DCs have a head-spinning array of choices when it comes to printing and labeling systems. Here are some tips for picking the right device for your operation.
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.
Printing and labeling systems in the distribution center can sometimes cause indigestion for managers. They can be a bottleneck in the process of getting goods out the door. Labeling errors can cause shipping errors that result in unhappy customers and possible chargebacks. Downtime can bring a whole line to a halt. But nothing can go out the door without a label.
Whether an operation uses inline print-and-apply systems or portable printing tools, the devices' speed, accuracy, and uptime are crucial to DC productivity. What's important is to determine what solution would work best for your operation. Here a few things to consider in selecting a printing and labeling system:
Think about people first. Larry Boroff, director of automation systems engineering for Forte, emphasizes that the technical capabilities of staff to maintain and program the devices should be an important consideration in which one you select. Some systems, particularly automated print-and-apply systems, require a fair amount of in-house expertise.
A veteran of Amazon, where he was an operations engineer, Boroff has a fine appreciation for the need for fast and reliable printing. He recalls that at Amazon, "we looked at both manual and automated [printing] systems. One of the drivers for that was what the workrce looked like." That applies as well for the clients he now works with at Forte, a supply chain consulting organization. "If a customer does not have a semi-skilled workforce that can correct any issues or troubleshoot problems, it gets tough to design a print-and-apply system for that customer," he says. "There will be times when you have to interface with the system, reset the orders, or manually rectify issues that come up. I want to make sure they are able to support it." If the DC's operations or maintenance staff doesn't have the skills to maintain an automated system, then a manual system may make more sense.
Get smart. While the skill of the workforce is important, printing system providers are building more intelligence into the printers themselves. Karl Perry, senior product manager for printer software at Intermec, says that although printers have been able to host applications for some time, manufacturers are now making the process simpler. For example, in August, Intermec launched a major upgrade in its printer software from the reliable but dated GW-BASIC to the more modern and robust C# (pronounced C sharp) language. The result, says Perry, has been to make application development easier for the average developer skilled in C#.
To illustrate the utility of built-in applications, Perry cites the case of a Midwestern high-tech distributor. The shipping department was having problems with shipments that were misdirected or contained incorrect items. Systems integrator ToolWorx Information Products wrote an application for Intermec printers and linked a scale and scanner to the printer. Now, orders are pulled into the printer via Wi-Fi from the firm's order system. The clerk responsible for picking and shipping the order scans and weighs each item, prompting the printer to check the actual weight against the expected weight to ensure a match. It signals the clerk in the event of a mismatch. Using the program eliminated inaccurate shipments for the customer.
Consider the budget and the required throughput. Automated systems are substantially more costly than manual systems but have a much higher throughput. If the goal is to limit touches or to label items at high speed, that argues for automation. But it's important to note that opting for a print-and-apply system also has implications for the design of the overall material handling system, Boroff warns. "My customer has to expect to have enough accumulation to support a print-and-apply system," he says. "You can't just have four or five or 20 feet of accumulation for products because you're going to starve your system or overload it."
Does portability have value? In the past, manual systems—with the printer in a closet or office for access to power and connections to the facility's IT network—often required printing large numbers of labels at once, then bringing them to the floor to match up with shipments. No more. Portable, battery-operated systems with Wi-Fi connectivity allow for a great deal more flexibility, says Perry.
"Rather than have the printer at a fixed point in the warehouse, you can take the printer anywhere you want. If you have a battery cart, you don't need a power cord. It is driving productivity in the shipping room." And, he adds, some portable printers have their own batteries built in, eliminating the need for the cart.
What are you labeling? Cartons? Totes? Polybags? Do products vary markedly in size? Do you have a full-case picking operation or are you picking mixed cases? Those are all factors in the print-and-apply technology decision. Full-case operations lend themselves to automation. In mixed-case picking, where multiple products are picked into a single shipping container, manual systems are perfectly adequate as the picking and packing process is likely to be slower than the printing and labeling operation.
Can you accelerate throughput? Boroff says a typical print-and-apply system can label 15 to 25 cartons a minute. Including a packing slip with the label would cut that almost in half.
For print-and-apply systems, especially those handling cartons of varying heights, he suggests installing two print engines on the same line with advanced control systems. That would come close to doubling the throughput speed, depending on product size, by having each head printing and applying to every other carton.
The biggest constraint in the whole print-and-apply system, he says, is the product mix. Most often, labels are applied to the top of a product for shipping. The print head has to move down to the carton to apply the label, then move back up out of the way before the next carton comes through. The time it takes for the print head to lower and raise again, he explains, is the limiting factor in how quickly cartons can move along the conveyance system. If the height of the cartons varies markedly—say, from six inches tall to 20 inches tall—the print head needs time to lower and raise as much as 14 or 15 inches in each direction.
One way to improve throughput in a system with a broad range of carton heights, he says, is to assign each print head to a small range of carton heights. For example, one print head could handle cartons from six to 12 inches high, a second those from 12 to 18 inches; That limits the stroke each machine must take to lower, apply, and retreat. But it requires some advanced skills to set up and manage that sort of system. "This is where the technology skill of your workforce is important," Boroff says.
Uptime and maintenance matter. Not too long ago, a malfunction in a printer could bring shipping to a standstill. But the development of smart printers, with technology that alerts managers to an impending failure so they take preventive action, can sharply diminish downtime, especially when combined with more modular printer designs that make maintenance easier. Says Perry about smart printers, "It's not just the capability to print labels, but to do preventive maintenance based on predictive algorithms that are coming from the device management system."
Perry says that current printers' warning systems offer screens that provide specific information on printer issues, as opposed to a simple warning light. And maintenance is simpler. "You're able to replace the print head without using a screwdriver, which you can never find when you need one," he says. "What was once a 20-minute job now takes 15 seconds."
GETTING THE CIO ON BOARD
Going forward, logistics managers may find themselves having to check with the company IT department before deploying printers in the warehouse or DC. That's because today's printers are no longer simply tools for expediting shipping. As manufacturers build more intelligence into them, these devices are becoming important nodes in companies' overall IT networks.
"CIOs are becoming more powerful in device management," says Alexander Babic, product manager industrial printers for Intermec. That doesn't mean the CIO will be looking over a DC manager's shoulder and trying to tell him or her what printer to select. What the technology people are interested in is ensuring that smart devices fit in the overall IT infrastructure, he says. Their concern, says Babic, is network security and ensuring that smart printers comply with the rules and regulations that govern the company's IT infrastructure.
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."