Private fleets and dedicated operations: A wider window of opportunity?
The desire for reliable, high-quality service has long been the basis of private carriage’s appeal. Pandemic-fueled disruptions and widespread market uncertainty will only up the ante.
Gary Frantz is a contributing editor for DC Velocity and its sister publication CSCMP's Supply Chain Quarterly, and a veteran communications executive with more than 30 years of experience in the transportation and logistics industries. He's served as communications director and strategic media relations counselor for companies including XPO Logistics, Con-way, Menlo Logistics, GT Nexus, Circle International Group, and Consolidated Freightways. Gary is currently principal of GNF Communications LLC, a consultancy providing freelance writing, editorial and media strategy services. He's a proud graduate of the Journalism program at California State University–Chico.
For the trucking industry, the Covid-19 pandemic has brought into stark relief something that businesses have recognized for some time and everyday citizens are now starting to truly appreciate: Trucking is the foundation of not just the economy, but of virtually every product consumers rely upon to maintain their daily lives.
The past two months have presented unprecedented challenges. What were carefully planned and optimized distribution networks have been thrown into disarray. Some markets, such as “essential” grocery, consumer staples, health care, and medical goods, are bursting at the seams with freight. Other segments, such as the more traditional less-than-truckload (LTL) and truckload shipments generated by small-business commercial, retail, industrial, and manufacturing operations, have disappeared as these businesses have gone dark and workers sent home under shelter-in-place mandates.
The good news: Truck drivers are being widely lauded for their courage, perseverance, and professionalism, braving difficult and sometimes dangerous conditions to deliver critically needed goods. Seldom in history has the importance of trucking to America’s financial and physical well-being been demonstrated so clearly, particularly since some 71% of all freight tonnage moves in the back of a truck, according to the American Trucking Associations.
And while the majority of these volumes move on commercial, for-hire LTL, and full-truckload carriers, one outcome of the market’s pandemic-fueled disruption has been rising interest in:
Purpose-designed dedicated operations, where truckload carriers assign a set of assets (trucks and drivers) and operate a “mini” network exclusively on behalf of that specific shipper, and
Private fleet operations, running within a larger non-trucking organization and providing secure, predictable product velocity and flow for some of the nation’s biggest enterprises.
These fleet options are finding a growing window of opportunity as shippers scramble to lock in reliable capacity, operational consistency, and high-quality service—and to secure protection against dramatic supply/demand swings in the market.
LOCKING IN CAPACITY
Today’s environment—with its widespread uncertainty about the immediate future—is not unlike the market that occurred shortly after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, observes Don Digby Jr., president of Denver, Colorado-based refrigerated carrier Navajo Express. “The biggest demand is for secure capacity,” he notes. Shippers want “to know they’ll have the trucks. That [desire] has never been more relevant or prevalent than it is today.”
John Bozec, senior vice president and general manager, van truckload, at Green Bay, Wisconsin-based truckload carrier Schneider, agrees that predictable service at high levels is “a driving force” behind increased interest in dedicated. “The bar … is only getting higher,” he notes. Bozec cites three determining factors, especially for dedicated solutions addressing complex needs: “The ability to have capacity that is locked in and that [shippers] can rely on, at a price point they know, and [confidence in] the ability to get a great delivery experience. [That’s] why they want more dedicated and not less.”
The current environment notwithstanding, increased interest in dedicated services also continues to be driven by e-commerce–related traffic, observes Eric Downing, senior vice president, dedicated for Omaha, Nebraska-based Werner Enterprises. “Demand for dedicated services has increased, especially as e-commerce [volumes] have expanded and customer expectations for next-day and same-day delivery have increased,” he says. “As shippers move to get their products closer to customers, these types of transportation needs usually fit well within the dedicated model.”
Downing noted that while cost is always part of the equation, shippers looking to dedicated typically are pursuing a larger strategy, often around three primary goals:
1. High levels of service quality, normally 99% percent on time or better
2. Longer-term partnerships where the carrier is working closely with the shipper to drive improvements and efficiencies in the overall supply chain
3. Committed capacity that is consistent yet flexible.
“Customers who have volatility in their supply chain need the ability to quickly flex their fleets up and down, and a good dedicated provider can provide that kind of solution,” explains Downing.
Schneider’s Bozec adds that while “dollars are always important,” the decision to adopt a dedicated strategy often involves other value considerations that don’t show up on an Excel spreadsheet. One example, he notes, is the experience created for the customer. “We will do things like have drivers wear co-branded gear, and the equipment might be co-branded,” he notes. “When you make that delivery, countless times per day, that driver is creating a great experience, [and through that] there is brand equity for the customer that gets built up over time.”
He cites as well two key factors in launching a successful dedicated operation: getting the foundation right through open, frank communication, and effective change management. “We talk change management from the outset, from the C-suite to the loading dock,” Bozec says. “If both organizations don’t get that right, we won’t be as successful as the customer wants us to be and we want to be.”
Greg Orr, executive vice president, North America truckload for TFI International, and president of Joplin, Missouri-based truckload carrier CFI, noticed during March and April customer interest in what he terms “pop-up” fleets. “We’re being asked to provide short-term [60 days or less] committed capacity, deploying assets in certain lanes or between certain regions to address a surge in volume and ensure they’re delivering product to the end customer in a timely fashion,” he notes.
He also is seeing shippers looking to expand current dedicated arrangements. “Customers are coming to us saying, ‘You are handling five of these lanes, would you have interest in these other 10, and if so, could we be more flexible on rates with the additional volume?’” Ultimately, Orr believes carriers have to be more open and able to provide creative solutions that help shippers figure out how to better manage the ebbs and flows in their supply chains.
THE CHOICE TO GO PRIVATE
Why does a shipper look to a private fleet or dedicated operation, and what are the risks?
Ron Baksa is director of fleet procurement for Plano, Texas-based PepsiCo. Between its soft drink and snack products, PepsiCo, by one trucking industry ranking, operates the second-largest private fleet in the U.S. with some 62,400 total vehicles: 14,300 tractors and 48,100 trailers.
The very first question Baksa suggests that those considering a private fleet ask themselves: Are you ready for the commitment in capital, people, systems—can you manage it all? “The combination of people, process, and technology is a huge component,” he says. “You need all three to realize the full benefit.”
PepsiCo’s transportation footprint includes long-haul trucking between plants and distribution centers, and road trucks that deliver product from distribution centers to stores. Its trucks also go to market with products delivered to customer warehouses.
As for the advantages of operating a private fleet, Baksa says a key benefit is having “a cushion against [trucking] market conditions, both operational and financial. You are always able to support the business if you have a significant private fleet,” he says.
Another advantage is the ability to match equipment precisely to product needs. “A common carrier will have a generic 53-foot dry van for all business,” he explains. But that’s not always an efficient vehicle choice. “If you have a very lightweight or cube-sensitive product, you can haul quite a bit more by purchasing a large-cube trailer. Or for heavier product, you can spec more lightweight equipment,” he says.
The challenge is finding—and maintaining—the balance between the rate, the payload, and loaded miles, he adds. “If you can increase your payload [per trailer] by 10%, for every 10 loads you get a free load,” Baksa says, adding:
“The cheapest mile is the one you don’t run.”
A QUESTION OF BALANCE
Bart De Muynck, research vice president, transportation technology, at research firm Gartner, also emphasizes finding the right balance between factors that include priorities, needs, product perishability, velocity, management commitment, and the profile of freight within the shipper’s supply chain. He brings a unique perspective, having previously worked for many years in PepsiCo’s transportation group helping implement technology solutions before joining Gartner, where he serves as a leading transportation technology analyst.
“Companies in general who have private fleets [see] transportation as a very important part of execution,” he notes. “If you have your own fleet, you are guaranteed to execute, you don’t have to worry about [tender] rejections.” Quality factors into it as well, he adds. Shippers invest in private fleets for “high-quality, reliable service” and the guarantee of committed capacity at a relatively fixed cost.
Another benefit is attractiveness to drivers. “Private fleets pay better and have better driver retention,” offering stable runs, regular miles, and consistent home time, De Muynck says. He sees private fleets as ideal for scenarios such as intercompany transport, where truckloads move on regular routes between warehouses, factories and DCs, and/or retail locations, or where you have finished goods going from factory to warehouse, then raw materials moving in backhaul lanes to the factory.
Yet private fleets are not without risk, he warns. Shippers essentially are building and running a trucking operation within the larger enterprise. That means capital investment in rolling stock; building a team with specific transportation management skills, systems, and administrative processes; hiring, managing, and paying drivers; tracking hours of service and ensuring regulatory compliance; and maintaining the fleet.
Not every business is willing to make that leap. Which is where dedicated operations often become a viable solution, De Muynck notes. “Dedicated is almost like a private fleet—assets are dedicated to you,” he explains. “You can optimize routes, but the great thing is you don’t own the asset, you don’t have the upfront cap-ex investment or [responsibility for] hiring additional people. It’s [a good model] for having [secure] capacity, especially when the market tightens up.”
At the end of the day, opines Schneider’s Bozec, the decision on what route to take—private fleet, dedicated, common carrier, or a hybrid combination—comes down to one overriding goal: “It’s what I want to do for my business to win in the market.”
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."