foundation, and more. Visit www.roadscholarawareness.org to view Road Scholar’s awareness trucks and don’t forget to keep the awareness going by booking your freight today at www.roadscholar.com.

What would you do to “Pay it Forward” if you were handed $100?

Tags: 10 Million Miles to a Cure Awareness Campaign, Autism Speaks, awareness truck, breast cancer, carriers, charity, dentist, LTL freight, Make a Wish Foundation, Oprah, oral cancer, pay it forward, road scholar transport, TCA, The Children’s Craniofacial Foundation, trucking company, trucking industry, Truckload Carriers Association, truckload freight
Posted in Awareness Campaign Articles, LTL freight, Services, Trucking Industry News | Comments Off

FMCSA Justifies Why They Must Pay for EOBRs on Mexican Trucks

Wednesday, March 16th, 2011

Much dispute has erupted over the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA)’s decision to pay for electronic on-board recording devices (EOBRs) on Mexican trucks traveling into and out of the United States as part of the Mexican Cross-Border Agreement.

The FMCSA would be spending anywhere from a half of million dollars to $700,000 to install mandatory EOBRs in Mexican trucks. Carriers are expressing disapproval with the agency using taxpayers’ money to do so, some saying that “it is the height of stupidity for our government to subsidize foreign companies” (http://www.cpatrucking.com/eobr-alliance-decries-unfairness-of-dots-plan-to-pay-for-eobrs-on-mexican-trucks.html).

Anne Ferro

But Anne Ferro, Administrator for the FMCSA, spoke up to defend the agency’s decision on funding the devices. EOBRs would not only ensure the monitoring of Mexican trucks, but according to Ferro, there is a larger reason why the agency has to purchase them and it has to do with the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Under the agreement, Ferro explains, the U.S. is only able to mandate Mexican trucks to do the same requirements as U.S. trucks, truckinginfo.com notes. Since the U.S. currently does not require the installation of EOBRs for all U.S. carriers, the FMCSA cannot mandate Mexican carriers to do so either. Therefore, in order to monitor Mexican trucks to ensure that they comply to current rules and regulations, such as hours of service and cabotage rules, which “restrict freight hauling between points in the U.S.,” the FMCSA has proposed to fund the installation temporarily until the pilot program ends, which is an estimated three years from now or until the U.S. mandates EOBRs on its trucks, the site notes.

Taxpayers may be questioning why we let Mexican truckers in if it is going to cost us to monitor them. This is because the FMCSA believes that the agreement with Mexico will save us billions of dollars in the end, one of the reasons why the cross-border agreement came about in the first place.

The proposal came after disputes resulting from the termination of the pilot program in 2009, which led to Mexico retaliating through the installation of tariffs on American goods, resulting in over $2 billion a year in tariff costs.

As Ferro notes, the border agreement was an attempt to get Mexico to withdraw the tariffs, agreeing to “reduce its tariffs by half when the final agreement is signed” and suspend the rest “when the first Mexican carrier is granted operating authority” (http://www.truckinginfo.com/news/news-detail.asp?news_id=73234).

There are three phrases that the agreement must go through. First is a pre-operations vetting process which would place a set limit on the number of Mexican carriers allowed to partake in the cross-border agreement during the first stage of the program. These carriers have to undergo inspections to ensure that their trucks comply with U.S. safety requirements as well as be insured by a company in the U.S. while drivers have to be knowledgeable of U.S. traffic laws and be able to speak English, truckinginfo.com states.

The next step deals with the inspection of each Mexican truck every time it crosses the border as well as “clear a Compliance Review and earn a Satisfactory Safety Rating in order to get full operating authority,” the site notes.

Finally, truckerinfo.com states that the public will have a chance to comment on the program, as well as “a web site at the FMCSA home page, creation of an advisory committee and periodic reports to Congress.”

As of right now, the Mexican cross-border project is just a proposal and the public will be given a chance to comment within the upcoming weeks in which the U.S. will again meet with Mexico to discuss.

With Road Scholar Transport, you can be assured that your LTL and TL freight are the hands of a certified, safe carrier. With satellite tracking down to the street-level, you will always know where your freight is and who has it.

On a scale of 1 to 5, how much do you value knowing where your freight is on demand?

Road Scholar satellite tracking

Tags: Anne Ferro, carriers, Congress, electronic on-board recording device, EOBRs, federal motor carrier safety administration, FMCSA, LTL freight, Mexican Cross-Border Agreement, Mexican trucks, Mexico, North American Free Trade Agreement, road scholar transport, satellite tracking, taxpayers, TL freight, U.S
Posted in LTL freight, Services, Trucking Industry News | Comments Off

Cargo Insurance No Longer Mandatory for Most Carriers

Tuesday, March 15th, 2011

Starting Monday, March 21^st, many carriers will no longer be obligated to purchase cargo insurance, terminating the 1935 Motor Carrier Act.

are you insured?

With the exception of household goods carriers and freight forwarders, who will still be required to carry the insurance, the rule, published last June, will abolish the current $5,000 minimum per claim.

According to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), most carriers obtain policies that are well above the $5,000 minimum requirement, with most having a $50,000 to $100,000 liability, truckersnews.com notes. Road Scholar Transport, a leading LTL and TL carrier, is one of these, with a $100,000 cargo liability policy available for viewing at http://www.roadscholar.com/certifications.php.

Although most carriers will no longer be required to carry the insurance, they certain have the option to continue their policies, which the FMCSA believes they will continue to do “because their customers require it,” an article in DC Velocity notes.

According to Transportation & Logistics Council Inc.’s Attorney Raymond Selvaggio, carriers should still be required to carry a certain amount of cargo insurance, believing that terminating all mandatory requirements would “weaken the already fragile system of protection available for transportation service providers” and open “up the marketplace to new entrants that are financially unstable” (http://www.dcvelocity.com/articles/20110314cargo_insurance_mandate_to_end_march_21/).

Unless Congress interferes, which, as of right now, there have been no objections, the rule will go into effect on Monday; however, Road Scholar will continue to provide its customer’s with cargo insurance and the utmost care and safety of your freight.

Do you think that there should be a minimum requirement of cargo liability insurance that carriers must carry?

Road Scholar Transport-Protecting your Cargo

Tags: cargo insurance, carriers, Congress, federal motor carrier safety administration, FMCSA, freight forwarders, household goods carriers, liability insurance, LTL freight, Motor Carrier Act, Raymond Selvaggio, road scholar transport, TL freight, Transportation & Logistics Council Inc.
Posted in LTL freight, Services, Trucking Industry News | Comments Off

Road Scholar Transportation