Peter Bradley is an award-winning career journalist with more than three decades of experience in both newspapers and national business magazines. His credentials include seven years as the transportation and supply chain editor at Purchasing Magazine and six years as the chief editor of Logistics Management.
Superficially, the less-than-truckload business looks much the same as it always has. Trucks back up to shippers' or receivers' docks each day and load or unload goods. But look deeper and what you'll see is an industry that has undergone radical change—all because its customers, the nation's shippers, have changed.
It's been a long time since it was enough for a trucker merely to move goods from Poughkeepsie to Kalamazoo. Bob Davidson, president and CEO of ABF Freight System, says, "Our customers would laugh at us if we held ourselves out as being able to deliver from point A to point B in X days with one plain vanilla service. They demand a broad array of logistics functions."
Indeed, in an era when lean inventories and short cycle times are driving much of the logistics decision making, LTL carriers have no choice but to offer much more than just fast and reliable over-the-road transport. They have to offer clear visibility into their networks. They have to be flexible. And they have to have a service mix that extends beyond the highways and shipping docks.
Doug Duncan, president and chief executive officer of FedEx Freight, argues that the transportation industry overall is being shaped by the pressures brought to bear on the industry's customers. "It's all about how people manage supply chains and attack logistics costs," he contends.
Historically, at least, that's been true. As distribution became more regional in nature and the demand for overnight service exploded, the regional LTL carriers that specialized in that type of service thrived. As customers demanded inventory visibility, carriers developed the tools to provide it. As shippers consolidated their freight volume with fewer carriers in return for better service, carriers responded with improvements in core services while extending their reach into once unfamiliar areas. So it's no surprise, then, that as businesses grapple with the seemingly contradictory demands to increase their international sourcing while maintaining lean inventories and slashing cycle times, LTL carriers have tried to develop ways to help their customers—and expand their own businesses as well.
Need for speed
What will it take to compete in this new marketplace? Sophisticated technology and the ability to respond quickly to changing requirements, says Bill Zollars, chairman, president and CEO of Yellow-Roadway Corp. "Companies are … looking for [carriers] that can help with supply issues, not for the lowest rates," he says. And that means carriers should expect to make major investments in the months ahead to meet shippers' demands for broad capabilities.
This thinking explains in part the rationale behind Yellow Corp.'s acquisition of Roadway Corp. to create Yellow-Roadway Corp. That deal, completed late last year, brought two of the biggest national LTL carriers—Yellow Transportation and Roadway Express—under one corporate roof. "This offers us the opportunity to change the competitive landscape in the transportation industry," Zollars says. "It puts us in a position just behind UPS and FedEx in market reach. We can do a lot more investing and make service improvements across a $6 billion base."
Duncan, who oversaw his own mega-merger a few years ago when Viking Freight and American Freightways were combined to create FedEx Freight, agrees that shippers are demanding much more from their carriers than ever before. In Duncan's view, economics are driving the trend. Manufacturers today are operating on thin margins, he says. Durable-goods manufacturers, for example, have seen the prices they're able to charge decline steadily since 1996, he says. "They have no pricing power in the marketplace."
Although manufacturing productivity has improved markedly, he says, the gains haven't been enough to offset rising costs. That has led to a focus on the supply chain. "In the last four or five years, logistics professionals have been taking inventories out and speeding operations up. Whenever they've done that, the demands on the carriers have increased. Speed and reliability have taken on an extraordinary measure [of importance]."
Zero tolerance
Not surprisingly, the mounting pressure to reduce inventory and speed up deliveries has altered some shippers' relationships with their carriers. "What we're seeing more and more is a lower tolerance for failure, even in the unexpected," Davidson says. "You can't just notify your customer when something has gone wrong; you also have to tell it how you're going to make things right."
Their desire for leverage is also leading more shippers to consolidate their business with fewer carriers—typically carriers that have broader capabilities. David Congdon, president and COO of Old Dominion Freight Line Inc., a successful regional carrier that operates in 38 states, says, "More and more, shippers are looking at reducing the number of carriers they use. They're looking to work with fewer carriers that can do more for them."
Gerald Detter, president and CEO of Con-Way Transportation Services, says his company has invested considerable time and money to develop additional offerings that meet customers' demands for speed, efficiency, and broader services from LTL carriers. "The Con-Way organization has evolved, with regional, long-haul and international services, because of customer demand," he reports. "We want [customers] to think of Con- Way as an enterprise, not as the back of a truck."
As shippers turn up the pressure, many carriers have responded by implementing strict performance standards. "We've changed the entire way we do business," says Duncan. FedEx Freight used to look at ontime shipment percentages as a measure of its success, he says. "That doesn't work today. Most nights we handle 60,000 shipments. If 99 percent of our deliveries are on time, that means I have 600 unhappy customers. We track every failure every night and trace it back to the root causes."
Spreading the risk
The demand for quick response over the last decade has also led to the regionalization of distribution, which has spurred growth among regional LTL carriers in particular.
"The way [shippers] choose to manage strategically is to place inventory in two, three or four places so they can fulfill orders the next day by truck," says Duncan. "They're getting better at choosing those facilities. Next-day service is what they want. The only reason they accept second-day service is that they can't find anyone to deliver their freight the next day."
Then there's the trend toward what Ted Scherck, president of the market research firm The Colography Group, calls "continental distribution." "If you operate with an extended supply chain and lean inventories, you put yourself at substantial risk of interruptions," he argues. Those might range from bad weather on the high seas to labor disputes like the one that shut down West Coast ports in 2002 to strains on freight capacity. "You name it, we've seen it," Scherck says. "Shippers have come to realize that global supply chains and lean inventory policies make them vulnerable to disruptions."
As a result, he says, some shippers are adjusting their distribution networks, placing critical imported goods in a limited number of strategically located DCs within U.S. borders. That allows the shipper to choose the mode—air, road or rail—that best fits the company's needs and reduces the risk substantially. That's where truckers come in. "If you're a North American carrier that supports continental distribution, you stand to benefit in a big way if your customers are abandoning the global model in favor of a surface distribution model," Scherck says.
No problem's too tough
Indeed, the continental distribution trend is already benefiting some LTL carriers. Scherck contends that because shippers and receivers have become conditioned to expect short transit times, businesses are trying to locate their continental distribution centers within 1,000 miles of most of their customers. Within that range, they can make deliveries in two days at the outside.
But he adds that this growth is not necessarily coming at the long-haul carriers' expense. "There are some goods that have to be manufactured in a single location and aren't suitable for high-end transportation," he says. He cites building materials such as doors and windows as an example."You're not going to move those by air," he says, "and you're not going to manufacture them in Malaysia."
Zollars has a slightly different take on the situation. "Today, we're seeing global networks become more important," he says. "That goes back to the idea that customers want companies with broad capabilities. They need companies with global networks."
Duncan believes truckers have no choice but to add services that cater to their customers' increasingly global operations. For example, he says, FedEx Freight is currently testing a program under which it's deconsolidating shipments in ocean containers from Asia for local distribution.
ABF Freight System is also expanding its scope in ways that would have been unthinkable just a few years ago. "We have a project going with a company that wants us to buy their product in the Pacific Rim, move it across the ocean to our warehouse in the United States and then, as they need product, pick the product and sell it back to them," says Davidson. "That's an example of our willingness to look at any logistics product," he adds.
For its part, Con-Way has set up what it calls a "solutions desk" under the auspices of Con-Way Air, the carrier's airfreight forwarding arm."The philosophy in the Con-Way companies is that we never say no," Detter says. "Whatever the issue, we'll relay it to the solutions desk and we'll find a solution. The customer may not be happy with the price, but we will come up with a solution."
The price of progress
And what about price? All of the investments LTL carriers have made carry a substantial cost. In the last few years, they've sunk money into technology, equipment, networks and more with no guarantee that they'd recoup those expenses. Indeed, hampered by stiff competition, carriers have been spectacularly unsuccessful in raising their rates in the last few years.
That may be changing. Although the competition has yet to abate, rates may finally be heading up. "Shippers have to recognize that the days of excess capacity are over," says Scherck. "Capacity is tightening. If we get the kind of bump in manufacturing that everyone says is coming, shippers will find themselves locked in a tight struggle for capacity, and trucking companies are expecting a return."
In fact, this may already be happening. Detter reports that the average weight per shipment in the Con-Way network increased significantly in November and December—up almost 40 pounds per shipment over prior months. If that's a true indication of what's happening in the market, it's likely that LTL rates will soon head up and stay up.
Meanwhile, a look at their balance sheets has only stiffened trucking executives' resolve to resist rate erosion. Carriers have been hit with double-digit increases in insurance costs. Labor costs for drivers have inched up. And carriers are finding that it's costing them more to run new trucks equipped with engines that meet the stringent emissions standards imposed last year than it did to run older models.
And when it comes to operating costs, truckers say there's nothing left to cut. "We're a very efficient industry," Detter says. "We use technology efficiently; we use our assets efficiently.We've cut out all the fat."
If nothing else, Detter adds, carriers will be forced to raise rates simply to ensure there's someone available to drive the trucks. "We need livable wages and benefits to attract people to a relatively unattractive industry," he says. "That's not going to go away."
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.
Global trade will see a moderate rebound in 2025, likely growing by 3.6% in volume terms, helped by companies restocking and households renewing purchases of durable goods while reducing spending on services, according to a forecast from trade credit insurer Allianz Trade.
The end of the year for 2024 will also likely be supported by companies rushing to ship goods in anticipation of the higher tariffs likely to be imposed by the coming Trump administration, and other potential disruptions in the coming quarters, the report said.
However, that tailwind for global trade will likely shift to a headwind once the effects of a renewed but contained trade war are felt from the second half of 2025 and in full in 2026. As a result, Allianz Trade has throttled back its predictions, saying that global trade in volume will grow by 2.8% in 2025 (reduced by 0.2 percentage points vs. its previous forecast) and 2.3% in 2026 (reduced by 0.5 percentage points).
The same logic applies to Allianz Trade’s forecast for export prices in U.S. dollars, which the firm has now revised downward to predict growth reaching 2.3% in 2025 (reduced by 1.7 percentage points) and 4.1% in 2026 (reduced by 0.8 percentage points).
In the meantime, the rush to frontload imports into the U.S. is giving freight carriers an early Christmas present. According to Allianz Trade, data released last week showed Chinese exports rising by a robust 6.7% y/y in November. And imports of some consumer goods that have been threatened with a likely 25% tariff under the new Trump administration have outperformed even more, growing by nearly 20% y/y on average between July and September.