Legislation

Adding An Additional Axle: Costly Yet Safer?

Safety advocates (including the Truck Safety Coalition) are fighting legislation that would allow more longer-combination vehicles on the road (a move the ATA says would be better for the environment and the trucking industry).  However, the Coalition for Transportation Productivity is pushing a proposal that would add an axle to big rigs.  The group says that it would allow higher load limits while increasing safety since the weight of the load would be evenly distributed.   Adding an axle would give semis 22 wheels, instead of the conventional 18.

I’m all for safety and I firmly believe it should be the number one priority for trucking companies, but what would be the financial implications if such a proposal passed?  Are trucking companies solely responsible for the cost of upgrading trucks?  And just how much would it cost?

Yet Another Victory…

The Los Angeles Port (via the NY Times) is the nation’s busiest port.

At least for the ATA. On Monday, a U.S. District Court Judge ruled to temporarily stop the Los Angeles and Long Beach Ports from imposing several stipulations in their Clean Truck Program, including a handful of provisions the ATA says is nothing more than an attempt to overturn the Motor Carrier Act of 1980 (which deregulated trucking in the U.S.). While clean truck fees and the ban on dirty diesel trucks remain, the ruling threw out requirements to mandate truck driving companies operating in the ports to give hiring preference to local drivers and administrative fees to cover port authority oversight costs paid by trucking companies. Furthermore, it also banned truck parking restrictions in L.A. and Long Beach that would force big rigs from residential streets around the ports.

Want to read more about the ruling? Click here.

ATA Wins Lawsuit in U.S. Court of Appeals

Remember the lawsuit the American Trucking Association filed to challenge requirements within the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach Concession Plans that would lead to a ban of independent owner operators (click here for a refresher)?  The ban is part of the Ports’ Clean Trucks Program, designed to reduce pollution and improve the environmental conditions of the ports.  Well, on March 20 the court (comprised of a three-judge panel) unanimously ruled in favor the ATA stating, “In short, motor carriers should not be required to adhere to the various unconstitutional provisions in the Port’s (concession) agreements, and are likely to suffer irrevocably if forced to do that or give up their businesses.”  The court further stated, “We see little safety-related merit in those thread-paper arguments, which denigrate small businesses and insist that individuals should work for large employers or not at all.”
The ATA said it will work with the Court to develop an injunction that implements the decision while protecting the interests of the trucking industry.

The Mexican Trucking Feud: Mexico Retaliates with Tariffs

In a recent spending bill signed by the President, Congress suspended a pilot program begun by the Bush administration that allowed long-haul Mexican trucks to deliver goods throughout the U.S. in compliance with the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). In response to the move, which the Mexican Economy Minister called “…protectionist and clearly in violation of (NAFTA),” Mexico placed tariffs (or taxes on exported goods) on 90 American manufactured and agricultural exports – nearly $2.4 billion worth of goods.

The dispute with the major trading partner is the first for the Obama administration, which has said it would work to create a new cross-border trucking program. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has already been in talks with other officials from the Office of the U.S. Trade and State Department to craft a new program to resolve the conflict, according to the Wall Street Journal. Mexican officials have indicated that they would rescind the tariffs if a new, satisfactory plan is developed.

While the American Trucking Associations and U.S. Chamber of Commerce both supported the program and opposed its withdrawal, some feel allowing Mexican trucks to operate in the U.S. is dangerous and could potentially stifle wages for American truck drivers. Others-including the Teamsters-believe Mexico needs to make sure their drivers and trucks are safe enough to operate on American roads before the U.S. opens the border again.

The Employee Free Choice Act: Not Really Free?

The Employee Free Choice Act is currently being pushed by unions to make it easier for them to organize companies within the U.S.  Also known as “card check” legislation, the bill eliminates the ability for business to require a secret-ballot election, allowing workers to form a union if a majority of them sign authorization cards.  It was introduced into both the House and the Senate today.

While labor believes the current system is unfair because it gives management the power of calling for the secret ballot, others are against the bill, including the American Trucking Associations and other prominent business leaders.   Those opposed to the bill contend that it would ultimately give unions the ability to intimidate and pressure workers during sign-up, while a secret-ballot process makes it difficult for any authoritative entity to intervene with a worker’s choice.

In further support of opposition to the card check, a recent economic study revealed that the card check will eliminate a staggering 600,000 jobs in the U.S. by the year 2010 – including numerous trucking jobs.  Additionally, the study (conducted by Dr. Anne Layne-Farrar) concluded that for every 3% increase in unionization, a 1% increase in unemployment will result.