Overdrive Magazine | Trucking Business News & Owner Operator Info
Issue link: http://read.dmtmag.com/i/856429
VOICES 4 | Overdrive | August 2017 In school, wasn't it bad to be accused of disruptive behavior? In today's par- lance, business and P.R. writers have put a positive spin on the term for technology set to revolutionize this or that business practice. It's gotten such a positive spin in the age of Google, Amazon, Uber and the like that companies boast in their press releases about being disruptive, given the rewards heaped on some of the disrupto-pioneers. Yet imagine the classroom corollary. What happened at school today, Timmy? Oh mom, it was so great! While everybody was moping about diagramming sentences, I stood up and hollered about the teacher's way of teaching, and she totally just gave me an A for the year! Many companies, proud of the dis- ruption they're bringing to trucking, fail to see the irony of the negative perceptions many owner-operators might hold about their products or services – ELDs, the latest "Uber for trucking" app with little in the way of actual freight to deliver, self-driving trucks, etc. Maybe, some contend, it's time for a disruption that actually might do something for me. The term came up when independent James Woods called in to express angst over what he sees as a prevailing culture of greed and dishonesty among freight brokers. The Texas-based indepen- dent believes greater transparency in freight transactions might be a dis- ruption that could take brokers down a peg from their privileged position. That is, they know what the ship- per's paying for the load, but they're also free to withhold or disclose the amount if it so suits them. Woods says he "caught" one of the largest brokers on two recent loads – the broker's margin was "39 percent on one, 42 percent on the other." He's not the only owner-operator who's done so. Mandating transparency has been tried. Some will remember the failed bipartisan TRUCC Act of 2008 that would have required disclosure of "a written list that specifi cally identifi es any freight charge, brokerage fee or commission, fuel surcharge or adjustment, and any other charges in- voiced." While it wouldn't have gone all the way to full rate transparency, it would have gotten pretty close, by some estimates. Broker organizations vehemently opposed the measure, saying disclo- sure requirements would amount to economic "re-regulation" of transpor- tation. Some owner-operators agree. As Allan McCullough puts it, "It is nobody's business how much I make on hauling a load, and it doesn't seem fair that someone should be forced to share that info about their business." But another measure in the TRUCC Act explicitly would have prohibited the presentation of "false or misleading information on a document or in an oral representa- tion about the actual rate, charge or allowance to any party to the transac- tion or transportation." Such a measure might go a long way toward combating situations such as those owner-operator Woods details – loads that mysteriously "can- cel" while you're en route to pick up, when they really didn't cancel at all; someone just off ered to do the work A 'disruption' truckers might welcome Hear owner-operator James Woods talk about his experiences with profit-hun- gry dishonest freight middlemen in the July 13 edition of the Overdrive Radio podcast: OverdriveOnline.com/OverdriveRadio. MAKE MAD MONEY! BE A FREIGHT BROKER!