Mark Solomon joined DC VELOCITY as senior editor in August 2008, and was promoted to his current position on January 1, 2015. He has spent more than 30 years in the transportation, logistics and supply chain management fields as a journalist and public relations professional. From 1989 to 1994, he worked in Washington as a reporter for the Journal of Commerce, covering the aviation and trucking industries, the Department of Transportation, Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court. Prior to that, he worked for Traffic World for seven years in a similar role. From 1994 to 2008, Mr. Solomon ran Media-Based Solutions, a public relations firm based in Atlanta. He graduated in 1978 with a B.A. in journalism from The American University in Washington, D.C.
What if they threw open the U.S.-Mexican border to all qualified trucking companies, but no Mexican truckers showed up?
It would indeed be an ironic outcome of a battle that has dragged on for more than 11 years, culminating in March 2009 in a mini-trade war that has cost U.S. exporters billions of dollars in lost revenue and, according to U.S. Chamber of Commerce estimates, led to the loss of more than 25,000 American jobs.
Yet it is entirely plausible, according to various experts. For all the publicity surrounding the March 3 announcement by President Barack Obama and Mexican President Felipe Calderón of a tentative resolution to the cross-border dispute, few expect the status quo to change for years to come. The agreement would allow carriers on both sides of the border to operate beyond a 25-mile "commercial zone," but that doesn't necessarily mean they'll take advantage of that freedom. In fact, Mexican truckers will have little, if any, desire to operate deeper into U.S. commerce than they already do, these experts say.
"The majority of Mexican truckers don't want any part of it," says Herb Schmidt, president and CEO of Con-way Truckload, the truckload unit of Con-way Inc. Schmidt estimates that only 5 percent of the 80 Mexican truckers that have cross-border interline relationships with Con-way Truckload have even considered serving the U.S. market beyond the commercial zone.
"There's less interest on the part of Mexican truckers than many people think," adds Derek J. Leathers, chief operating officer of truckload giant Werner Enterprises, which generates about 10 percent of its annual revenue from Mexican operations. Before joining Werner, Leathers spent four years running the Mexican division of truckload and logistics giant Schneider National Inc.
As for how much volume we're talking about, an estimated 2.7 million loaded trailers crossed into the United States from Mexico in 2009, according to the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics. About 1.2 million loaded trailers entered Mexico from the United States that year, according to data from private research firm Transearch.
Winners and losers
The agreement has yet to be finalized, and the details remain sketchy. The pact must still pass industry and congressional muster, which promises to be a significant challenge. At the very least, there will be U.S. lawmakers concerned about the safety of Mexican drivers and the environmental worthiness of Mexican vehicles—not to mention the cost to taxpayers of a proposal by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to partially foot the bill to equip Mexican rigs with electronic on-board recorders to monitor a vehicle's movement and location.
If and when an agreement is signed, one clear winner would be U.S. producers whose exports have been curtailed by tariffs imposed by Mexico in retaliation for its carriers being denied access to U.S. markets. As part of the accord announced in March, the Mexican government will reduce the tariffs by 50 percent when a final agreement is signed, and suspend the remaining 50 percent when the first Mexican carrier is granted operating authority. The tariffs have been levied on 89 U.S. import products valued at about $2.4 billion a year.
Among the losers could be Mexican customs brokers, about half of whom own drayage companies that move freight between Mexican and U.S. trucks for line-haul service into either country. Because the agreement allows Mexican truckers to operate beyond the commercial zone and haul freight directly to U.S. destinations, the need for those drayage services would diminish, if not disappear, experts say.
For the most part, however, it's likely to be business as usual along the border. U.S. carriers operating southbound to Mexico will continue to drive to the commercial zone and tender their trailers to their Mexican interline partners for the line-haul, largely out of concern for their drivers' safety within Mexico. The same business model is likely to prevail on the northbound routes, with Mexican truckers turning over trailers to their U.S. counterparts for movement into the U.S. interior, the experts say.
There are a host of reasons why Mexican truckers would be loath to enter the U.S. market. For one, the liability exposure in the United States would be too great for many Mexican truckers to tolerate. "They are scared to death of our tort system," says Schmidt, noting that the costs of obtaining insurance coverage—if Mexican carriers can obtain coverage at all—combined with the risk of being hit with a massive jury award in the event of an incident would be enough to keep many Mexican truckers out of U.S. commerce.
Then there's the expense. Mexican carriers looking to expand into the United States would face significant upfront costs for labor, maintenance, facilities, and equipment. The typical Mexican trucker has a fleet of six trucks, hardly enough to justify the kind of capital investment needed to play in the world's biggest economy, experts say.
In addition, the agreement bars Mexican carriers from accepting loads moving between U.S. points, thus keeping the intra-U.S. market off-limits to competition with U.S. carriers.
The debate goes on
In the meantime, the debate over easing restrictions on Mexican truckers continues. The agreement's opponents—chief among them the Teamsters union and Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, the trade group representing the nation's independent drivers—have warned that cheaper Mexican labor will undercut U.S. driver wages and siphon off jobs. Leathers of Werner says the argument is a red herring, contending that any labor cost advantage enjoyed by Mexican drivers will be more than offset by their companies' higher costs of capital and equipment, as well as the increased liability exposure.
Schmidt of Con-way Truckload adds that should Mexican drivers enter the United States with more frequency, they will, over time, demand wages that are comparable to U.S. drivers'. Schmidt compares that possible scenario to what has occurred over the years at Mexican "maquiladoras," plants in Mexico where raw materials imported on a duty-free basis are assembled into goods, which are re-exported back to the United States or another destination market. At Mexican "maquilas," Schmidt says, rising labor costs have forced businesses to relocate deeper into Mexico to procure inexpensive labor.
Lana R. Batts, a partner in transport advisory firm Transport Capital Partners and vice president of government affairs for the American Trucking Associations in the 1980s and early 1990s, says the Teamsters have little to fear from Mexican drivers jeopardizing their livelihood. Batts adds that union concerns that the agreement will give Mexican drug lords and other unsavory characters an open supply chain into the United States are unfounded, noting that border security is not disappearing and that the situation will be no worse than if there were no agreement.
"I have no idea why the Teamsters would waste their political capital on this issue," says Batts. Teamster officials did not return a phone call requesting comment.
Jim Giermanski, president of transport security firm Powers Global Holdings and a veteran observer of the Southern border trade scene, says the agreement could actually stimulate the U.S. economy and increase jobs by creating new demand for maintenance services, truck yards, and equipment.
Despite that, Giermanski says the agreement will have little competitive impact on the marketplace. The one exception, he says, could be the creation of regional hub-and-spoke operations linking Mexico with U.S. border cities, notably in Texas.
Kyle Alexander, director of strategic carrier development for Transplace, a Frisco, Texas-based third-party logistics service provider with significant Mexican exposure, agrees that open access for Mexican truckers could, in the near term, trigger new opportunities for shippers building a distribution presence on the southern border.
"It will open up this unique economic zone between Texas and Mexico to a level that has never existed before," Alexander says. Opportunities for long-haul service, he adds, will take at least three to five years to develop, if they come to fruition at all.
Thanks, but no thanks
The issue of open access for Mexican truckers into U.S. markets has been on the table since the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) took effect back in 1994. In fact, NAFTA stipulated that qualified Mexican carriers should be allowed full freedom in U.S. commerce no later than January 2000. However, legal and administrative roadblocks—mostly driven by safety and environmental concerns—have kept them out.
The reality, though, is it has never been a freedom that Mexican carriers crave. One trucking industry source noted the Bush administration "literally had to beg" Mexican truckers to participate in a 2007 pilot program that gave a limited number of Mexican truckers entry into U.S. markets. Mexican carrier participation fell way short of the 100 trucking concerns the U.S. government hoped for, the source said.
"This notion that this agreement opens the floodgates is absurd," said the executive, who requested anonymity. "However this develops, it will be evolutionary, not revolutionary."
Container traffic is finally back to typical levels at the port of Montreal, two months after dockworkers returned to work following a strike, port officials said Thursday.
Today that arbitration continues as the two sides work to forge a new contract. And port leaders with the Maritime Employers Association (MEA) are reminding workers represented by the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) that the CIRB decision “rules out any pressure tactics affecting operations until the next collective agreement expires.”
The Port of Montreal alone said it had to manage a backlog of about 13,350 twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs) on the ground, as well as 28,000 feet of freight cars headed for export.
Port leaders this week said they had now completed that task. “Two months after operations fully resumed at the Port of Montreal, as directed by the Canada Industrial Relations Board, the Montreal Port Authority (MPA) is pleased to announce that all port activities are now completely back to normal. Both the impact of the labour dispute and the subsequent resumption of activities required concerted efforts on the part of all port partners to get things back to normal as quickly as possible, even over the holiday season,” the port said in a release.
The “2024 Year in Review” report lists the various transportation delays, freight volume restrictions, and infrastructure repair costs of a long string of events. Those disruptions include labor strikes at Canadian ports and postal sites, the U.S. East and Gulf coast port strike; hurricanes Helene, Francine, and Milton; the Francis Scott key Bridge collapse in Baltimore Harbor; the CrowdStrike cyber attack; and Red Sea missile attacks on passing cargo ships.
“While 2024 was characterized by frequent and overlapping disruptions that exposed many supply chain vulnerabilities, it was also a year of resilience,” the Project44 report said. “From labor strikes and natural disasters to geopolitical tensions, each event served as a critical learning opportunity, underscoring the necessity for robust contingency planning, effective labor relations, and durable infrastructure. As supply chains continue to evolve, the lessons learned this past year highlight the increased importance of proactive measures and collaborative efforts. These strategies are essential to fostering stability and adaptability in a world where unpredictability is becoming the norm.”
In addition to tallying the supply chain impact of those events, the report also made four broad predictions for trends in 2025 that may affect logistics operations. In Project44’s analysis, they include:
More technology and automation will be introduced into supply chains, particularly ports. This will help make operations more efficient but also increase the risk of cybersecurity attacks and service interruptions due to glitches and bugs. This could also add tensions among the labor pool and unions, who do not want jobs to be replaced with automation.
The new administration in the United States introduces a lot of uncertainty, with talks of major tariffs for numerous countries as well as talks of US freight getting preferential treatment through the Panama Canal. If these things do come to fruition, expect to see shifts in global trade patterns and sourcing.
Natural disasters will continue to become more frequent and more severe, as exhibited by the wildfires in Los Angeles and the winter storms throughout the southern states in the U.S. As a result, expect companies to invest more heavily in sustainability to mitigate climate change.
The peace treaty announced on Wednesday between Isael and Hamas in the Middle East could support increased freight volumes returning to the Suez Canal as political crisis in the area are resolved.
The French transportation visibility provider Shippeo today said it has raised $30 million in financial backing, saying the money will support its accelerated expansion across North America and APAC, while driving enhancements to its “Real-Time Transportation Visibility Platform” product.
The funding round was led by Woven Capital, Toyota’s growth fund, with participation from existing investors: Battery Ventures, Partech, NGP Capital, Bpifrance Digital Venture, LFX Venture Partners, Shift4Good and Yamaha Motor Ventures. With this round, Shippeo’s total funding exceeds $140 million.
Shippeo says it offers real-time shipment tracking across all transport modes, helping companies create sustainable, resilient supply chains. Its platform enables users to reduce logistics-related carbon emissions by making informed trade-offs between modes and carriers based on carbon footprint data.
"Global supply chains are facing unprecedented complexity, and real-time transport visibility is essential for building resilience” Prashant Bothra, Principal at Woven Capital, who is joining the Shippeo board, said in a release. “Shippeo’s platform empowers businesses to proactively address disruptions by transforming fragmented operations into streamlined, data-driven processes across all transport modes, offering precise tracking and predictive ETAs at scale—capabilities that would be resource-intensive to develop in-house. We are excited to support Shippeo’s journey to accelerate digitization while enhancing cost efficiency, planning accuracy, and customer experience across the supply chain.”
Donald Trump has been clear that he plans to hit the ground running after his inauguration on January 20, launching ambitious plans that could have significant repercussions for global supply chains.
As Mark Baxa, CSCMP president and CEO, says in the executive forward to the white paper, the incoming Trump Administration and a majority Republican congress are “poised to reshape trade policies, regulatory frameworks, and the very fabric of how we approach global commerce.”
The paper is written by import/export expert Thomas Cook, managing director for Blue Tiger International, a U.S.-based supply chain management consulting company that focuses on international trade. Cook is the former CEO of American River International in New York and Apex Global Logistics Supply Chain Operation in Los Angeles and has written 19 books on global trade.
In the paper, Cook, of course, takes a close look at tariff implications and new trade deals, emphasizing that Trump will seek revisions that will favor U.S. businesses and encourage manufacturing to return to the U.S. The paper, however, also looks beyond global trade to addresses topics such as Trump’s tougher stance on immigration and the possibility of mass deportations, greater support of Israel in the Middle East, proposals for increased energy production and mining, and intent to end the war in the Ukraine.
In general, Cook believes that many of the administration’s new policies will be beneficial to the overall economy. He does warn, however, that some policies will be disruptive and add risk and cost to global supply chains.
In light of those risks and possible disruptions, Cook’s paper offers 14 recommendations. Some of which include:
Create a team responsible for studying the changes Trump will introduce when he takes office;
Attend trade shows and make connections with vendors, suppliers, and service providers who can help you navigate those changes;
Consider becoming C-TPAT (Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism) certified to help mitigate potential import/export issues;
Adopt a risk management mindset and shift from focusing on lowest cost to best value for your spend;
Increase collaboration with internal and external partners;
Expect warehousing costs to rise in the short term as companies look to bring in foreign-made goods ahead of tariffs;
Expect greater scrutiny from U.S. Customs and Border Patrol of origin statements for imports in recognition of attempts by some Chinese manufacturers to evade U.S. import policies;
Reduce dependency on China for sourcing; and
Consider manufacturing and/or sourcing in the United States.
Cook advises readers to expect a loosening up of regulations and a reduction in government under Trump. He warns that while some world leaders will look to work with Trump, others will take more of a defiant stance. As a result, companies should expect to see retaliatory tariffs and duties on exports.
Cook concludes by offering advice to the incoming administration, including being sensitive to the effect retaliatory tariffs can have on American exports, working on federal debt reduction, and considering promoting free trade zones. He also proposes an ambitious water works program through the Army Corps of Engineers.
ReposiTrak, a global food traceability network operator, will partner with Upshop, a provider of store operations technology for food retailers, to create an end-to-end grocery traceability solution that reaches from the supply chain to the retail store, the firms said today.
The partnership creates a data connection between suppliers and the retail store. It works by integrating Salt Lake City-based ReposiTrak’s network of thousands of suppliers and their traceability shipment data with Austin, Texas-based Upshop’s network of more than 450 retailers and their retail stores.
That accomplishment is important because it will allow food sector trading partners to meet the U.S. FDA’s Food Safety Modernization Act Section 204d (FSMA 204) requirements that they must create and store complete traceability records for certain foods.
And according to ReposiTrak and Upshop, the traceability solution may also unlock potential business benefits. It could do that by creating margin and growth opportunities in stores by connecting supply chain data with store data, thus allowing users to optimize inventory, labor, and customer experience management automation.
"Traceability requires data from the supply chain and – importantly – confirmation at the retail store that the proper and accurate lot code data from each shipment has been captured when the product is received. The missing piece for us has been the supply chain data. ReposiTrak is the leader in capturing and managing supply chain data, starting at the suppliers. Together, we can deliver a single, comprehensive traceability solution," Mark Hawthorne, chief innovation and strategy officer at Upshop, said in a release.
"Once the data is flowing the benefits are compounding. Traceability data can be used to improve food safety, reduce invoice discrepancies, and identify ways to reduce waste and improve efficiencies throughout the store,” Hawthorne said.
Under FSMA 204, retailers are required by law to track Key Data Elements (KDEs) to the store-level for every shipment containing high-risk food items from the Food Traceability List (FTL). ReposiTrak and Upshop say that major industry retailers have made public commitments to traceability, announcing programs that require more traceability data for all food product on a faster timeline. The efforts of those retailers have activated the industry, motivating others to institute traceability programs now, ahead of the FDA’s enforcement deadline of January 20, 2026.