What’s the most frustrating part of getting paid after a load?

Many don't agree with transparency even though the brokers see both sides being the middleman. But, thats their source of business. Some sort of trust when working with brokers needs to be established if you're a O/o or a small fleet because its not available or documented online what (%) of shipping companies use brokers. With the larger freight Brokerages growing rapidly in difficult somethings are just obvious and the O/o's must obey the Gate Keepers, get their own direct customers or leave the industry altogether.

 

no!

Following the payment isn't what the problem is, it is all a game to keep the broker's cash flow up, the longer they have to clear their AP, they can capture more interest.

There is a fix; it is really simple.

It starts at the load that is posted, a total disclosure, a legal requirement, from the posting broker of where the load came from, directly or indirectly, and if indirectly, the exact source of that load - all before the bidding takes place. With that, the load has to be paid within 30 days, or there is interest added to the settlement of say 15% of the total billable load daily, and if there is an outstanding claim, the authority is suspended and the owners are financially responsible or the officers of the company.

The FMCSA can do this without much trouble.

The FMCSA also needs to make sure there is means testing and that it is maintained quarterly, not annually.

But taking it one step further, the FMCSA can allow everyone who touches that load (brokers and consignees) should be included in a lawsuit to get paid. This will end 80% of the problems.

 

Wife taking the money

 

If owners want to use the idea or you, go for it. I don't know if they would get behind it, they are more concern with where to piss.

The problem with this industry, it is fractured, people are not willing to step up to lead.

Read some of my posts (not my political posts). I am getting busy now with expanding part of my business, I hop in and out of here recently so it is hit or miss. I read your OP before anyone posted and just got around to it.

 

Broke this one out for my sanity.

Here is where the failure could happen, the problem with volunteering anything, it usually drops to the wayside because of human nature. It has to be done for every broker but to see a proof of concept, it would work.

The problem is that the FMCSA has to do something; too many small operators are losing a lot of money from hidden practices, and many of them do not keep track of it at all.

I would think that the FMCSA mandating part of the solution on the brokers is needed, but then prevention of the owner's failure to maintain the business capital would also have to happen.

As I said, this industry is fractured when it comes to both finances and politics involved with the regulations. Too many do not understand the difference between a regulation and a statute or law, who does the enforcement, and why it is a regulated industry in the first place.

Right now too many are in the crapper, we are seeing failure rates rising again. Too many owners are desperate to make just enough to keep going, so to can make it to better times. If the changes are made to the broker end of the business, then that gives them more than a 50% chance to see them through, as opposed to the <10% that exists now.

One last thing, I know what you are doing, but I am taking the point of changes made at the regulatory level for a reason. One thing that I can not see anywhere is a pro-trucker representative/senator in congress, I know this steps close to the political red line here, but if there is one, where are they? I do not have faith in Duffy to actually listen.

 

I believe that if there was a platform where carriers and O/o's could see verified broker payment behavior, some O/o's would use it regarding the margin transparency (even if just ranges), and maybe connect to shippers directly, those who use it would be concern about their comparable on whether they're obtaining that 70% of the load and not just 30%. Problem is it would be a threat towards the brokers falling off when O/o's and carriers see the lost margins for the physical work they've done.

It's a fickle industry altogether. The Carrier needs to trust that the Brokers isn't gyping them on a fair rate for the load whiles the Shipper wants to believe that the Broker has their best interest at heart and not scheming them. A good broker will stay within reason regarding the rates on both sides while a scheming one with tell a shipper it's costing more then the last times because of the difficult challenge on finding a decent carrier. But then tell the carrier off of a load board once that carrier gave a reasonable bid rate. For example, the Broker might says, ' Your rate is to high you need to bring it down, a few hundred I got multiple others doing 1000 miles for $1500, how can I pay you $1950?'.. however they got $3000 from the Shipper for that same load. On the same end the Shipper might Only want to Pay $2100 for the load and the Carrier bids $1850 so the Broker suggests $1700 and the carrier suggest $1720 and the Broker agrees with the carrier. Some brokers are good, I got one who calls steady every week sometimes every other week for a east coast lane and pays well above market value and the customers fair and when the rate needs to increase they increase it. However, the majority aren't like that.