By rights, the guys who manage regional LTL trucking outfits ought to be ecstatic. Like truckers everywhere, they took a beating during the economic downturn, but today, the storm clouds have receded and their future looks bright. No less an authority than The Colography Group has pronounced their business hot. "The strongest shipping growth is concentrated in the regional LTL segment," the Atlanta based research and analysis firm proclaimed in its latest market analysis, A World of Change: Global Transport in a Time-Driven World.
It's not hard to see why. Nervous about potential supply chain disruptions in a post 9/11 world, companies of all stripes are keeping goods in local distribution centers closer to the end customer. According to The Colography Group, more than two-thirds of all shipments travel 600 miles or less, and the proportion is growing. At the same time, a spike in e-commerce has flooded the nation's shipping channels with small, light packages, a trend that favors the less-than-truckload carrier at the expense of the truckload hauler.
Ironically, the regionals' business is exploding just when their ranks are the thinnest. Battered by economic blows in the last couple of years, many of the weaker players closed their doors or were swallowed up by competitors, the latest casualty being USF Red Star in the Northeast. That's led to a capacity crunch in some parts of the country. "Right now, in many industry segments, demand for trucking services is exceeding supply," says Jim Latta, vice president of business development and coowner of the privately held A. Duie Pyle, which operates both LTL and truckload service, mostly in the northeastern United States.
If that were the only problem they faced, LTL executives would probably be breaking out the champagne right now. But unfortunately, it's not. With little prompting, most carriers will reel off a list of weak spots in their industry that threaten their ability to serve customers. That's provoking anxiety among the shippers that rely on regional LTL service. It's not just a question of capacity, they say, it's also a question of rates.
Rough road
What has the truckers worried? For starters, there's the driver shortage—a problem that has defied a decade's worth of attempts at resolution. "I've been concerned for some time that our industry has not been attractive to the best and brightest people," says Gerald L. Detter, president and chief executive officer of Ann Arbor, Mich.-based Con-Way Transportation Services Inc., which serves virtually the entire United States through regional LTL subsidiaries. "Decades ago, it was considered a leading bluecollar industry, with excellent wages and benefits." But that all changed. "Today, it's more work, harder work, for less compensation—that's a bad combination. So the quality of the people who are willing to do this kind of work will dilute itself, in my opinion, and I believe that has happened." Detter predicts truckers will be forced to raise drivers' compensation somewhere between 25 and 30 percent in the next three to five years.
Then there are the trucks themselves. Although some companies have continuously renewed their trailer stock, many simply can't afford to buy new equipment. Latta at A. Duie Pyle says his impression is that many of the trucks sold in recent years have been "straight" trucks (i.e. nonarticulated), which allow only restricted access for loading and unloading by forklift truck, bought by sub-regional carriers.
Despite strong sales among manufacturers of large trucks, many regional carriers are only slowly enlarging their fleets. "We can't be like the grocery industry making two or three cents on the dollar, because of the cost of equipment," says John Shevell, vice chairman of New England Motor Freight Inc. in Elizabeth, N.J., which provides LTL trucking services in the northeastern and mid- Atlantic United States, eastern Canada and Puerto Rico.
Of course, every trucking executive who voices concerns about the quality of trucks or availability of drivers is talking about the other guy. But road congestion is a problem that affects them all. "How do you have reliable service in the face of an infrastructure that is a big, big problem?" asks Ted Scherck, president of The Colography Group and author of the World of Change report. "How do you deliver in Boston? That's a critical problem."
It's not just Boston, of course. Congestion is endemic throughout the high-volume Northeast region, which includes New York. "They want to put the Olympics in here!" complains Shevell. "All that traffic, and no one will get any freight. It's the most absurd thing in the world."
Reaching the outer limits
But it's not just about drivers, equipment and roads. For many regionals, says Scherck, it's a major challenge just figuring out how to cover extensive geographic regions with their limited equipment. "If you're going to be a regional carrier, you really have to serve the whole region," he says. "A lot of second-tier companies are not large enough to provide the level of service demanded at the price demanded in the whole region."
For some, the solution has been mergers and acquisitions, a trend Scherck expects to continue. "We'll end up with, in effect, five or six regions in the United States and the trucking companies are going to have to have competitive service offerings and competitive scope within that region. That's going to be a challenge for a company that is, for example, strong in the Southeast, but has weaker offerings in the Northwest. They'll have to make a decision if they're going to compete in the Northwest. You can't compete by growing organically, so you have to find someone to buy or merge with to give that coverage."
Indeed, that's exactly what FedEx Freight has done, Scherck says. "It's a collection of regional operations instead of a national footprint; that's why it's done so well." Scherck notes that Con-Way and Overnite have used the same strategy to vault into the top tier.
Not every carrier can buy or merge its way to the top, however. The remaining regionals have been left scrambling to find other ways to make their services attractive. Some have teamed up with a traditional adversary, the rails, to provide intermodal service. Some have outfitted their trucks with smart tracking technology. And some are pinning their hopes on new, innovative equipment.
Steve Ginter, vice president of marketing at New Penn Motor Express Inc., which operates LTL services in the eastern United States, Canada and Puerto Rico, says his company has invested in trucks with liftgates that can load and unload cargo without a raised dock. "Especially here in the Northeast, where the infrastructure of our customers is not what it is in the West or Midwest, there's a fairly significant need for lift-gate where we're able to make a delivery from a hydraulic tail-gate," Ginter says. "We're making greater investments in equipment that has a hydraulic lift-gate to meet the needs of customers who need that, sometimes even for a residential delivery."
Others have chosen to expand not their fleets, but their service offerings. "We're doing everything we can to grow different products for our customers," says Brad Brown, head of marketing at Averitt Express Inc., operating LTL mostly in the South. "We believe they want our company to do more than just pick up and deliver goods for them.We've been core LTL for 25 years, and in the last six we've been doing international services with air and ocean freight forwarding. We also have a time-definite product—with guaranteed air, ground and charter," says Brown, who adds that Averitt has even established a supply chain group.
What does all this mean for shippers? Certainly, they should brace themselves to pay higher rates. Carriers argue that an increase is long overdue. "Customers will probably recoil," concedes Con-Way's Detter. "But I suggest they consider the following: Look at the cost of transport compared to the cost of manufacturing over the last two decades. The cost of transportation is much smaller [as a percentage of manufacturing costs] today than it was 20 years ago. Because we have shared those efficiencies—perhaps too much—with customers, now it's time to get paid more."
Congestion on U.S. highways is costing the trucking industry big, according to research from the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI), released today.
The group found that traffic congestion on U.S. highways added $108.8 billion in costs to the trucking industry in 2022, a record high. The information comes from ATRI’s Cost of Congestion study, which is part of the organization’s ongoing highway performance measurement research.
Total hours of congestion fell slightly compared to 2021 due to softening freight market conditions, but the cost of operating a truck increased at a much higher rate, according to the research. As a result, the overall cost of congestion increased by 15% year-over-year—a level equivalent to more than 430,000 commercial truck drivers sitting idle for one work year and an average cost of $7,588 for every registered combination truck.
The analysis also identified metropolitan delays and related impacts, showing that the top 10 most-congested states each experienced added costs of more than $8 billion. That list was led by Texas, at $9.17 billion in added costs; California, at $8.77 billion; and Florida, $8.44 billion. Rounding out the top 10 list were New York, Georgia, New Jersey, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, and Tennessee. Combined, the top 10 states account for more than half of the trucking industry’s congestion costs nationwide—52%, according to the research.
The metro areas with the highest congestion costs include New York City, $6.68 billion; Miami, $3.2 billion; and Chicago, $3.14 billion.
ATRI’s analysis also found that the trucking industry wasted more than 6.4 billion gallons of diesel fuel in 2022 due to congestion, resulting in additional fuel costs of $32.1 billion.
ATRI used a combination of data sources, including its truck GPS database and Operational Costs study benchmarks, to calculate the impacts of trucking delays on major U.S. roadways.
There’s a photo from 1971 that John Kent, professor of supply chain management at the University of Arkansas, likes to show. It’s of a shaggy-haired 18-year-old named Glenn Cowan grinning at three-time world table tennis champion Zhuang Zedong, while holding a silk tapestry Zhuang had just given him. Cowan was a member of the U.S. table tennis team who participated in the 1971 World Table Tennis Championships in Nagoya, Japan. Story has it that one morning, he overslept and missed his bus to the tournament and had to hitch a ride with the Chinese national team and met and connected with Zhuang.
Cowan and Zhuang’s interaction led to an invitation for the U.S. team to visit China. At the time, the two countries were just beginning to emerge from a 20-year period of decidedly frosty relations, strict travel bans, and trade restrictions. The highly publicized trip signaled a willingness on both sides to renew relations and launched the term “pingpong diplomacy.”
Kent, who is a senior fellow at the George H. W. Bush Foundation for U.S.-China Relations, believes the photograph is a good reminder that some 50-odd years ago, the economies of the United States and China were not as tightly interwoven as they are today. At the time, the Nixon administration was looking to form closer political and economic ties between the two countries in hopes of reducing chances of future conflict (and to weaken alliances among Communist countries).
The signals coming out of Washington and Beijing are now, of course, much different than they were in the early 1970s. Instead of advocating for better relations, political rhetoric focuses on the need for the U.S. to “decouple” from China. Both Republicans and Democrats have warned that the U.S. economy is too dependent on goods manufactured in China. They see this dependency as a threat to economic strength, American jobs, supply chain resiliency, and national security.
Supply chain professionals, however, know that extricating ourselves from our reliance on Chinese manufacturing is easier said than done. Many pundits push for a “China + 1” strategy, where companies diversify their manufacturing and sourcing options beyond China. But in reality, that “plus one” is often a Chinese company operating in a different country or a non-Chinese manufacturer that is still heavily dependent on material or subcomponents made in China.
This is the problem when supply chain decisions are made on a global scale without input from supply chain professionals. In an article in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Kent argues that, “The discussions on supply chains mainly take place between government officials who typically bring many other competing issues and agendas to the table. Corporate entities—the individuals and companies directly impacted by supply chains—tend to be under-represented in the conversation.”
Kent is a proponent of what he calls “supply chain diplomacy,” where experts from academia and industry from the U.S. and China work collaboratively to create better, more efficient global supply chains. Take, for example, the “Peace Beans” project that Kent is involved with. This project, jointly formed by Zhejiang University and the Bush China Foundation, proposes balancing supply chains by exporting soybeans from Arkansas to tofu producers in China’s Yunnan province, and, in return, importing coffee beans grown in Yunnan to coffee roasters in Arkansas. Kent believes the operation could even use the same transportation equipment.
The benefits of working collaboratively—instead of continuing to build friction in the supply chain through tariffs and adversarial relationships—are numerous, according to Kent and his colleagues. They believe it would be much better if the two major world economies worked together on issues like global inflation, climate change, and artificial intelligence.
And such relations could play a significant role in strengthening world peace, particularly in light of ongoing tensions over Taiwan. Because, as Kent writes, “The 19th-century idea that ‘When goods don’t cross borders, soldiers will’ is as true today as ever. Perhaps more so.”
Hyster-Yale Materials Handling today announced its plans to fulfill the domestic manufacturing requirements of the Build America, Buy America (BABA) Act for certain portions of its lineup of forklift trucks and container handling equipment.
That means the Greenville, North Carolina-based company now plans to expand its existing American manufacturing with a targeted set of high-capacity models, including electric options, that align with the needs of infrastructure projects subject to BABA requirements. The company’s plans include determining the optimal production location in the United States, strategically expanding sourcing agreements to meet local material requirements, and further developing electric power options for high-capacity equipment.
As a part of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the BABA Act aims to increase the use of American-made materials in federally funded infrastructure projects across the U.S., Hyster-Yale says. It was enacted as part of a broader effort to boost domestic manufacturing and economic growth, and mandates that federal dollars allocated to infrastructure – such as roads, bridges, ports and public transit systems – must prioritize materials produced in the USA, including critical items like steel, iron and various construction materials.
Hyster-Yale’s footprint in the U.S. is spread across 10 locations, including three manufacturing facilities.
“Our leadership is fully invested in meeting the needs of businesses that require BABA-compliant material handling solutions,” Tony Salgado, Hyster-Yale’s chief operating officer, said in a release. “We are working to partner with our key domestic suppliers, as well as identifying how best to leverage our own American manufacturing footprint to deliver a competitive solution for our customers and stakeholders. But beyond mere compliance, and in line with the many areas of our business where we are evolving to better support our customers, our commitment remains steadfast. We are dedicated to delivering industry-leading standards in design, durability and performance — qualities that have become synonymous with our brands worldwide and that our customers have come to rely on and expect.”
In a separate move, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also gave its approval for the state to advance its Heavy-Duty Omnibus Rule, which is crafted to significantly reduce smog-forming nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from new heavy-duty, diesel-powered trucks.
Both rules are intended to deliver health benefits to California citizens affected by vehicle pollution, according to the environmental group Earthjustice. If the state gets federal approval for the final steps to become law, the rules mean that cars on the road in California will largely be zero-emissions a generation from now in the 2050s, accounting for the average vehicle lifespan of vehicles with internal combustion engine (ICE) power sold before that 2035 date.
“This might read like checking a bureaucratic box, but EPA’s approval is a critical step forward in protecting our lungs from pollution and our wallets from the expenses of combustion fuels,” Paul Cort, director of Earthjustice’s Right To Zero campaign, said in a release. “The gradual shift in car sales to zero-emissions models will cut smog and household costs while growing California’s clean energy workforce. Cutting truck pollution will help clear our skies of smog. EPA should now approve the remaining authorization requests from California to allow the state to clean its air and protect its residents.”
However, the truck drivers' industry group Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) pushed back against the federal decision allowing the Omnibus Low-NOx rule to advance. "The Omnibus Low-NOx waiver for California calls into question the policymaking process under the Biden administration's EPA. Purposefully injecting uncertainty into a $588 billion American industry is bad for our economy and makes no meaningful progress towards purported environmental goals," (OOIDA) President Todd Spencer said in a release. "EPA's credibility outside of radical environmental circles would have been better served by working with regulated industries rather than ramming through last-minute special interest favors. We look forward to working with the Trump administration's EPA in good faith towards achievable environmental outcomes.”
Editor's note:This article was revised on December 18 to add reaction from OOIDA.
A Canadian startup that provides AI-powered logistics solutions has gained $5.5 million in seed funding to support its concept of creating a digital platform for global trade, according to Toronto-based Starboard.
The round was led by Eclipse, with participation from previous backers Garuda Ventures and Everywhere Ventures. The firm says it will use its new backing to expand its engineering team in Toronto and accelerate its AI-driven product development to simplify supply chain complexities.
According to Starboard, the logistics industry is under immense pressure to adapt to the growing complexity of global trade, which has hit recent hurdles such as the strike at U.S. east and gulf coast ports. That situation calls for innovative solutions to streamline operations and reduce costs for operators.
As a potential solution, Starboard offers its flagship product, which it defines as an AI-based transportation management system (TMS) and rate management system that helps mid-sized freight forwarders operate more efficiently and win more business. More broadly, Starboard says it is building the virtual infrastructure for global trade, allowing freight companies to leverage AI and machine learning to optimize operations such as processing shipments in real time, reconciling invoices, and following up on payments.
"This investment is a pivotal step in our mission to unlock the power of AI for our customers," said Sumeet Trehan, Co-Founder and CEO of Starboard. "Global trade has long been plagued by inefficiencies that drive up costs and reduce competitiveness. Our platform is designed to empower SMB freight forwarders—the backbone of more than $20 trillion in global trade and $1 trillion in logistics spend—with the tools they need to thrive in this complex ecosystem."