FSC Are You Recieving It

still sittin in portland.....frieght is too cheap this early in the week

FWIW....the sheepchaser lives in cheyenne

 

Of the two options I clicked "I get bent over and shafted" but I think there is some middle ground between the two.

Today I got 24 cpm surcharge and that was a REAL surprise! I tell ya it was music to my ears, and it happens maby 3 or 4 times a month. I figure it doesn't make a difference because it does not largely impact my pay over the driver that does NOt get the surcharge on the same load.

I have to play devil's advocate here though, in the form of a question: Why is it actually illegal for the FSC to get cut into by the broker? I suspect it happens all the time, and it can't be any worse than a broker simply chargin more for their services.

 

And if you're an Owner Operator, you surely want that FSC separated from your rate. Don't know how it works for a company driver, when it comes to tax time, but as an owner operator you don't want the FSC shown as an Income when you receive a 1099.


If drivers are not getting paid percentage, how do you know what the rate is on a Load, when getting paid mileage?. Trucking companies won't tell you what the shipper is paying them. Except for Agriculture products. They are paying out a lower figure this year. But, Yes, other than that, shippers are paying out dearly to the brokers and trucking companies.

 

Right. I guess what I am saying is this: Is it really any surprise that FSC is being slowly eliminated?

The broker should not pad his wallet more than the driver regardless or what label they slap on it. I just don't see why FSC exists when hardly anyone expects it anymore.

 

Don't say Owner Operators ! They rely on the Fuel Surcharge! Last Year when the fuel prices were over 4.00 a gallon , the fuel surcharge was up too! Many, Many owner operators are saying,, " I made out better, (profit wise ) when the Fuel Prices were up, because of the Fuel Surcharge."

They're saying, now that the fuel prices are down, so is the fuel surcharge, so their profit margin has gone down.

Fuel Surcharge is geared for the Owner Operator. Not for A Company Driver. Fuel Surcharge should not paid to a Company Driver. It goes to whoever owns the truck., and that means to the trucking company.

 

It is my guess that the reason that FSC is slowly being removed is because the legislation may be presented and passed this time. If so, then the FSC will have to be passed on. However, if it is just a freight rate, then the cut can be as always.

The previous legislation was nixed by the ATA in a request to Bush Administration. It seems their members would be hurt by having to pass the FSC over to the owners and lease operators.

 

A bill introduced May 6 by Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-OR, and co-sponsored by Rep. Thomas Petri, R-WI, and Rep. Brad Ellsworth, D-IN, seeks to mandate 100 percent pass-through of fuel surcharges to whoever actually buys the fuel.

The bill, HR5977, “Truth in Reliable Understanding of Consumer Costs Act,” or the “TRUCC Act,” is identical to a bill introduced in the Senate in late April by Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-ME, and co-sponsored by Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-OH.

“This bill will go a long way toward helping truckers and their shipping customers weather the brutal cost of fuel,” said Todd Spencer, executive vice president of the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association.
Fuel surcharges have been a staple in the industry as a way that trucking companies can recoup the high cost of fuel. And now with skyrocketing fuel prices, more and more is being collected – but not passed on.
There currently is not a uniform fuel surcharge standard for the trucking industry.

Fuel surcharges must be negotiated individually, leaving shippers and truckers vulnerable to opportunistic middlemen.
“It’s all too common for middlemen in the trucking industry to push shippers to pay fuel surcharges, but only pass along a portion of those surcharges to the truckers who are actually hauling the freight and paying the fuel bill,” Spencer said.


To make matters worse, small-business truckers are often denied access to the contracts and rate information negotiated between freight brokers and the shipper or customer they are hauling freight for.

I've been saying this for a long time> "Shippers are paying out dearly to the trucking companies and brokers.


The TRUCC Act also seeks to ensure that brokers and middlemen negotiating a contract to haul freight for a shipper are not using the high price of fuel to exploit that shipper or the small-business trucker who actually hauls the shipper’s freight.

You're Right about that RoadMedic! And it's the Brokers and Trucking Companies that are messing it up (fuelsurcharge) for the Owner Operators. Trucking Companies don't need a fuel surcharge.. They're getting good rates from the shippers. But either way, the trucking company/ broker will dip their finger in the pot somehow... They're making a ruin of all this and it's the owner operators that will be getting the shaft.

 

What do company drivers even have to do with this discussion?

By the way, Thank you for coming back to this discussion in a level headed manner and with facts to support your statements. I, for one, greatly appreciate that.

I'm not the enemy here, I agree with you on MOST of your points, just not with the way that you attempted to make them.

I feel like a fuel surcharge is only needed on a fraction of the loads one might haul. "Spot market" loads that are negotiated on a load by load basis have no need for a fuel surcharge(If it is a one time shipment, it either pays enough or it doesn't), but long term contractual loads that are recurring and regular hauls for ya need to have a surcharge in place to keep you from having to negotiate the freight rate on every single shipment.

Where I agree with you completely; If a fuel surcharge is paid on a load by the shipper, that fuel surcharge SHOULD be passed through to entity who bears the burden of purchasing the fuel for said load. That would be the moral and ethical thing to do. Unfortunately, there is no law on the books yet forcing that to happen.

That Trucc Act legislation that you referenced in a later post has been introduced in one form or another in each of the last four congresses, and has died a miserable death each time. I just don't see it ever having a chance of passage as long as groups with mega-clout, such as the US Chamber of Commerce, spend part of their very large lobbying budget to kill it.

 

meh...political lobbyists. They will pass the legislation and it will manage to make things worse for the OO. Mark my words. You'll see.