Subscribe to our free, weekly email newsletter!


Agricultural shippers face added container chassis expense

CL, CMA-CGM, Cosco, Evergreen, Hanjin, Maersk, NYK and OOCL have announced plans to no longer provide chassis, the letter stated.
By Patrick Burnson, Executive Editor
September 09, 2010

In a letter sent to shippers today, the Agriculture Transportation Coalition (AgTC), said several major ocean carriers will no longer be providing container chassis.

CL, CMA-CGM, Cosco, Evergreen, Hanjin, Maersk, NYK and OOCL have announced plans to no longer provide chassis, the letter stated.

“NYK had announced an effective date of September 1, 2010, but this has postponed this,” said AgTC spokesmen.

According to the AgTC, Maersk has announced October 4, 2010 as the date for divestment of chassis at California’s ports and rail yards:

“Henceforth, the truckers will have the choice to provide their own chassis, use customer-owned chassis, or rent the chassis from Direct ChassisLink, a Maersk affiliate for $11/day. Of course, the truckers will likely charge the cargo owners additional amounts to cover their own extra operational and administrative costs.”

The move should hardly come as a surprise to West Coast shippers, however, as they were warned of this development at last June’s AgTC annual conference in San Francisco.

AgTC spokesmen allowed that the lines “correctly point out” that the U.S is the only market in the world where ocean carriers provide the chassis, and that stricter safety and reporting requirements will drive costs up further.

“While carriers have said that carriers and shippers should work together to jointly reduce costs, this appears to be a fairly significant increase in shipper costs (and administrative burden), with no recognition of the impact by the carrier, and no sharing of the burden,” AgTC said, adding that essentially, this amounts to a unilateral rate increase.

“So the question becomes - if the carriers regularly impose surcharges on the basis that they have additional costs, such as for bunker fuel, for terminal handling, shouldn’t they provide a freight rate reduction now that they are shifting a significant cost from themselves to the shipper?”

So far, said the AgTC, such requests, even from major shippers, have been rejected.

About the Author

image
Patrick Burnson
Executive Editor

Patrick Burnson is executive editor for Logistics Management and Supply Chain Management Review magazines and web sites. Patrick is a widely-published writer and editor who has spent most of his career covering international trade, global logistics, and supply chain management. He lives and works in San Francisco, providing readers with a Pacific Rim perspective on industry trends and forecasts. You can reach him directly at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).


Subscribe to Logistics Management magazine

Subscribe today. It's FREE!
Get timely insider information that you can use to better manage your
entire logistics operation.
Start your FREE subscription today!

Recent Entries

In this webcast we'll explore how successful companies use strategies such as cross-client load consolidation, zone skipping, pooling, etc. to minimize freight cost. You’ll hear how transportation optimization is used to generate cost savings and where the ROI comes from.

Even with expected import cargo volume declines in the coming months, the Port Tracker report by the National Retail Federation (NRF) and maritime consultancy Hackett Associates expects volumes to be up for the first half of 2016.

USPS pointed to ongoing growth in its Shipping and Package Group, whose primary offerings are comprised of Priority Mail, Express Mail, Parcel Select and Parcel Return services, as the key driver for the quarterly revenue gains.

With a 2.3 cent decline to $2.008 per gallon, this week’s price stands as the lowest national average going back to the week of March 16, 2009, when it checked in at $2.017.

A recent Wall Street Journal report stated that third-party logistics and freight transportation services provider XPO Logistics shut down seven freight terminals that were part of the Con-way Inc. less-than-truckload (LTL) network, Con-way Freight. Con-way was acquired by XPO for $3 billion last year.

Article Topics

News · Freight · Truck · Railroad · Container · Transportation · All topics

Comments

Post a comment
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.


© Copyright 2016 Peerless Media LLC, a division of EH Publishing, Inc • 111 Speen Street, Ste 200, Framingham, MA 01701 USA