What's new

FedEx Freight | Other News

Status
Not open for further replies.
Canadian Flyer said:
It's not a perfect world, obviously, but the person who seals the trailer is nonetheless responsible for checking load security. If a deck collapses in the nose of a trailer behind several pieces of freight that made seeing the deck impossible, you can't really be held accountable for that. The idea with an enclosed van trailer of any kind (dry, heated, reefer) is that the door(s) are the path of least resistance and should be safeguarded. Will anything fall against the door, causing a risk to the person who opens it? Might something break loose and possibly break open the door?

It's like a circle check. You are supposed to try your best. A half-loaded smooth wall trailer doesn't leave you options unless you have a rubber footed expanding load bar, for example. Likewise, a trailer sealed by the shipper is impossible to check.

That being said, I deal with a lot of time-sensitive linehaul work, including some special commodities. The only time I've had a pre-sealed trailer was if another driver picked it up from the shipper, with the sole exception of computer equipment shipments. And I cross the border, something that mandates high security seals. Most shippers, in my experience, don't like being responsible for sealing the trailer themselves unless there's a high risk of theft.
Click to expand...

My trailer is pulled from the dock and hooked by the hostler and put on ready line.
The dispatcher hands my bills and asks, "would you mind putting this seal on your trailer?"
"You feel I am responsible for this?" you gotta be kiddin.
 
SwampRatt said:
Oh, I understand, BUT... The idea that the driver is somehow responsible for things beyond their ability to inspect is not reasonable.

I just want people to know, just because an inspection shows an infraction, it does NOT always fall on the driver. Even if the trailer is not sealed, it may still not be practicable to inspect. But don't argue with the inspector on the side of the road. There is a proper time & place to make the case, later.

FedEx road drivers will have very little responsibility, in any, in the area of load securement. A city driver, on the other hand, might begin his/her day unable to see the entire load. But then, at some point as deliveries are made, the driver will then be reasonably expected to inspect, secure, and correct, as required.
Click to expand...

I used to have back strip my entire trailer and rearrange and secure it. I used to have a forklift company on my route where I would pickup and deliver entire machines. On the mornings I would come in to a forklift in the nose, there was no blocking or bracing of any kind. I would have to nail down blocks etc, to secure it. Our dock provided wooden chock blocks, hammers, and 16-penny nails, they just wouldn't use them.

That used to always make me wonder when running line haul just what exactly was behind me when hooking up to those trailers. It's a scary thought an 8k lb forklift just sitting there with only a parking brake to hold it in place.
 
Dick Dastardly said:
I used to have back strip my entire trailer and rearrange and secure it. I used to have a forklift company on my route where I would pickup and deliver entire machines. On the mornings I would come in to a forklift in the nose, there was no blocking or bracing of any kind. I would have to nail down blocks etc, to secure it. Our dock provided wooden chock blocks, hammers, and 16-penny nails, they just wouldn't use them.

That used to always make me wonder when running line haul just what exactly was behind me when hooking up to those trailers. It's a scary thought an 8k lb forklift just sitting there with only a parking brake to hold it in place.
Click to expand...
I feel your pain, I had a trailer going to Mem one time with 4 forklifts....not a wood chock to be found anywhere on the trailer. Did have a few load bars though...like they were gonna stop a forklift from moving!!
 
Oakland Port Ban on Coal Shipments Blocked by US Judge

http://www.ttnews.com/articles/oakl...yRGQ0dGpzZ0RMTFwvTFVxYmFyd3lhdjFDbVZSb1lkeCJ9

"As demand for coal in the U.S. declines, miners depend increasingly on overseas markets. Yet Wyoming and Montana’s Powder River Basin, home to the nation’s largest reserves, is largely cut off from the world market without West Coast ports.

Oakland is among several terminals in California and the Pacific Northwest that environmentalists have pushed to close to miners in an effort to keep U.S. coal off the international market. Reversing the ban could increase exports by as much as 19%, according to the Sierra Club."
 
SwampRatt said:
Oakland Port Ban on Coal Shipments Blocked by US Judge

http://www.ttnews.com/articles/oakl...yRGQ0dGpzZ0RMTFwvTFVxYmFyd3lhdjFDbVZSb1lkeCJ9

"As demand for coal in the U.S. declines, miners depend increasingly on overseas markets. Yet Wyoming and Montana’s Powder River Basin, home to the nation’s largest reserves, is largely cut off from the world market without West Coast ports.

Oakland is among several terminals in California and the Pacific Northwest that environmentalists have pushed to close to miners in an effort to keep U.S. coal off the international market. Reversing the ban could increase exports by as much as 19%, according to the Sierra Club."
Click to expand...
Just stop digging stuff out of the ground, damn it! We need CLEAN energy! Like electric cars!

You know, the ones with batteries in them. The contents of which must be mined from the ground. :poke::duh::hilarious::regretful::wtflol:
 
Shippers using contracts to shift burdens of food hauling regs to carriers

https://www.ccjdigital.com/shippers...a3c973&utm_term=newsletter-2-daily-position-1

"The “mischievous thing” about the language in these contracts, says Seaton, is “it’s not what the law requires.”

“The practice of simply rejecting edible food products and requiring dumping is unconscionable and unsustainable.” Such contract provisions “are typical of the type of contract cram-down that is becoming all too frequent with the full implementation of FSMA.”"
 
SwampRatt said:
Shippers using contracts to shift burdens of food hauling regs to carriers

https://www.ccjdigital.com/shippers-using-contracts-to-shift-burdens-of-food-hauling-regs-to-carriers/?utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_content=05-21-2018&utm_campaign=Commercial Carrier Journal&ust_id=124f9551466b2c5785e539d1cda3c973&utm_term=newsletter-2-daily-position-1

"The “mischievous thing” about the language in these contracts, says Seaton, is “it’s not what the law requires.”

“The practice of simply rejecting edible food products and requiring dumping is unconscionable and unsustainable.” Such contract provisions “are typical of the type of contract cram-down that is becoming all too frequent with the full implementation of FSMA.”"
Click to expand...
Should read,Shippers once again using extortion, to screw over carriers....
 
SwampRatt said:
Shippers using contracts to shift burdens of food hauling regs to carriers

https://www.ccjdigital.com/shippers-using-contracts-to-shift-burdens-of-food-hauling-regs-to-carriers/?utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_content=05-21-2018&utm_campaign=Commercial Carrier Journal&ust_id=124f9551466b2c5785e539d1cda3c973&utm_term=newsletter-2-daily-position-1

"The “mischievous thing” about the language in these contracts, says Seaton, is “it’s not what the law requires.”

“The practice of simply rejecting edible food products and requiring dumping is unconscionable and unsustainable.” Such contract provisions “are typical of the type of contract cram-down that is becoming all too frequent with the full implementation of FSMA.”"
Click to expand...
This kind of extortionate bull is yet another reason why the industry is suffering. This is why I refuse to work in the transportation of perishable food items. Because ultimately the buck is passed to the driver.

I've heard horror stories of guys who bought all brand new equipment to run California with, only for the receivers to reject a load and bankrupt them.
 
Canadian Flyer said:
This kind of extortionate bull is yet another reason why the industry is suffering. This is why I refuse to work in the transportation of perishable food items. Because ultimately the buck is passed to the driver.

I've heard horror stories of guys who bought all brand new equipment to run California with, only for the receivers to reject a load and bankrupt them.
Click to expand...
Sounds like INSANE risk vs reward. Even with insurance, the cost in time and disposal would be challenging. Never pulled reefers, so...:idunno:
 
250-truck Daseke fleet begins salary pay program for drivers
CCJ Staff

| May 22, 2018

https://www.ccjdigital.com/250-truc...m_term=newsletter-2-daily-position-top-story#

"The Washington State-based Smokey Point Distributing, a Daseke Inc. company, says that starting June 1 it will pay qualified solo over-the-road drivers with flatbed hauling experience an annual salary of $65,000 and each qualified and experienced member of a driving team an annual salary of $75,000.

In addition to the annual salary, drivers will still have the opportunity to earn compensation and annual bonuses for certain accessorial, mileage, safety and driver referrals."
 
Experts share tips to help ace the roadside inspection

http://www.fleetowner.com/roadside-...m=email&elq2=6e8ec405f3ab42feb8312423fddc5629

"...at this point, commercial drivers should be using a certified ELD or an AOBRD, if they had one in use before the ELD mandate deadline of Dec. 18, 2017. The older AOBRDs can be used through Dec. 17, 2019. The trouble is, there are big differences between ELDs and AOBRDs that could cause a driver headaches during an inspection if misidentified."
 
SwampRatt said:
Sounds like INSANE risk vs reward. Even with insurance, the cost in time and disposal would be challenging. Never pulled reefers, so...:idunno:
Click to expand...
I've pulled reefers, but never hauling food. Some carriers, particularly in LTL and expedite, use reefers as temperature control for things like medical equipment, pharmaceuticals and even paint.

Hauling food pays really well from what I hear, but it's not worth it unless you work for a foodservice carrier like GFS or Sysco. Owner/operators are expected to pay for reefer fuel too, and unlike road fuel it's not surcharged. With the high dollar stuff like pharmaceuticals, it's worth it. With food? One bad load can cost a fortune, and a load can basically be refused for any reason. In medical, unless its a reefer full of organs it's pretty safe.
 
I-90 enforcement blitz set for three states this weekend

https://www.overdriveonline.com/i-90-enforcement-blitz-set-for-three-states-this-weekend/

"State troopers in Wyoming, South Dakota and Minnesota will patrol the interstate from border to border over a 23-hour period from 5 a.m. Central on Friday, May 25, through 4 a.m. Central on Saturday, May 26.


According to the South Dakota Highway Patrol, troopers in all three states will be focusing on speed, hazardous moving violations, seatbelt use and impaired driving."
 
Truckers getting fined for ignoring I-77 detour in West Virginia

https://www.overdriveonline.com/truckers-getting-fined-for-ignoring-i-77-detour-in-west-virginia/

"The Register-Herald in Beckley, W.V., is reporting truckers and other large vehicles are being asked to take exit 1 off of I-77 and follow detour signs east along Route 460 before getting back on I-77 at exit 9. The report notes that state troopers have written more than 100 tickets to truckers, with no warnings, in just over a week since the project began."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top