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.
When the bill reauthorizing the nation's transport funding mechanisms became law in July 2012, much was made of the fact that it was the first multiyear funding law in seven years and that the federal government would be doling out $105 billion over the subsequent 27 months to pay for infrastructure projects.
Largely overlooked in the 1,656-page bill was language that on Oct. 1 changes forever how truck freight is laded, brokered, and transported. To some, it smacks of trucking reregulation. To others, it brings clarity and accountability to a business lacking in both. For those who make their nut moving freight, it reshapes the decades-old operation of property brokerage, which is a $300 billion-a-year business.
On that date, the federal government makes it more expensive for brokers to do business, enforces strict rules on what brokers and truckers can and can't do, and levies stiff fines for noncompliance. The law also forces shippers to be more vigilant in how they tender their goods for transport.
First off, there is the higher cost of brokering. Anyone seeking a broker's license will have to post a $75,000 surety bond, which ensures a carrier will be paid if a broker fails to do so. The more than seven-fold jump in the bond's original $10,000 ceiling has drawn the ire of smaller brokers, who argue it will drive many independents out of business and concentrate activity in the hands of larger brokers, a claim the main broker trade group, the Transportation Intermediaries Association (TIA), denies. The Association of Independent Property Brokers and Agents filed suit July 16 in federal district court in Ocala, Fla., to block the provision.
That may not cause a major problem, however. A survey released July 11 by Portland, Ore.-based consultancy DAT of 250 major truckers and brokers said two-thirds have already purchased the higher bond. Of those who hadn't, 79 percent said they were either shopping for the bond or intended to do so, DAT said. Only 3 percent said they didn't plan to buy the higher bond.
The big changes come elsewhere in the law. As of Oct. 1, a trucker can no longer take possession of freight from another trucker or a broker, a long-held and fairly common practice known as "double-brokering." A trucker cannot broker freight without a brokerage license, and that authority must be completely separate from the trucking operation. The trucker showing up at a shipper's dock must be the same carrier whose name appears on the bill of lading. If not, a shipper must create a new bill with the new trucker's name and identification number, and pay just the new carrier. Truckers can accept cargo only with their own equipment.
An exception to all of this is the so-called interline agreement, where the origin trucker accepts the load, drives a certain distance, and then tenders the goods to another trucker. In practice, however, such operations are rare because of the time and cost involved in transferring loads and because carriers are reluctant to give up revenue.
Brokers, meanwhile, can no longer take physical control of cargo and can only arrange the transportation for their shipper clients. A broker must ensure the trucker with which it has arranged the transaction is the carrier appearing at the shipper's dock. A broker cannot insure the cargo, except as a contingency, meaning its coverage would kick in if a carrier's policy fails, a rare occurrence. A broker cannot appear on the bill of lading as a carrier. In essence, the law transforms a broker into a shipper and strips it of any carrier-related functions.
As for shippers, they need to know that a trucker can no longer accept their freight for brokering purposes, and that a broker or a third-party logistics (3PL) company cannot physically touch the goods. Neither party can be on the bill of lading in the "carrier" section. A broker or 3PL can appear on the bill's section marked "3PL" and can receive freight bills.
The penalties for violating the laws are not cheap. The federal government can levy a maximum fine of $10,000 per load on the guilty party.
CHANGING ROLES
Experts said the law stops a trucker from holding itself out as the freight hauler, only to switch roles—unbeknownst to the shipper—into that of a broker. "If a carrier does not move the freight, it will have to disclose to the shipper that it is acting in another capacity ... No secrets can be kept," said Robert Mucci, a commercial risk management specialist with Worcester, Mass.-based Wolpert Insurance Agency Inc.
Mucci said the law would prevent a trucker who agreed to haul a load from claiming after the fact that it was not liable for a lost or damaged shipment because it was merely acting as a broker. Because the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), a Department of Transportation sub-agency that oversees truck safety, will issue unique registration numbers to each party for their specific authority, "there will be a Berlin-type wall separating broker-arranged shipments from 'subcontracted' shipments," he said.
David G. Dwinell, who owned his first truck in 1958 and today instructs brokers on, among other things, how to avoid liability issues, called the law a "get-out-of-jail-free card" for well-run brokers who operate their business without controlling drivers' actions and who are not in possession of the cargo.
Dwinell called the provisions a prime example of well-intentioned legislative overreach. He said the elimination of double-brokerage wipes out an important source of revenue for a trucker, especially if it has too much business for its own fleet to move and needs to farm out excess loads. Over the years, truckers came to view the practice of double-brokerage as "their sacred right," he said.
Dwinell said the language was essentially crafted by the American Trucking Associations, the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA), and the TIA to protect their respective interests, and called it a stab at backdoor reregulation. He said the provisions would add friction to the trucking supply chain, deprive truckers of business, and invite more extensive safety enforcement by the states.
Truckers, Dwinell said, will bear the biggest burden. "The net effect of this will be incalculable," he said. When asked about the cost, he replied, "write the word 'billion,' pick a number out of the air, and put it in front."
A LONG LEGISLATIVE ROAD
The language is the culmination of several years of legislative wrangling designed to clean up a corner of the shipping world that sometimes operates in the shadows. Supporters say the provisions establish clear functional lines among the various players. It gives shippers peace of mind that the carrier on its bill of lading will be the same one that shows up to haul its freight, they say. And it curtails the sleazy act of "churning," where a trucker without brokerage authority grabs freight from a load board, gets an advance from the shipper or broker, flips the load to another carrier, and then disappears, leaving the second carrier empty-handed. Roughly one-quarter of owner-operators have had trouble at one point or another collecting from brokers or other intermediaries, according to OOIDA estimates. In some cases, the truckers never get paid, the trade group said.
The language in the law "spell[s] out responsibilities and protect[s] all involved," Robert A. Voltmann, TIA's president and CEO, wrote in May. "We believe that whoever hires a truck is responsible for paying for that truck."
Voltmann said truckers who rebroker freight without proper licensing expose themselves to a legal nightmare called "vicarious liability," where a company can be held responsible for accident-related damages even if it wasn't directly involved in the incident.
In recent years, the plaintiffs' bar has focused on the potential liability in carrier-to-carrier relationships to win big settlements for accident victims. By contrast, brokers who are properly licensed and who demonstrate robust carrier selection procedures have been, to some extent, insulated from legal exposure, Voltmann said. "Why would a carrier not avail [itself] of these protections?" he wrote.
Jett McCandless, founder and CEO of CarrierDirect, a Chicago-based firm that consults for carriers and 3PLs, said the law will deter low-rent truckers and brokers that, out of desperation, engage in behavior beyond the scope of the law and its ethics. Double-brokerage, he said, leaves shippers vulnerable to actions they have no visibility into or control over. "All of the controls they have in place, all of the reasons they did the procurement, go out the window," he said.
McCandless said the new rules would go a long way toward removing the bad actors and, by extension, make the business cleaner and the roads safer. "It legitimizes the space," he said.
Voltmann said it's high time truckers operating in brokerage be required to have separate broker authority and the bond that accompanies it. "Brokerage is not a hobby. It's a profession with certain responsibilities, including protecting other people's money," he said. "The majority of money touched by a broker, whether that broker is asset-based or nonasset-based, belongs to other people."
A move by federal regulators to reinforce requirements for broker transparency in freight transactions is stirring debate among transportation groups, after the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) published a “notice of proposed rulemaking” this week.
According to FMCSA, its draft rule would strive to make broker transparency more common, requiring greater sharing of the material information necessary for transportation industry parties to make informed business decisions and to support the efficient resolution of disputes.
The proposed rule titled “Transparency in Property Broker Transactions” would address what FMCSA calls the lack of access to information among shippers and motor carriers that can impact the fairness and efficiency of the transportation system, and would reframe broker transparency as a regulatory duty imposed on brokers, with the goal of deterring non-compliance. Specifically, the move would require brokers to keep electronic records, and require brokers to provide transaction records to motor carriers and shippers upon request and within 48 hours of that request.
Under federal regulatory processes, public comments on the move are due by January 21, 2025. However, transportation groups are not waiting on the sidelines to voice their opinions.
According to the Transportation Intermediaries Association (TIA), an industry group representing the third-party logistics (3PL) industry, the potential rule is “misguided overreach” that fails to address the more pressing issue of freight fraud. In TIA’s view, broker transparency regulation is “obsolete and un-American,” and has no place in today’s “highly transparent” marketplace. “This proposal represents a misguided focus on outdated and unnecessary regulations rather than tackling issues that genuinely threaten the safety and efficiency of our nation’s supply chains,” TIA said.
But trucker trade group the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) welcomed the proposed rule, which it said would ensure that brokers finally play by the rules. “We appreciate that FMCSA incorporated input from our petition, including a requirement to make records available electronically and emphasizing that brokers have a duty to comply with regulations. As FMCSA noted, broker transparency is necessary for a fair, efficient transportation system, and is especially important to help carriers defend themselves against alleged claims on a shipment,” OOIDA President Todd Spencer said in a statement.
Additional pushback came from the Small Business in Transportation Coalition (SBTC), a network of transportation professionals in small business, which said the potential rule didn’t go far enough. “This is too little too late and is disappointing. It preserves the status quo, which caters to Big Broker & TIA. There is no question now that FMCSA has been captured by Big Broker. Truckers and carriers must now come out in droves and file comments in full force against this starting tomorrow,” SBTC executive director James Lamb said in a LinkedIn post.
The “series B” funding round was financed by an unnamed “strategic customer” as well as Teradyne Robotics Ventures, Toyota Ventures, Ranpak, Third Kind Venture Capital, One Madison Group, Hyperplane, Catapult Ventures, and others.
The fresh backing comes as Massachusetts-based Pickle reported a spate of third quarter orders, saying that six customers placed orders for over 30 production robots to deploy in the first half of 2025. The new orders include pilot conversions, existing customer expansions, and new customer adoption.
“Pickle is hitting its strides delivering innovation, development, commercial traction, and customer satisfaction. The company is building groundbreaking technology while executing on essential recurring parts of a successful business like field service and manufacturing management,” Omar Asali, Pickle board member and CEO of investor Ranpak, said in a release.
According to Pickle, its truck-unloading robot applies “Physical AI” technology to one of the most labor-intensive, physically demanding, and highest turnover work areas in logistics operations. The platform combines a powerful vision system with generative AI foundation models trained on millions of data points from real logistics and warehouse operations that enable Pickle’s robotic hardware platform to perform physical work at human-scale or better, the company says.
Bloomington, Indiana-based FTR said its Trucking Conditions Index declined in September to -2.47 from -1.39 in August as weakness in the principal freight dynamics – freight rates, utilization, and volume – offset lower fuel costs and slightly less unfavorable financing costs.
Those negative numbers are nothing new—the TCI has been positive only twice – in May and June of this year – since April 2022, but the group’s current forecast still envisions consistently positive readings through at least a two-year forecast horizon.
“Aside from a near-term boost mostly related to falling diesel prices, we have not changed our Trucking Conditions Index forecast significantly in the wake of the election,” Avery Vise, FTR’s vice president of trucking, said in a release. “The outlook continues to be more favorable for carriers than what they have experienced for well over two years. Our analysis indicates gradual but steadily rising capacity utilization leading to stronger freight rates in 2025.”
But FTR said its forecast remains unchanged. “Just like everyone else, we’ll be watching closely to see exactly what trade and other economic policies are implemented and over what time frame. Some freight disruptions are likely due to tariffs and other factors, but it is not yet clear that those actions will do more than shift the timing of activity,” Vise said.
The TCI tracks the changes representing five major conditions in the U.S. truck market: freight volumes, freight rates, fleet capacity, fuel prices, and financing costs. Combined into a single index indicating the industry’s overall health, a positive score represents good, optimistic conditions while a negative score shows the inverse.
Specifically, the new global average robot density has reached a record 162 units per 10,000 employees in 2023, which is more than double the mark of 74 units measured seven years ago.
Broken into geographical regions, the European Union has a robot density of 219 units per 10,000 employees, an increase of 5.2%, with Germany, Sweden, Denmark and Slovenia in the global top ten. Next, North America’s robot density is 197 units per 10,000 employees – up 4.2%. And Asia has a robot density of 182 units per 10,000 persons employed in manufacturing - an increase of 7.6%. The economies of Korea, Singapore, mainland China and Japan are among the top ten most automated countries.
Broken into individual countries, the U.S. ranked in 10th place in 2023, with a robot density of 295 units. Higher up on the list, the top five are:
The Republic of Korea, with 1,012 robot units, showing a 5% increase on average each year since 2018 thanks to its strong electronics and automotive industries.
Singapore had 770 robot units, in part because it is a small country with a very low number of employees in the manufacturing industry, so it can reach a high robot density with a relatively small operational stock.
China took third place in 2023, surpassing Germany and Japan with a mark of 470 robot units as the nation has managed to double its robot density within four years.
Germany ranks fourth with 429 robot units for a 5% CAGR since 2018.
Japan is in fifth place with 419 robot units, showing growth of 7% on average each year from 2018 to 2023.
Progress in generative AI (GenAI) is poised to impact business procurement processes through advancements in three areas—agentic reasoning, multimodality, and AI agents—according to Gartner Inc.
Those functions will redefine how procurement operates and significantly impact the agendas of chief procurement officers (CPOs). And 72% of procurement leaders are already prioritizing the integration of GenAI into their strategies, thus highlighting the recognition of its potential to drive significant improvements in efficiency and effectiveness, Gartner found in a survey conducted in July, 2024, with 258 global respondents.
Gartner defined the new functions as follows:
Agentic reasoning in GenAI allows for advanced decision-making processes that mimic human-like cognition. This capability will enable procurement functions to leverage GenAI to analyze complex scenarios and make informed decisions with greater accuracy and speed.
Multimodality refers to the ability of GenAI to process and integrate multiple forms of data, such as text, images, and audio. This will make GenAI more intuitively consumable to users and enhance procurement's ability to gather and analyze diverse information sources, leading to more comprehensive insights and better-informed strategies.
AI agents are autonomous systems that can perform tasks and make decisions on behalf of human operators. In procurement, these agents will automate procurement tasks and activities, freeing up human resources to focus on strategic initiatives, complex problem-solving and edge cases.
As CPOs look to maximize the value of GenAI in procurement, the study recommended three starting points: double down on data governance, develop and incorporate privacy standards into contracts, and increase procurement thresholds.
“These advancements will usher procurement into an era where the distance between ideas, insights, and actions will shorten rapidly,” Ryan Polk, senior director analyst in Gartner’s Supply Chain practice, said in a release. "Procurement leaders who build their foundation now through a focus on data quality, privacy and risk management have the potential to reap new levels of productivity and strategic value from the technology."