In an era of sleek consumer devices, a mobile printer that's heavy, clunky, or slow will be a hard sell. Here's what manufacturers are doing to keep up with customer expectations.
Susan Lacefield has been working for supply chain publications since 1999. Before joining DC VELOCITY, she was an associate editor for Supply Chain Management Review and wrote for Logistics Management magazine. She holds a master's degree in English.
It's a sure bet that almost all of your warehouse associates use some sort of mobile device in their daily lives—whether it's a smart phone, a tablet computer, or an MP3 player. So it's no surprise that mobile devices like portable printers are becoming common in the workplace as well, particularly for warehouse or distribution center (DC) applications. As Marty Johnson, product marketing manager for printer manufacturer Zebra Technologies, puts it: "The commercialization of mobility is all around us."
Indeed, many companies have either already implemented Wi-Fi in their distribution facilities or are strongly considering it, says Ravi Panjwani, regional vice president of marketing and product management for printer manufacturer Brother Mobile Solutions Inc. And with wireless connectivity in place, DCs can reap great productivity benefits by using mobile printers. Mobile units allow associates to print items—like bar codes and labels for pallets and cartons, packing lists, inventory pick and return tickets, and lot identifiers—at the point of use rather than having to travel to a central location. (For when to use a mobile versus a stationary printer, see sidebar.)
Yet workers' increasing familiarity with mobile devices poses a bit of a challenge for industrial printer manufacturers. "With the proliferation of sleek consumer devices like the iPad and Android tablets, end-user customers' expectations of mobile printers have certainly increased," says Panjwani.
As for what this means for mobile printer manufacturers, it's essentially changed the rules of the game. It used to be that they could pretty much focus on making a device that was rugged enough to withstand hard use inside the warehouse. Now, they also have to think about how to make that printer lightweight, ergonomic, and user-friendly. "I can't say we look at an iPhone and decide to use something just because it's in use in the mass market, but in general, we are aware of and in tune with what is commonly used in day-to-day devices, and we take that into account," Johnson says.
LIGHT AND EASY
One area that's been heavily influenced by developments in consumer electronics is the mobile printers' form factor—that is, the look and feel of the devices. Just as smart phones have gotten progressively smaller and lighter, so too have mobile printers. It's not that these manufacturers want to emulate Apple; there's a practical reason for it: Shaving just a few ounces off a printer can make a real difference to someone who has to carry the device around for an eight-hour shift.
In addition, the user interface has changed greatly in the past five years to reflect how users interact with their smart phones, says Johnson. For example, more mobile printers feature display screens and icons like the ones found on phones—think of the symbols used to indicate battery charge status and Wi-Fi strength.
Why should it matter whether the icons are easy to interpret? Shouldn't cost and print quality be all that counts? Well, yes and no. As Tom Roth, senior director of printer product management at Intermec, points out, labor is a huge cost for warehouses and distribution centers. "It's important to keep workers happy and productive on the shop floor," he says. "Technology that is intuitive reduces training time, reduces the number of turnovers, and helps workers make fewer mistakes."
The display screens and icons also make workers' jobs easier by providing better diagnostics, says Roth. If there's a problem with the printer—for example, it's out of labels, there's a jam, or the Wi-Fi signal is weak—the icons clearly indicate the source of the problem. "Workers no longer have to guess," says Roth. "This makes them more productive."
TAKING CHARGE OF BATTERIES
In another parallel to what's happening in consumer electronics, manufacturers are making battery-related improvements to their printers. For instance, some are working to increase the life of the battery while also making it lighter, says Johnson. Others have incorporated "smart battery technology" into their units. This technology can monitor not only how much charge is left in the battery but also the number of charge cycles and "impedance" of the battery, which can be used to predict how much life the battery has left, says Dan Brodnar, director of product management for Intermec.
"The overall advantage for customers is that, in many cases, end users sign up for a battery replacement program where after 18 months someone comes in and replaces all of the batteries regardless of whether they need replacing or not," says Brodnar. "With this new technology, the battery will report to the device what its capacity is so you can choose which batteries to replace versus just throwing them all away."
Yet not all changes being made to printers are driven by innovations in consumer electronics. Some are made in response to challenges that are unique to the warehouse environment. For example, Zebra has designed some of its mobile printers not only to be more tolerant of the chilly temperatures found in freezer units but also to allow workers to operate them without removing their gloves.
Other design changes include how the labels themselves are inserted into the printer. Labels no longer need to be threaded into the machine, says Johnson of Zebra. Instead, they can simply be dropped in. In addition, many of the labels no longer have a liner on the back. That means employees don't have to worry about disposing of the liners or making sure they don't end up on the floor where they could pose a slip hazard, says Brodnar.
ONE DEVICE TO DO IT ALL?
As for what the future holds for mobile printers, an obvious question is whether manufacturers will go down the path of developing multifunctional devices. That's been one of the biggest trends in consumer electronics over the past few years. For evidence, you need look no farther than the smart phone, which not only allows users to make calls, but also to surf the Web, take photos, and even pay for a cup of coffee.
This kind of device convergence is already beginning to show up in mobile printers, according to Intermec. In the past, printers were connected to a "dumb" computer terminal that was solely dedicated to running printer software. But that's starting to change, says Brodnar. "In many instances, we are taking some of those basic applications that reside on a dumb terminal and moving those inside the printer in the form of smart printing applications," he reports. "Now, the printer becomes its own computer. It provides the printing function, and in many cases, it provides an input function as well."
That means that in a pallet-building application, for example, the printer could be connected to a bar-code scanner and/or scale. As the items are scanned and weighed and the pallet reaches maximum weight capacity, the printer would print a label to be applied to the pallet.
But that's not to say that the market is progressing toward a device that serves as both bar-code scanner and printer. Johnson says that such a device would be too heavy to comfortably carry.
This leads to an important point. Unlike the consumer market, where design changes are made just to make the device look slicker or cooler, all changes to an industrial printer must help workers do their job better. "At the end of the day, it boils down to workflow productivity," says Brodnar. "That's why customers buy our products. And to the extent that an icon or a display screen helps with that workflow, it will be adopted."
Should you stay or should you go?
A mobile printer is good for when the worker is on the go, such as in picking, putaway, or pallet-building applications. Because the printer is conveniently attached to a forklift, hung from a shoulder strap, or clipped to a belt, the associate doesn't have to waste time hurrying back to a central location to grab a label from a stationary printer. Printing a label at the point of application also helps boost accuracy because it cuts down on the possibility the employee will apply the label to the wrong item, says Marty Johnson, product marketing manager for Zebra Technologies.
But just because you decide to invest in mobile printers doesn't mean you can kick your big fixed printers to the curb. If yours is a typical warehouse or DC operation, you'll probably want to have both on hand. Most facilities find that while mobile devices are great for some jobs, fixed printers are a better choice for others. Here are a few cases when it's better to use a stationary printer for the job.
1. You want to go big. Obviously, you don't want to have a printer big enough to print an 8-inch label slung from your shoulder. So if you have to print a large label that goes on a chemical drum, for example, you'll want to use a stationary device.
2. You print thousands of labels daily. Mobile printers are capable of printing hundreds of labels a day, but if you need to print more than that, it's best to go with a heavy-duty stationary model that is rugged and durable.
3. Labeling is a crucial part of your process. If labeling is a critical part of your process and your printer goes down, your operation will grind to a halt. So in cases where a printer can have a major impact on throughput, it pays to have a high-end unit that can take a beating.
4. Your worker's not mobile. If you have an operation where the goods come to the worker instead of the worker going to the goods, it makes sense for the printer to stay put as well.
Most of the apparel sold in North America is manufactured in Asia, meaning the finished goods travel long distances to reach end markets, with all the associated greenhouse gas emissions. On top of that, apparel manufacturing itself requires a significant amount of energy, water, and raw materials like cotton. Overall, the production of apparel is responsible for about 2% of the world’s total greenhouse gas emissions, according to a report titled
Taking Stock of Progress Against the Roadmap to Net Zeroby the Apparel Impact Institute. Founded in 2017, the Apparel Impact Institute is an organization dedicated to identifying, funding, and then scaling solutions aimed at reducing the carbon emissions and other environmental impacts of the apparel and textile industries.
The author of this annual study is researcher and consultant Michael Sadowski. He wrote the first report in 2021 as well as the latest edition, which was released earlier this year. Sadowski, who is also executive director of the environmental nonprofit
The Circulate Initiative, recently joined DC Velocity Group Editorial Director David Maloney on an episode of the “Logistics Matters” podcast to discuss the key findings of the research, what companies are doing to reduce emissions, and the progress they’ve made since the first report was issued.
A: While companies in the apparel industry can set their own sustainability targets, we realized there was a need to give them a blueprint for actually reducing emissions. And so, we produced the first report back in 2021, where we laid out the emissions from the sector, based on the best estimates [we could make using] data from various sources. It gives companies and the sector a blueprint for what we collectively need to do to drive toward the ambitious reduction [target] of staying within a 1.5 degrees Celsius pathway. That was the first report, and then we committed to refresh the analysis on an annual basis. The second report was published last year, and the third report came out in May of this year.
Q: What were some of the key findings of your research?
A: We found that about half of the emissions in the sector come from Tier Two, which is essentially textile production. That includes the knitting, weaving, dyeing, and finishing of fabric, which together account for over half of the total emissions. That was a really important finding, and it allows us to focus our attention on the interventions that can drive those emissions down.
Raw material production accounts for another quarter of emissions. That includes cotton farming, extracting gas and oil from the ground to make synthetics, and things like that. So we now have a really keen understanding of the source of our industry’s emissions.
Q: Your report mentions that the apparel industry is responsible for about 2% of global emissions. Is that an accurate statistic?
A: That’s our best estimate of the total emissions [generated by] the apparel sector. Some other reports on the industry have apparel at up to 8% of global emissions. And there is a commonly misquoted number in the media that it’s 10%. From my perspective, I think the best estimate is somewhere under 2%.
We know that globally, humankind needs to reduce emissions by roughly half by 2030 and reach net zero by 2050 to hit international goals. [Reaching that target will require the involvement of] every facet of the global economy and every aspect of the apparel sector—transportation, material production, manufacturing, cotton farming. Through our work and that of others, I think the apparel sector understands what has to happen. We have highlighted examples of how companies are taking action to reduce emissions in the roadmap reports.
Q: What are some of those actions the industry can take to reduce emissions?
A: I think one of the positive developments since we wrote the first report is that we’re seeing companies really focus on the most impactful areas. We see companies diving deep on thermal energy, for example. With respect to Tier Two, we [focus] a lot of attention on things like ocean freight versus air. There’s a rule of thumb I’ve heard that indicates air freight is about 10 times the cost [of ocean] and also produces 10 times more greenhouse gas emissions.
There is money available to invest in sustainability efforts. It’s really exciting to see the funding that’s coming through for AI [artificial intelligence] and to see that individual companies, such as H&M and Lululemon, are investing in real solutions in their supply chains. I think a lot of concrete actions are being taken.
And yet we know that reducing emissions by half on an absolute basis by 2030 is a monumental undertaking. So I don’t want to be overly optimistic, because I think we have a lot of work to do. But I do think we’ve got some amazing progress happening.
Q: You mentioned several companies that are starting to address their emissions. Is that a result of their being more aware of the emissions they generate? Have you seen progress made since the first report came out in 2021?
A: Yes. When we published the first roadmap back in 2021, our statistics showed that only about 12 companies had met the criteria [for setting] science-based targets. In 2024, the number of apparel, textile, and footwear companies that have set targets or have commitments to set targets is close to 500. It’s an enormous increase. I think they see the urgency more than other sectors do.
We have companies that have been working at sustainability for quite a long time. I think the apparel sector has developed a keen understanding of the impacts of climate change. You can see the impacts of flooding, drought, heat, and other things happening in places like Bangladesh and Pakistan and India. If you’re a brand or a manufacturer and you have operations and supply chains in these places, I think you understand what the future will look like if we don’t significantly reduce emissions.
Q: There are different categories of emission levels, depending on the role within the supply chain. Scope 1 are “direct” emissions under the reporting company’s control. For apparel, this might be the production of raw materials or the manufacturing of the finished product. Scope 2 covers “indirect” emissions from purchased energy, such as electricity used in these processes. Scope 3 emissions are harder to track, as they include emissions from supply chain partners both upstream and downstream.
Now companies are finding there are legislative efforts around the world that could soon require them to track and report on all these emissions, including emissions produced by their partners’ supply chains. Does this mean that companies now need to be more aware of not only what greenhouse gas emissions they produce, but also what their partners produce?
A: That’s right. Just to put this into context, if you’re a brand like an Adidas or a Gap, you still have to consider the Scope 3 emissions. In particular, there are the so-called “purchased goods and services,” which refers to all of the embedded emissions in your products, from farming cotton to knitting yarn to making fabric. Those “purchased goods and services” generally account for well above 80% of the total emissions associated with a product. It’s by far the most significant portion of your emissions.
Leading companies have begun measuring and taking action on Scope 3 emissions because of regulatory developments in Europe and, to some extent now, in California. I do think this is just a further tailwind for the work that the industry is doing.
I also think it will definitely ratchet up the quality requirements of Scope 3 data, which is not yet where we’d all like it to be. Companies are working to improve that data, but I think the regulatory push will make the quality side increasingly important.
Q: Overall, do you think the work being done by the Apparel Impact Institute will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions within the industry?
A: When we started this back in 2020, we were at a place where companies were setting targets and knew their intended destination, but what they needed was a blueprint for how to get there. And so, the roadmap [provided] this blueprint and identified six key things that the sector needed to do—from using more sustainable materials to deploying renewable electricity in the supply chain.
Decarbonizing any sector, whether it’s transportation, chemicals, or automotive, requires investment. The Apparel Impact Institute is bringing collective investment, which is so critical. I’m really optimistic about what they’re doing. They have taken a data-driven, evidence-based approach, so they know where the emissions are and they know what the needed interventions are. And they’ve got the industry behind them in doing that.
The global air cargo market’s hot summer of double-digit demand growth continued in August with average spot rates showing their largest year-on-year jump with a 24% increase, according to the latest weekly analysis by Xeneta.
Xeneta cited two reasons to explain the increase. First, Global average air cargo spot rates reached $2.68 per kg in August due to continuing supply and demand imbalance. That came as August's global cargo supply grew at its slowest ratio in 2024 to-date at 2% year-on-year, while global cargo demand continued its double-digit growth, rising +11%.
The second reason for higher rates was an ocean-to-air shift in freight volumes due to Red Sea disruptions and e-commerce demand.
Those factors could soon be amplified as e-commerce shows continued strong growth approaching the hotly anticipated winter peak season. E-commerce and low-value goods exports from China in the first seven months of 2024 increased 30% year-on-year, including shipments to Europe and the US rising 38% and 30% growth respectively, Xeneta said.
“Typically, air cargo market performance in August tends to follow the July trend. But another month of double-digit demand growth and the strongest rate growths of the year means there was definitely no summer slack season in 2024,” Niall van de Wouw, Xeneta’s chief airfreight officer, said in a release.
“Rates we saw bottoming out in late July started picking up again in mid-August. This is too short a period to call a season. This has been a busy summer, and now we’re at the threshold of Q4, it will be interesting to see what will happen and if all the anticipation of a red-hot peak season materializes,” van de Wouw said.
The report cites data showing that there are approximately 1.7 million workers missing from the post-pandemic workforce and that 38% of small firms are unable to fill open positions. At the same time, the “skills gap” in the workforce is accelerating as automation and AI create significant shifts in how work is performed.
That information comes from the “2024 Labor Day Report” released by Littler’s Workplace Policy Institute (WPI), the firm’s government relations and public policy arm.
“We continue to see a labor shortage and an urgent need to upskill the current workforce to adapt to the new world of work,” said Michael Lotito, Littler shareholder and co-chair of WPI. “As corporate executives and business leaders look to the future, they are focused on realizing the many benefits of AI to streamline operations and guide strategic decision-making, while cultivating a talent pipeline that can support this growth.”
But while the need is clear, solutions may be complicated by public policy changes such as the upcoming U.S. general election and the proliferation of employment-related legislation at the state and local levels amid Congressional gridlock.
“We are heading into a contentious election that has already proven to be unpredictable and is poised to create even more uncertainty for employers, no matter the outcome,” Shannon Meade, WPI’s executive director, said in a release. “At the same time, the growing patchwork of state and local requirements across the U.S. is exacerbating compliance challenges for companies. That, coupled with looming changes following several Supreme Court decisions that have the potential to upend rulemaking, gives C-suite executives much to contend with in planning their workforce-related strategies.”
Stax Engineering, the venture-backed startup that provides smokestack emissions reduction services for maritime ships, will service all vessels from Toyota Motor North America Inc. visiting the Toyota Berth at the Port of Long Beach, according to a new five-year deal announced today.
Beginning in 2025 to coincide with new California Air Resources Board (CARB) standards, STAX will become the first and only emissions control provider to service roll-on/roll-off (ro-ros) vessels in the state of California, the company said.
Stax has rapidly grown since its launch in the first quarter of this year, supported in part by a $40 million funding round from investors, announced in July. It now holds exclusive service agreements at California ports including Los Angeles, Long Beach, Hueneme, Benicia, Richmond, and Oakland. The firm has also partnered with individual companies like NYK Line, Hyundai GLOVIS, Equilon Enterprises LLC d/b/a Shell Oil Products US (Shell), and now Toyota.
Stax says it offers an alternative to shore power with land- and barge-based, mobile emissions capture and control technology for shipping terminal and fleet operators without the need for retrofits.
In the case of this latest deal, the Toyota Long Beach Vehicle Distribution Center imports about 200,000 vehicles each year on ro-ro vessels. Stax will keep those ships green with its flexible exhaust capture system, which attaches to all vessel classes without modification to remove 99% of emitted particulate matter (PM) and 95% of emitted oxides of nitrogen (NOx). Over the lifetime of this new agreement with Toyota, Stax estimated the service will account for approximately 3,700 hours and more than 47 tons of emissions controlled.
“We set out to provide an emissions capture and control solution that was reliable, easily accessible, and cost-effective. As we begin to service Toyota, we’re confident that we can meet the needs of the full breadth of the maritime industry, furthering our impact on the local air quality, public health, and environment,” Mike Walker, CEO of Stax, said in a release. “Continuing to establish strong partnerships will help build momentum for and trust in our technology as we expand beyond the state of California.”
That result showed that driver wages across the industry continue to increase post-pandemic, despite a challenging freight market for motor carriers. The data comes from ATA’s “Driver Compensation Study,” which asked 120 fleets, more than 150,000 employee drivers, and 14,000 independent contractors about their wage and benefit information.
Drilling into specific categories, linehaul less-than-truckload (LTL) drivers earned a median annual amount of $94,525 in 2023, while local LTL drivers earned a median of $80,680. The median annual compensation for drivers at private carriers has risen 12% since 2021, reaching $95,114 in 2023. And leased-on independent contractors for truckload carriers were paid an annual median amount of $186,016 in 2023.
The results also showed how the demographics of the industry are changing, as carriers offered smaller referral and fewer sign-on bonuses for new drivers in 2023 compared to 2021 but more frequently offered tenure bonuses to their current drivers and with a greater median value.
"While our last study, conducted in 2021, illustrated how drivers benefitted from the strongest freight environment in a generation, this latest report shows professional drivers' earnings are still rising—even in a weaker freight economy," ATA Chief Economist Bob Costello said in a release. "By offering greater tenure bonuses to their current driver force, many fleets appear to be shifting their workforce priorities from recruitment to retention."