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.
The U.S. Postal Service Friday proposed the first rate increases on its "Priority Mail" product lines in nearly three years, actions that, if approved by postal regulators, will result in high-single-digit to double-digit hikes on many of its products starting in January.
Under the proposal, filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission, the agency that oversees USPS' rate actions, the overall price of shipping services will rise, on average, by 9.5 percent. This includes a 3.1-percent increase for USPS' "Parcel Select" product, under which large postal users induct mail deep into the postal system—usually at the closest post offices to destinations—for final delivery, primarily to residences. By law, USPS must serve every address in the United States, and an array of companies, from large bulk mailers to consolidators that aggregate parcels from multiple shippers, to parcel giants FedEx Corp. and UPS Inc., leverage the USPS network to coordinate "last-mile" deliveries.
Rates on "Priority Mail Express," which offers guaranteed next-day or second-day delivery by 3 p.m., will increase by 15.6 percent under the USPS proposal. Retail prices on Priority Mail Express packages tendered at postal counters will rise 14.4 percent. Rates will rise 17.7 percent for Priority Mail Express packages tendered through USPS' "Commercial Base" service, which offers lower prices than retail to customers that use online and other authorized postage-payment methods.
The biggest increase, 48.2 percent, will come in the "Commercial Plus" category, which is tailored to users tendering more than 5,000 Priority Mail Express packages per year. The increase is designed to bring Commercial Plus rates in line with its Commercial Base rates, USPS said. The quasigovernmental agency said its long-term goal is to eliminate the Commercial Plus pricing category during 2017, to reflect the industry standard of publishing one set of commercial rate tables.
Rates on the regular "Priority Mail" service, which offers two- to three-day deliveries, will increase, on average, by 9.8 percent, USPS said. Retail rates will rise 8.6 percent, shipments tendered via Commercial Base will rise 9.4 percent, and rates for the Commercial Plus category will rise 13.3 percent, again to bring it to near parity with Commercial Base rates.
Rates for USPS' "Standard Post" product, where parcels are delivered in between two and 14 days, will rise 10 percent. Customers shipping over short and midrange distances will continue to get Priority Mail service and will be required to use Standard Post only if an item contains hazardous materials or is otherwise not eligible for air transport, USPS said. Once known as "Parcel Post," the product will be rebranded again in January as "Retail Ground," USPS said.
The Postal Regulatory Commission has the power to accept, reject, or modify the USPS proposal.
USPS products are divided into two categories: "Market Dominant," which includes first-class mail, and the "Competitive" category, which includes shipping services. In recent years, shipping services have reported solid shipment and revenue gains, in contrast to perpetual declines in the dominant products, which have been battered by the ongoing conversion to digital mail. However, the gains in shipping services have not offset the declines in the dominant products, because shipping represents a relatively small part of USPS' overall revenue.
The USPS announcement comes one day after UPS announced 2016 rate increases of 4.9 percent https://www.dcvelocity.com/articles/20151015-ups-hikes-2016-tariff-rates-49-percent-on-ground-service-52-percent-on-air-international/, on average, for ground parcel deliveries not moving under contractual arrangements. Atlanta-based UPS also announced a 5.2-percent noncontract rate hike on air and international shipments. Memphis-based FedEx announced a 4.9-percent hike on air, parcel, and international services. The UPS and FedEx increases take effect on Dec. 28 and Jan. 4, respectively.
Jerry Hempstead, a long-time parcel executive and head of an Orlando-based parcel consultancy bearing his name, said USPS offers an excellent value proposition to business-to-consumer (B2C) shippers of lightweight parcels, which are the core of e-commerce deliveries. Hempstead noted that unlike FedEx and UPS, USPS does not impose fuel surcharges or extra fees for certain types of deliveries. USPS also does not impose a different pricing scheme for shippers tendering packages beyond specific dimensions, Hempstead said.
UPS and FedEx have imposed so-called dimensional pricing on ground parcel deliveries of shipments measuring less than 3 cubic feet; these changes have resulted in double-digit rate increases for shippers of lightweight, bulky parcels, because for those items pricing based on dimensional weight is much higher than pricing based on the parcel's actual weight.
FedEx and UPS will benefit from USPS' proposed rate measures because they will elevate the lower end of the pricing market for all three players, Hempstead said. Many large postal users like Seattle-based e-tailer Amazon.com Inc. have service contracts that may mitigate the proposed rate hikes, he added.
USPS' services generally underprice those of FedEx and UPS. However, many B2C shippers continue to use FedEx and UPS because of what are perceived to be more-reliable networks and superior technology. FedEx and UPS have a near duopoly on the business-to-business (B2B) parcel segment, with USPS essentially a nonparticipant.
Editor's note: USPS' "Commercial Plus" pricing for its Priority Mail Express is available to customers tendering 5,000 parcels or more each year. The original story said the threshold was 50,000 parcels per year.
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.
A Canadian startup that provides AI-powered logistics solutions has gained $5.5 million in seed funding to support its concept of creating a digital platform for global trade, according to Toronto-based Starboard.
The round was led by Eclipse, with participation from previous backers Garuda Ventures and Everywhere Ventures. The firm says it will use its new backing to expand its engineering team in Toronto and accelerate its AI-driven product development to simplify supply chain complexities.
According to Starboard, the logistics industry is under immense pressure to adapt to the growing complexity of global trade, which has hit recent hurdles such as the strike at U.S. east and gulf coast ports. That situation calls for innovative solutions to streamline operations and reduce costs for operators.
As a potential solution, Starboard offers its flagship product, which it defines as an AI-based transportation management system (TMS) and rate management system that helps mid-sized freight forwarders operate more efficiently and win more business. More broadly, Starboard says it is building the virtual infrastructure for global trade, allowing freight companies to leverage AI and machine learning to optimize operations such as processing shipments in real time, reconciling invoices, and following up on payments.
"This investment is a pivotal step in our mission to unlock the power of AI for our customers," said Sumeet Trehan, Co-Founder and CEO of Starboard. "Global trade has long been plagued by inefficiencies that drive up costs and reduce competitiveness. Our platform is designed to empower SMB freight forwarders—the backbone of more than $20 trillion in global trade and $1 trillion in logistics spend—with the tools they need to thrive in this complex ecosystem."