What's new

Yellow | Well Guys and Gals we are going to need another 5%

flat top said:
It says the whistleblower was an employee who said "the under weight shipments we're not being changed" , but the heavy ones were. Could it be a disgruntled dock worker who assumed that underweight shipments we're not changed, because he " heard " they weren't changed? Also, when they do a weight correction there is a charge for doing the correction itself. Some cases it may be cheaper for the customer, to leave the shipment at the original higher weight, than incur the correction charge, if it's only a slight difference. A lot more to this story than meets the eyes.
Click to expand...
Depends on the program a company used. The one I'm familiar with reweighs were mandatory. The information was transmitted from the forklift and or dimensional machine automatically. It took 2 reweighs on 2 different machines to make an adjustment in a shipment. If it was found to be different then the bill, it was automatically changed. It also had to be about a 10% change before it was corrected. Unlike some other carriers, there was no charge if it was found to be lower, there was a reweigh charge along with the corresponding revenue change it it was higher. There also were spot checks for class verification.
 
511monkey said:
There is an important point to make here in that time spent correcting a bill in the customers favor is time spent away from catching potentially dangerous situations before they pose a risk to the public. I don’t think that it can be emphasized enough that it is the customers responsibility to declare the correct weight of the shipment.
Click to expand...
Unless a shipment is flagged for a class research, the reweighs are automatically transmitted from the forklift. If there were no value to doing this, all the other carriers that have a similar program would not be doing it.
 
I just heard YRC and the gubment reached a settlement. Being this started in 2008 YRC has agreed to give the gubment 9 2008 tractors, 7 2008 trailers, allow them to utilize 5 dock doors at the Chicago terminal
And all they can eat popcorn from the machine.
 
Unfortunately small companies do not always have a scale to weigh a pallet. Therefore they weigh a part and multiple by total pieces shipped. Or weigh one box of parts and multiple by total boxes. And guess at empty pallet weight.
This method does not take into account packaging and wrap and banding. If they ship 600 lbs of “parts” the can easily have 10% more in dunnage along with “parts”.
I had one customer that I went into daily, and got to know guys very well, they switched software that was supposed to be latest and greatest for manufacturing companies to keep inventory low and never run out of material for orders.
The shipping documents were created on what customer ordered, in pounds. The software did not take into consideration pallet weight or shrink wrap.
Shipping guys called them out, told them trucking companies bill by weight hauled, they were told “ we bill customer by what we sell not what is hauled.
The fancy program was not designed to have
Dunnage figured into documents because that would mess up how material was ordered.
Needless to say not every shipper has accurate method to weigh, but company pretty much weights every thing the same.
Unless you get the shipments mixed up on your lift and weigh a skid of mirrors and not a skid of popcorn.
 
dokman said:
Unfortunately small companies do not always have a scale to weigh a pallet. Therefore they weigh a part and multiple by total pieces shipped. Or weigh one box of parts and multiple by total boxes. And guess at empty pallet weight.
This method does not take into account packaging and wrap and banding. If they ship 600 lbs of “parts” the can easily have 10% more in dunnage along with “parts”.
I had one customer that I went into daily, and got to know guys very well, they switched software that was supposed to be latest and greatest for manufacturing companies to keep inventory low and never run out of material for orders.
The shipping documents were created on what customer ordered, in pounds. The software did not take into consideration pallet weight or shrink wrap.
Shipping guys called them out, told them trucking companies bill by weight hauled, they were told “ we bill customer by what we sell not what is hauled.
The fancy program was not designed to have
Dunnage figured into documents because that would mess up how material was ordered.
Needless to say not every shipper has accurate method to weigh, but company pretty much weights every thing the same.
Unless you get the shipments mixed up on your lift and weigh a skid of mirrors and not a skid of popcorn.
Click to expand...
Just in time method of inventory control is something taught in business school. They don’t teach however that it’s not for every business. It might be ideal for large companies, such as car manufacturers, to control their inventory. For the most part, a vey large number of businesses can’t use this method effectively. There are methods to include the total shipping weight in your example, I suspect that the owner was sold this software and it sounded like a good idea, on paper. Freight companies have been basing their rates on dollars per hundredweight on the total shipment since freight was moved on horsedrawn wagons. I fail to see why the freight companies should have to base their revenue on the weight parts inside the box because of someone’s misguided method of inventory control. I bet that a scale would have been cheaper for them than their “ inventory control “ pie in the sky software that doesn’t take into account the real world realities of freight shipping.
 
almost13ranch said:
Just in time method of inventory control is something taught in business school. They don’t teach however that it’s not for every business. It might be ideal for large companies, such as car manufacturers, to control their inventory. For the most part, a vey large number of businesses can’t use this method effectively. There are methods to include the total shipping weight in your example, I suspect that the owner was sold this software and it sounded like a good idea, on paper. Freight companies have been basing their rates on dollars per hundredweight on the total shipment since freight was moved on horsedrawn wagons. I fail to see why the freight companies should have to base their revenue on the weight parts inside the box because of someone’s misguided method of inventory control. I bet that a scale would have been cheaper for them than their “ inventory control “ pie in the sky software that doesn’t take into account the real world realities of freight shipping.
Click to expand...
I am referring to two complete companies one may only ship a few million dollars a year, and the other with fancy software was a multi million dollar company. And no the soft ware did not have a means to include packaging or pallets, their product was shipped in different containers depending on customer request. The shipping guys asked this several times over, and they could not override freight bill and include dunnage weight, as it would bill customer for product shipped. Have you ever seen a freight bill that breaks down class into two parts , say class 50 for 3 pallets, and class 250 for 300 boxes of light bulbs. This can save companies a lot of money in years time.
 
almost13ranch said:
Just in time method of inventory control is something taught in business school. They don’t teach however that it’s not for every business. It might be ideal for large companies, such as car manufacturers, to control their inventory. For the most part, a vey large number of businesses can’t use this method effectively. There are methods to include the total shipping weight in your example, I suspect that the owner was sold this software and it sounded like a good idea, on paper. Freight companies have been basing their rates on dollars per hundredweight on the total shipment since freight was moved on horsedrawn wagons. I fail to see why the freight companies should have to base their revenue on the weight parts inside the box because of someone’s misguided method of inventory control. I bet that a scale would have been cheaper for them than their “ inventory control “ pie in the sky software that doesn’t take into account the real world realities of freight shipping.
Click to expand...
the real world realities of freight shipping.

I like that, that is a 1930’s statement about 2019 reality.
 
dokman said:
I am referring to two complete companies one may only ship a few million dollars a year, and the other with fancy software was a multi million dollar company. And no the soft ware did not have a means to include packaging or pallets, their product was shipped in different containers depending on customer request. The shipping guys asked this several times over, and they could not override freight bill and include dunnage weight, as it would bill customer for product shipped. Have you ever seen a freight bill that breaks down class into two parts , say class 50 for 3 pallets, and class 250 for 300 boxes of light bulbs. This can save companies a lot of money in years time.
Click to expand...
I actually have seen many, many bill of ladings with different classes and the weight broken out on them. Some customers may have an agreement with the carrier for a class exception rate. If that company is a multi million dollar company, there’s no excuse for their software problem.
 
almost13ranch said:
I actually have seen many, many bill of ladings with different classes and the weight broken out on them. Some customers may have an agreement with the carrier for a class exception rate. If that company is a multi million dollar company, there’s no excuse for their software problem.
Click to expand...
If company A ships a pallet to company B, and company A had incorrect weight( under) but company B is paying freight charge (collect shipment), then why is company B being charged for company A not having correct weight.
This happens all the time. So does this fall under your quote. “ there is no excuse for their software problem “ So YRC can bill this way and it is okay?
 
almost13ranch said:
Actuallly, the 2019 “reality “ is that this shouldn’t be a problem for any shipper.
Click to expand...
I actually saw where a W/R clerk changed a bill and charged customer class 250 for a empty metal tub, and class 55 for the bolts that were inside the tub.
Original bill had tare weight for tub and total weight for bolts, there again something sold by the pound that caused a problem.
 
dokman said:
If company A ships a pallet to company B, and company A had incorrect weight( under) but company B is paying freight charge (collect shipment), then why is company B being charged for company A not having correct weight.
This happens all the time. So does this fall under your quote. “ there is no excuse for their software problem “ So YRC can bill this way and it is okay?
Click to expand...
That is an issue to be resolved between A and B. Regardless of who errs, charges are due for services performed. YRC should not waste labor to resolve that issue.
 
Elwood said:
That is an issue to be resolved between A and B. Regardless of who errs, charges are due for services performed. YRC should not waste labor to resolve that issue.
Click to expand...
Normally agree with you , but not on this one. A good salesman would try and help out on this issue to keep both happy. I addressed this with salesman and his response was ....... well some one has to pay for it.
Guess what we lost the freight.
 
dokman said:
If company A ships a pallet to company B, and company A had incorrect weight( under) but company B is paying freight charge (collect shipment), then why is company B being charged for company A not having correct weight.
This happens all the time. So does this fall under your quote. “ there is no excuse for their software problem “ So YRC can bill this way and it is okay?
Click to expand...
Reweighs, and now also dimensioners,are the trucking companies watchdog for dishonest shippers who cheat, or estimate the shipment weight. Dimensioners help measure for cube and freight class, again to keep shippers from shipping say 14 skids they say stackable, but in reality, take up a whole pup. Prepaid-shipper or 3rd party pays charges. Collect- consignee, or 3rd party pays. It’s that simple. Whatever technology a shipper uses does not necessarily mean the carrier is bound by it.
 
dokman said:
If company A ships a pallet to company B, and company A had incorrect weight( under) but company B is paying freight charge (collect shipment), then why is company B being charged for company A not having correct weight.
This happens all the time. So does this fall under your quote. “ there is no excuse for their software problem “ So YRC can bill this way and it is okay?
Click to expand...
First off, what ever the shipment weighs is what it weighs. If a shipper tenders the shipment for 500# and it really weighs 600#, the weight is what it is. Second, if a shipper A tenders a bill for a prepaid shipment, then shipper A is responsible for the charges. If shipper A sends a shipment collect, the consignee is responsible for the charges. If the shipper puts too low of a weight on the bill and the carrier catches it, the consignee is responsible for the charges. The shipment weighs what it weighs. Do you understand how prepaid and collect shipments work now?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top