<10,000 lbs 26.6%
>10,000 lbs 39.9%
<10,000 lbs 26.6%
>10,000 lbs 39.9%
<10,000 lbs 25.9%
>10,000 lbs 38.85%
<10,000 lbs 25.5%
>10,000 lbs 38.25%
Effective Date: April 11, 2017
<10,000 lbs 25.0%
>10,000 lbs 37.50%
Fuel. That wonderful stuff that allows us to run engines. It is incredible to think of what a world without any sort of fuel would look like; we as humans rely so heavily on fuel for our everyday life. Industries rely heavily on fuel and the relevant cost of fuel; we feel this every day in trucking. Being relatively new to the trucking side of the transportation industry, I have little knowledge of the origin of fuel surcharges, but I can understand the logic that led companies to put them in place.
Over the course of the last year, like most people, I have noted the price per litre at my local 7-11 when I fill up my little Civic to get to work. I have seen gasoline prices as high as $1.30 per litre and as low as $0.79 per litre. I recognize diesel prices differ from that of gasoline; however, I feel that the point remains: fuel prices fluctuate. A fuel surcharge in essence allows the carrier to be compensated when fuel prices increase, and then in turn allows the carrier to pass savings on to the customer when prices decline. Like so many systems, this is a great idea… in theory…
The problem with fuel surcharge really is not the surcharge or the concept of the fuel surcharge in itself, but rather the lack of accountability so inherent with fuel surcharges. Most carriers maintain their own fuel surcharges and update them as they see fit. Many do not post their fuel surcharge, but rather show it to you on your quote or your bill. Some even leave it out and let you add your pre negotiated surcharge to the rates yourself. How do you know if your fuel surcharge is competitive? One carrier’s rates may be higher than another carrier’s rates, but what if their fuel is out by 10%? The lack of accountability with fuel surcharges makes pricing in the transportation industry just that much more frustrating and yet intriguing.
Ultimately, shippers, receivers, and carriers can work together to ensure that there is both integrity and accountability in how the fuel surcharge is used so that the benefits are evident to both sides. Common ways to create accountability with fuel surcharges include using a suggested fuel surcharge posted by a third party such as the FCA, or NTS fuel surcharges. The only struggle with these surcharges is that they are trying to mitigate for all of the fluctuation in fuel prices across the whole country. This may be sufficient for national carriers, but the challenge comes for smaller, regional carriers that are heavily influenced by smaller provincial shifts in pricing. Encouraging local transport associations, such as the AMTA in Alberta, to post a recommended fuel surcharge may be a viable solution. What are your thoughts?
The roadways are many different things to many different people; for some it is a way to explore the world, others see it as a method of visiting family or friends, for others it is a way to escape, yet others use our roads simply to commute back and forth as they grind through life. For companies, our roadways are the arteries that keep products flowing between plants, manufacturers, wholesalers, distributors, retailers, jobsites – an endless list really.
What is interesting to me, as someone who works in road transportation daily, is that many people fail to recognize how vulnerable they are every single time they get behind the wheel. Whether it is an aged driver whose perception may be slowed only slightly less than their processing and reaction time, a youthful driver oblivious to the power they are now licensed to drive and all of the inherent risks involved, or the family van – full of distractions long before texting was on the radar; there are a number of challenges on the roads that make it a near miracle every day that you get home safe.
As governments try to regulate common sense in an effort to improve road safety, I am continually frustrated by the seeming lack of courage to do the right thing to really improve road safety. The transportation industry has been asking for it for a long time, and there is a move in Alberta and across Canada to lobby government to make meaningful improvements in road safety. An easy fix really, we have asked the government to simply required commercial drivers to receive training and certification in order to be legally allowed to operate as a commercial driver.
I understand that businesses rarely ask for more regulation, but in this case it makes sense. While the rest of us may put miles on our vehicles, we still spend many hours daily otherwise occupied in our careers. For professional drivers, their day IS driving. Their exposure to the risks I mentioned above are significantly higher than for the rest of us. When they are sick, tired, mentally stressed, or whatever else, they still drive. Through all types of weather, surrounded by all skill levels of drivers (with some it should not be called skill), driving on both familiar roads and areas they have never seen before, all with some sort of pressure to perform their job in a safe, professional and timely manner, these professionals experience pressures of driving beyond what 90% of us ever will. Yet, the government does not seem to want to agree that they (professional drivers) should be required to have any special training or certification.
I hope you understand that the trucking industry is asking for this regulation. I have spent hours upon hours in committee meetings and industry consultation hearing how important this is to improve road safety for both professional drivers and the motoring public. What we need now is for politicians across this country to get off their hands and make some real strides in the right direction. As roadways get more and more congested, and our cities get larger and larger, we need to begin to recognize that safety is not going to happen by itself. We need the people who are on the roads the most to be properly trained and certified to ensure safer roads for all users.
What is the value of a guarantee when there are 15 pages of conditions and exceptions?
Do you remember ‘back in the day’ when a guarantee was a guarantee? Do remember when pop was a nickel and a satisfaction guarantee meant you would get your money back if you weren’t satisfied? Then came the day when that same satisfaction guarantee meant that if you weren’t satisfied, you could be guaranteed that you would be completely frustrated by how the company did nothing to help.
The innovators saw the issue and went all out. They introduced us to the 100% Satisfaction Guarantee. I guess the theory was that if you were 90% satisfied before, they could live with that 10%… not any longer! Phew! What a relief! So now they tell us that their guarantee covers us any time we are not 100% satisfied… I want you to know that is pretty much false…. I always strive to be a little dissatisfied, simply to help improve the experience, but being able to point out how things could be better apparently doesn’t mean you were not 100% satisfied… If you are not lost yet, hang in there, I am sure you will be soon enough!
So then I ask them what I get if I am not 100% Satisfied. What does your guarantee give me? Most of the time – nothing. It is almost as though we are right back to being guaranteed that we will not be satisfied anytime that we are not 100% satisfied… I told you it wouldn’t get any easier…
The real go-getters now issue a ‘Money-Back’ Guarantee. Which, I have found out, does not guarantee that they will give you your money back. In fact, they tell me there has to be an issue first… so much for getting my stuff for free… So I now understand that if I am not completely satisfied, these folks will give me my money back. YAY! But wait. There are 8,397 double sided pages in size 8 font of terms and conditions. Please complete our 13 page form, outlining each of the conditions that you have adhered to, the exact reason why you are not satisfied, and submit the form within the allotted 12 seconds or else the guarantee is not valid.
I want a company that will clearly identify what they are guaranteeing. I want a company that will put some skin in the game to stand behind what they say. I want a company that will do away with all of the terms and conditions that make the so-called guarantee worthless. Show me the company that will give a guarantee and stand behind it without making me feel like I am the problem… and I will be your customer for life!
Recently a couple of shippers have contacted us concerned that, even with fuel prices below $1.00/litre, they were still being subject to a Fuel Surcharge. In conversation with other carriers, I recognize that more and more shippers are questioning this same thing. I wanted to take the time to discuss a few points on this issue and explain why a shipper SHOULD WANT to pay fuel surcharges, but should maybe begin to focus on accountability in how it is calculated vs. just being concerns that it exists at all.
The fuel surcharge system came into effect when fuel was at $0.39 per litre simply as a means of mitigating the fluctuating costs of fuel. It was the early 1990’s when fuel surcharges became widely used and it was primarily due to the price volatility that resulted from the Gulf War. Because of this, shippers will likely continue to see fuel surcharges applied until the price of fuel drops below $0.39. For a long time, I have lobbied the industry to increase the base price of the fuel surcharge formula on the basis that the price of fuel will likely never drop down that low again. However the push-back has been that it is very difficult to know what the base should raise to, and to know exactly how low the price of fuel might go in the future.
A mindset change and shift in our paradigm might be helpful to fully appreciate how beneficial the fuel surcharge is to both shipper and carrier. Fuel Surcharges should not be considered as an ‘addition’ to the rate, but rather as a ‘floating’ portion of the rate. The reality is that if we no longer had a fuel surcharge at $1.00, the customer would no longer receive price relief when the price of fuel continues to drop. As long as there is a fuel surcharge, the customer will continue to experience price reductions that correlate to the price of fuel. If the fuel surcharge is not in place, the shipper loses that benefit.
The real issue is one of accountability. How can a shipper be certain that they are being charged fairly?
Beyond simply trusting their carrier based on their established track record, I would make two suggestions:
1. Establish rates between shipper and carrier that are based on the FCA publicly posted Fuel Surcharge.
2. Establish rates and a fuel surcharge formula based on average fuel prices in Alberta as posted by the Government of Canada
I am amazed at how many of the items we humans employ to make our lives more efficient and easier actually do the opposite. Our society is full of examples. All of our processing power should save us more time and make us more productive; yet, we waste more time than ever on our devices and struggle to find time for the people we love and the things we enjoy. There are constant technological distractions throughout our days, and I marveled at how often my computer likes to freeze solid to really give my productivity a kick. One example that gets on my nerves quite often are the automated phone systems that businesses utilize.
This is fresh in my mind as I literally just got off of the phone. I was trying to contact a local organization to find out if they have a certain product in stock at one of their locations here in Edmonton, Alberta. I got the automated answering service, listened to the menu options, pressed the appropriate numbers, and found that wonderful hold music. I waited for several minutes, the phone would ring and then go straight to hold – no one ever answered or asked me to hold. After some time, the automated service simply said “goodbye” and it hung up on me. At this point, I did something rare: I tried to call the same organization again (a different location however…) and was greeted with the same automated service. Long story short, I ended up hanging up before they kicked me off their automated merry go round for a second time.
Though your automated phone answering service seems to make sense for you, it really may be a greater deterrent to your business than a benefit. You may lose more money in the long run if individuals simply choose to deal with different vendors because of their painful experiences in trying to reach someone who can help them accomplish their goals. It is common to hear about the importance of a first impression in our personal lives, and I tend to think the same goes for your business. In many cases, how phone calls are answered and directed plays a large role in determining how your customers and potential customers view your organization. It may just pay in the long run to have a human answering and directing calls.
WARNING: Do not use to dry pets! (Microwave) – Dang, you mean I have to use a towel?
WARNING: Do not hold rotating end! (Chainsaw) – But I was just trying to put more pressure on it.
WARNING: Do not iron clothes while wearing! (Clothes Iron) – But now I can’t see where the wrinkles are!
Sometimes I feel like the warning labels on many products are ridiculous or even stupid. However, the manufacturers are aware that if they do not clearly make you aware of the hazards, they can be held liable for an injury that really was not their (or their products) “fault”. They put the warning labels on to protect themselves from frivolous lawsuits. Understanding this position, in regards to freight companies, helps me navigate through the loop holes they may throw my way. (Believe it or not, some people knowingly try to file claims that are not legit. Shocking, right?) Because these ‘upstanding citizens’ try take advantage of the claim process, regulations were put in place to protect the freight companies. Unfortunately, sometimes the pendulum swings too far and they end up declining everything based on a ‘technicality’. My goal when filing a claim is always to prove that my freight claim is legitimate and to remove any doubt on whether I should be reimbursed. Here are a few more things I do to ensure my claim gets paid.
Marking damages at the time of delivery. I have learned “Subject to Inspection” just doesn’t cut it. Many freight companies don’t believe the damage was caused by them unless some indication of the damage is noted at the time of delivery. The key is to clearly indicate the state of your shipment when you sign for it. This does not mean you have to open every box and inspect each item at the time of delivery. But if a box is crushed or torn, or the shipment is in rough shape in any way, mark your delivery receipt accordingly. You can inspect for damages later and follow up with the carrier if you do discover something is damaged. “Box crushed”, “carton torn”, “wet”, “punctured”, etc. are all going to be honored at the time your claim is being processed. Feel free to add “subject to inspection” after whatever kind of damage you have already indicated, but do not only mark “subject to inspection”.
File your claim in time. If your shipment moved 13 years ago and you are finally getting around to filing your claim, don’t be upset if it gets declined. Obviously, no one would expect payment after that kind of time but you do need to be aware that there is a time frame. You have 60 days from receipt of your shipment to give written Notice of Intent to Claim. You then must file the actual claim within 9 months of the shipment. I find the sooner I submit my claim, the easier it seems for the freight company to investigate it and my chances of approval for payment goes up.
My third and final post on this coming soon!