The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration's five-year strategic plan calls for expanding its reach in the supply chain to shippers and receivers, and shippers' groups aren't happy about it.
Earlier this summer, FMCSA unveiled a draft strategic plan for 2011-2016, in which the agency introduces the concept of a "commercial motor vehicle transportation life-cycle," which includes not just truck and bus companies but the entities that control or influence those companies.
NASSTRAC, an industry association that represents the interests of freight shippers in all modes of transportation, filed comments on the plan jointly with the Health & Personal Care Logistics Conference, which represents manufacturers, shippers and receivers of pharmaceuticals and health and personal care products.
Both associations have significant concerns over FMCSA's potential regulation, and ultimately an overreach, into the operations of shippers in the proposed plan. NASSTRAC says it strongly opposes plans by FMCSA to seek authority from Congress to regulate shippers, receivers, brokers and freight forwarders.
NASSTRAC's concern is that FMCSA's response is not to accomplish more with the authority it has, but to ask Congress to allow it to regulate millions of additional U.S. businesses.
The shipper's group believes FMCSA's plans to expand its regulatory jurisdiction reflects complaints by truck drivers about time spent waiting to load and unload, as opposed to driving loaded miles. If this is the case, NASSTRAC suggests there are other entities contributing to the problem, including other carriers; federal, state and local officials; and other entities that are less susceptible to pressure by carriers than are shippers, receivers and intermediaries.
The groups note that motor carriers are free to impose detention charges to deter shipper delays in loading and unloading. Alternatively, motor carriers may drop trailers for loading or unloading at the shipper's or receiver's convenience, so drivers are not required to wait. Motor carriers also can publish provisions in their rules tariffs that penalize shipper conduct that does not meet industry norms. Ultimately, NASSTRAC says, motor carriers have the option of declining business from shippers, receivers or intermediaries that do not act responsibly.
"It's remarkable that FMCSA doesn't identify the timely, dependable and cost-effective transportation of goods between businesses and from businesses to consumers as part of its goals," said John Cutler, NASSTRAC's legal counsel. "This is the fundamental reason we have a trucking industry. To the extent that excessive regulation undermines this goal, motor carriers, their customers, consumers and the economy will be served poorly. Costs would far exceed benefits if FMCSA regulation were extended to shippers, receivers and intermediaries."
Earlier this summer, FMCSA unveiled a draft strategic plan for 2011-2016, in which the agency introduces the concept of a "commercial motor vehicle transportation life-cycle," which includes not just truck and bus companies but the entities that control or influence those companies.
NASSTRAC, an industry association that represents the interests of freight shippers in all modes of transportation, filed comments on the plan jointly with the Health & Personal Care Logistics Conference, which represents manufacturers, shippers and receivers of pharmaceuticals and health and personal care products.
Both associations have significant concerns over FMCSA's potential regulation, and ultimately an overreach, into the operations of shippers in the proposed plan. NASSTRAC says it strongly opposes plans by FMCSA to seek authority from Congress to regulate shippers, receivers, brokers and freight forwarders.
NASSTRAC's concern is that FMCSA's response is not to accomplish more with the authority it has, but to ask Congress to allow it to regulate millions of additional U.S. businesses.
The shipper's group believes FMCSA's plans to expand its regulatory jurisdiction reflects complaints by truck drivers about time spent waiting to load and unload, as opposed to driving loaded miles. If this is the case, NASSTRAC suggests there are other entities contributing to the problem, including other carriers; federal, state and local officials; and other entities that are less susceptible to pressure by carriers than are shippers, receivers and intermediaries.
The groups note that motor carriers are free to impose detention charges to deter shipper delays in loading and unloading. Alternatively, motor carriers may drop trailers for loading or unloading at the shipper's or receiver's convenience, so drivers are not required to wait. Motor carriers also can publish provisions in their rules tariffs that penalize shipper conduct that does not meet industry norms. Ultimately, NASSTRAC says, motor carriers have the option of declining business from shippers, receivers or intermediaries that do not act responsibly.
"It's remarkable that FMCSA doesn't identify the timely, dependable and cost-effective transportation of goods between businesses and from businesses to consumers as part of its goals," said John Cutler, NASSTRAC's legal counsel. "This is the fundamental reason we have a trucking industry. To the extent that excessive regulation undermines this goal, motor carriers, their customers, consumers and the economy will be served poorly. Costs would far exceed benefits if FMCSA regulation were extended to shippers, receivers and intermediaries."
media brand
0 Comments
See all comments