Cherry Pickin

[Teflon]

The following quotes taken from Panther's most recent issue of its news magazine, "Panther Paws". These are the words of Mr. French, the director of operations.


Mr. French: It’s 10:36 on Wednesday, October 18, 2006. Driver availability is at 63.7% and we have already turned down 78 customer loads due to 36.3% of our fleet being out of service and 110 drivers refusing these loads because they’re hoping to get a 3,000
mile load later in the day. If today is like yesterday (and the day before, and the day before that,) then these drivers will be the same ones calling tomorrow to tell us that we are not utilizing them and that Panther is keeping them from earning revenue.

My comments: I guess it would be a perfect world in expediting if driver availability was 100%. Even 90 or 80% would be great. However, in the real world people have lives and as any driver will tell you there is a long list of reasons to be out of service such as vacation, family problems, sickness, maintenance, needed rest, and many more.
As for the 110 drivers refusing loads....I thought this was a non-forced dispatch business. There may be a new young single or team driver who has high overhead and has to keep stats up in order to cover his/her business. Then there may be the older couple that has been in the business for years, faithfully pulling their weight for the company leased on to, and having a paid off truck, may want to just pick up a trip here and there to cover basic expenses and spend the rest of their time enjoying life.


Mr. French: We’ve spoken to you on the phone and in person, we’ve read
the e-mails you’ve sent to us, and we’ve read your postings
on Expeditors Online. We know you believe that we have too
many drivers and not enough freight to support all of you. I
say that in reality the opposite is true.
We don’t have too many trucks; we have too many drivers
who try to “cherry pick†their loads. We can spot a “Cherry
Picker†a mile away – they have acceptance and availability
numbers around 50% or less. Trucks that do this force us to
increase the number of trucks in the fleet to ensure that we
can cover the loads our customers offer to us.
Cherry pickers also don’t stay around for very long. The
reason they don’t stay with Panther is they’re not profitable.
The reason they’re not profitable is not that Panther doesn’t
have enough loads to go around. The reason they’re not
profitable is that cherry picking is a lousy strategy. I’ve seen
a lot of people try it, it just doesn't work.

My comments: If Panther wants all trips covered, then maybe they should buy their own fleet. Alternatively, maybe they should take less profit on the bad loads and pass more of the money to the O/O. As a result, the trip is covered, the customer is happy, and the O/O can stay in business. If Panther is not willing to sacrifice for a bad load then why should the O/O. Panther recently put together a “public offering†and in their “prospectus†said they had a owner operator turnover of between 60 and 70% per year. These must be the “cherry pickers†Mr. French talks about. My personal experience tells me that accepting a load based on good business principle is the best way to make money and stay in business.

Mr. French: Last week we cancelled the contracts of over 30 trucks that were the all-time record holders for poor on-time performance
and low availability and acceptance. If we canceled our
contracts with all trucks that have performance numbers below
50%, there would be more and better loads for the 90% of you
who are out there to get the job done and make money. : I believe it’s time to take care of the drivers who take care of Panther.

My comments: This sounds like a threat to me. God forbid if I get sick and have to park my truck for an extended period. If I were an O/O looking for a company to lease with and read this stuff I would definitely go with another carrier. I guess Panther is looking for the people who will sacrifice profitability for company loyalty.

Mr. French: Every load we turn down is one more opportunity for a
competitor to gain an edge on us. Not every load we are
offered will be a “good†load. Like I said earlier, it is not
2005. There is excess capacity in the expedite transportation
marketplace right now, and customers have a lot of choices.
But as I also said earlier, there is plenty of opportunity to
make money in 2006. When customers choose us, they choose
us because of you, our drivers.

My comments: Another contradiction. If there is excess capacity out there then the customer is shopping for the lowest rate, not the company or the drivers. That is why there are bad loads offered. When it comes to general surface freight the customer does not care if the truck carrying the freight is a beat up old $15000 FL 70 or a $140000 class 8 truck. They just want it delivered cheap. The guy with the cheap truck can take the run and make money, the “cherry pickin†man and wife team that has to live on the road 24.7 in order to keep their home on wheels paid for, cannot.

Mr. French says: “You (drivers) are the ones who provide the outstanding service that our customers have come to depend onâ€.

My Comments: A very true statement. It is the carrier’s job to get the customer and the driver’s job to keep them. However, in the real world, drivers are unavoidable for the carrier. If they could replace us with robots, they would.


Closing comments: It seems to me that there is a disconnect between a carriers perceived performance and the realities of the expediting business. Everyone wants a perfect balance sheet and the perfect load. It just is not going to happen. I understand that company operations managers are under the gun to produce the best numbers possible, but in the expedite business there are so many things beyond the control of management, and it drives them crazy. They do not understand the overall psyche of the typical owner operator/driver. This business attracts people from many backgrounds. This is not a business that attracts 20 somethings right out of college looking for a new career track. Most of the people I meet in the business are very independent minded people who are attracted to the business by the freedom of choice it offers. It takes every ounce of business acumen to survive in expediting. If a carrier resorts to coercion of its drivers to accomplish its goal then its days are numbered in this business. There is too much invested in time, effort, money on the part of the O/O to have much patience with a company philosophy like that. If a company is having a hard time covering load offers then it should change its business model and assume more of the risk of doing business. If a person puts forth the time, effort, money to lease on with a carrier then he/she should have the freedom to do with his investment what he/she pleases. If that means staying home six months out of the year, so be it. When the truck is in service, it is just one more truck there to do the job. What Mr. French is saying is that he will cull the part timers from the 100 per centers. With the current turnover rate in drivers, that should not be hard to do. I completely understand Mr. French’s problem, it is as old as expediting itself.

 

[bryan]

Hi

I have always wondered:do they count it as a load not covered if they don't have a truck within 100 miles.Example GM needs a load picked up in Billy Bob NE to be delivered to Pontiac MI.There are no trucks in NE.

What happens when they have a truck delivering in Billy Bob NE but he has to book sleep?Does this count against the carrier?

Im still dumb founded by customers calling expedite companies for courier loads.Especially logistic companies,its not like ours is the only phone # they have.I don't feel that they are charging enough for these courier loads or atleast they ain't paying me enough.

 

[Teflon]

You pose a very good question. I don't know the answer. Maybe someone else will weigh in on this.

 

[Turtle]

In Mr. French's defense, there are a lot of lazy drivers out there who won't move their truck or van for less than 500 loaded miles. These drivers don't want to work, nor are they professional drivers. Good riddance.

On the other hand, they make little or no effort to entice drivers to take bad loads in order to get the loads covered. There are short runs where you have an hour or two between load acceptance and being loaded, then an hour or two to the consignee, then getting unloaded, then an hour or two to get to a place to wait for the next load, and all of a sudden most of your day is shot on a low paying run, and any extra pittance of an incentive hardly makes up for the required time involved, much less finding yourself #9 on the board after you deliver. So you've wasted your day on the only load you're gonna get, on a load that barely covered fuel and a meal.

Cash is king. Especially since favors are never returned.

It's almost as if they want to get these loads covered, and the only way they are going about it is to stomp their feet and whine, "Take it, take it, take it!"

I cannot stress this point enough:
Low driver availability and load acceptance rates are a symptom, not a cause.

Detention Pay is an insulting joke. Industry standard is $50 per half hour (after one hour for vans). On an expedited pickup, especially, there should be no reason for a detention situation, or at least they should be extraordinarily rare. Even rarer still if the pickup times and locations were actually confirmed with the shipper by Customer Service or dispatch. And because detention pay is essentially pocket change, there's no incentive to confirm the load. The perceived meaning is the reality, Panther doesn't mind wasting the time of their drivers.

If I had less of my time wasted, and actually got paid fairly for when it was wasted, I'd be much more inclined to take a bad load, because it would all even out. Most drivers fully understand that even bad loads need to be taken (1) because the customer has a need and (2) that same customer will also have good loads that it needs to have delivered, and if we can't meet their needs they will find someone else who will. But as it is, my time is wasted both on bad loads and underpaid detention. Too mane games are being played. Additional monies built into the load are not being offered up front as a part of the load. The result is, wasted time by all concerned.

Incidentally, there's nothing worse than doing dispatch a favor by taking a money-losing run, like a mini, with the enticement of a First Out, only to have the First Out load offer be another money-losing mini, then dropping to the bottom of the board for turning down the load.

If there are drivers who won't go to Canada, but will take the load to a swap in Detroit, the first leg driver had better have all of the Canadian paperwork done, faxed and cleared through the broker, instead of wasting 2-3 hours of the driver who will be taking the load the remaining miles into Canada to have them do it at the swap point. Just more wasted unpaid time.

"We know you believe that we have too many drivers and not enough freight to support all of you. I say that in reality the opposite is true."

"There is excess capacity in the expedite transportation marketplace right now, and customers have a lot of choices."

Soooo, the opposite of too many drivers is too many drivers? Got it. Thanks for clearing that right up. I'll say it again:

Low driver availability and load acceptance rates are a symptom, not a cause.

It's definitely a problem, though, and one that should be addressed. Right quick.

 

[cheri1122]

Also, high turnover rates are a symptom, not the problem, and recruiting replacements merely perpetuates the underlying causes.

 

[davebeckym]

I can see several solutions here, but they won't happen.

The first solution would be to raise rates. The more loads that are money makers the higher the acceptance rate. I know other companies are doing it too, but .77 per mile for a van that does a lot of sitting is way too low. Especially if the van belongs to a fleet owner. A driver getting 60% would make .45 per mile.

2. Pay for all miles including deadhead. Drivers would be glad to deadhead 150 miles for a 100 mile load. Shippers that are located out of the freight lanes would be forced to pay their fair share instead of the drivers taking one for the company.

3. Pay for deadhead out of areas that have no loads. If a van goes to Denver, charge the shipper deadhead back to Kansas City.

Like I said, it's not going to happen, but we can dream!

 

[Tennesseahawk]

I GOT IT! Let's start a UNION!

DOH! Nevermind...

"If I claim to be a wise man, it surely means that I don't know." - Kansas

 

[Turtle]

Union. Too funny. lol


.77 a mile is low, but I wouldn't mind that for longer loads, since it's more often than not a pretty easy gig. But on shorter loads, the rates need to come up, and not just after you turn it down twice or beg for it.

As an example, and I hate to do this cause they're long gone and irrelevant, but dispatcher know a load is a crappy one before they even offer it. Con-Way dispatchers knew, too, and they'd bump up the deadhead rate (usually 2 or 3 times the normal rate for all DH miles) and the loaded miles rate right up front with the initial load offer. So, on a load they know they're gonna have problems booking, a load offer for 80 DH miles that would normally pay squat, might pay .25 for all of them, and instead of .77 loaded, it might be .90 or $1.00.

Even at that rate it might still be a crappy load, especially for the Cherry Pickers, but at least they're making a genuine effort, right up front with no games, and I'd be much more inclined to take a load like that. I mean, the load's gotta be covered, the customer has a need, it's what I do, and so long as it doesn't take me to a place where there's no hope of getting another load out within a reasonable time, I might as well. I'm not the only one who thinks that way, either.

So you know where I'm coming from, my On-Time is 100% (always), my Acceptance is currently 85% (but will jump back up soon as I drop this one off), my Availability is 92% (had to take off a few days to get the Espar heater put in) and my Safety is 100% (in spite of the fact that I nearly went postal on Safety the other night lol).

 

[Olko]

It sounds like not much has changed in the past 5 years as this goes. There is a lot more to determining if a load is profitable or makes a wise business decision, than just the pay per mile. We always ran as a team, and tried to take any load we could justify the figures on. That did not mean taking a $200 run which would tie us up for a whole day. Would we ever take those runs, sure we would if the circumstances were right, for us, at that paticular time.

The companies have a duty to ensure their fanancial wellbeing, just as the driver O/O has to their business, somtimes these two responsibilities clash. In that "Perfect World" we all wished we lived every load would leave all parties totally satisfied.

Is there a "Perfect Solution" Nope, and there never will be. This debate has been going on for years and will continue for years to come.

Kevin

 

[Bob and Hooligan]

This is an interesting topic.

My position is simple: I do not take loads that are unprofitable.
The company does not loose money on ANY runs, and neither do I.

A few years ago, I suggested a solution to the company's problem with covering minis. You simply keep your 1st out position until you accept a run. Now, if the company offers a load of more than 300 miles, and you turn it down, you would loose your position. The company would not have to do any fancy computer work. Just a note to dispatch explaining when a refusal could be charged.

I also have a problem with acceptance being a factor in truck selection. On-time, and safety should be weighed also.

I am on the new Driver's Council, and look forward to bringing these items up at the meeting.

Road Hooligan

 

[Moot]

At the end of the day when I check my "box score" the only numbers of significance to me are ON TIME% and Safety%. For me both are 100% TOOT,TOOT! I provide safe dependable service. Isn't that what it is all about?

As for the Big Stick they call refusal%:

11:00 p.m. Thursday night while at home I except a load that has 202 miles D.H. to the transfer point in Northern Minnesota. (meet air charter jet) Then goes 25 miles loaded to the consignee. The dispatcher and I were able to work out a mutual pay agreement.

I delivered at 05:30 am and bounced 250 miles home. Took a shower and crawled into bed. 3 hours later dispatch calls with a 887 mile load picking up 10 miles from my house. Hard to refuse but I needed more sleep. I explained that to the nice women and also appoligized for forgetting to put myself O.O.S. She understood and said I would not be charged with the dreaded refusal. I said thank you and that I would put myself O.O.S. I wanted to decide on whether to go O.O.S. for the weekend or just a few more hours so I could sleep.

Minutes later my phone rings again. Same load offer, different dispatcher. I explained that the first dispatcher and I worked things out. He thought that meant that I had excepted the load. I said no, I didn't except the load. He got snotty and hung up.

This guy never asked if I would be interested in transferring somewhere. I went on-line and sure enough he hit me with the big stick. REFUSED LOAD OFFER. Ouch!

 

[are12]

Turtle, I must disagree with you on this statement:

"In Mr. French's defense, there are a lot of lazy drivers out there who won't move their truck or van for less than 500 loaded miles. These drivers don't want to work, nor are they professional drivers. Good riddance."

Why should a team take a load under 500 miles and how can you say they do not want to work or they are not professional drivers?? To a "team" most of these loads are a waste of time. And yes, we are one of those teams that rarely take loads under 500 miles. Why should we? Let's say we take a load for 300 miles that delivers the next day. We just wasted a whole day to make what?? Then, the next run that comes out of that same area, is for over a 1000 miles and it is given to a single driver - that 9 out of 10 times - the single driver has to swap it out. Where is the logic to this?? Why not learn to distinguish between single and team loads when you have both sitting in the same area.
Believe me, we are not lazy and we are professional but we do not like our time wasted on crabby loads!
I do not worry about my acceptance percentage - to me that is a joke. I worry about my on time and safety(which are both 100%) and I think Panther should be more concerned with that. If you have a driver with an acceptance rate of 98% but an on time of less than 100% - what makes him more willing to work or more professional than the driver that has 70% acceptance and 100% on time??
I also agree that what Mr. French is saying sounds like a threat to those that run at 70% or below in their acceptance rate.
I realized in February that the acceptance rate was a joke when we were involved in an accident - that was not our fault - but because we were off for a month while the truck was repaired, our acceptance rate dropped to 0. Do you have any idea how hard it is to get the acceptance rate back up from 0?? Let me tell you it was not easy.
And as for the "Availability" that is also a joke. We have been out here for 7 weeks - no out of service at all - and our availability as of yesterday was 91%. What does it take to get 100%?? I am sorry but I WILL NOT live my whole life in this truck!! I have a home and I do like to go there once in a while! I also like to see my family - once in a while! We are not like some drivers and want to be home every week-end and when we are out here we stay out for 6 weeks and by then, I feel we NEED to take a break. God Bless the drivers that stay out here for months at a time, I don't know how they do it!
I love my job but it is not my life!

As far as detention - ask the new comers what they are getting. They are getting $20.00 every quarter hour past the 2 hour mark. (I was even shown the 2006 handbook because I did not believe them) Where is that fair to the driver's that have been here? When is Panther going to take care of the ones that stick with them even when things are slow?

I am sorry if I am coming across rude but I do not like being put in a class of driver's that don't want to work or are unprofessional. I am out here to make a living, just like everyone else, and I know what it takes to keep my head above water.

 

[davekc]

All of these concerns I believe are supply and demand issues that effect every company. Right now, the supply is higher than the demand, which is evident at truck stops and any load board that one looks at. I think Chris French is expressing his frustrations just like owners and drivers do. It is a delicate balance between trying to cover customers needs, and drivers keeping their trucks as profitable as possible.
No easy task on either side.








Davekc
owner
22 years
PantherII
EO moderator

 

[joebob1_30132]

yeah folks..as one team person said of these "you have to take the good with bad Load" her response to the dispatch was NO I dont!! thats be cause Im a owner operator darlin I dont have to take anything I dont want ..go hire a comapany driver .. I think all they have to do is basically come in turn on the lights answer the phone and connect A with B and when it delivers they get paid.... 1st.. and then we get our cut right!! pretty simple .. right ..they pay the light billl the phone bill and the rent thats it!!... and we incurre all the risk the cost,, the time away from home .. they clock out and go home and do it all over again.. just by answering the phone they make money... Istopped carring about my acceptance weeks ago.. when i did "team play" it got me 17 offers +or- in 5 days for under 300 miles with lots of wait time for pick up/delivery. lots of deadhead,, and little money.. Business man first right Dave!!! as a fleet owner you have their ear.. advocate for us. explain the philosophy you have stated many times here in this forum.. mabe that will help all of our cause when they get a little frustrated as to why they cant get us to load..
Personally I think its a small price they pay to have us bear all the cost .. heck they just have to answer the phone..

 

[Teflon]

Mr. French says Cherry Picking does not work and
cherry pickers are not successfull in the busines...I beg to differ.
Take a look at the following numbers I took from the driver
stat printout of 3 different drivers at Panther. (note: these are all elite service trucks)The first number is the In Service%, the second number is the Acceptance%, and the third is revenue to truck.


Driver 1: 100 40 17176.00
Driver 2: 77 80 15442.54
Driver 3: 100 100 14401.35

I know this is a small sampling, but it shows that the the cherry picker made the most money.

Teflon

 

[LDB]

If the dollars for driver 2 are recalculated up to 100% acceptance like the other two then the payout would be $20,054. I think one problem is lack of a concrete definition for cherry picking. I'd say 40% acceptance is cherry picking which could possibly also be called excessive refusing. Having an acceptance ratio of 100% is accepting jobs that are money losers and should be passed over from an economic standpoint. An acceptance ratio in the 67-80% range is usually going to identify the highest money earners because they aren't turning down sensible jobs and aren't taking jobs that need something added to them to make sense.

Imposing a 500 mile minimum is probably cherry picking for a team. Unlike a solo whose 14 hour clock starts and puts him down later a team can keep going and going and going to steal a phrase. When the team unloads after a 198 mile run they can keep going on the next one. The solo may not be able to.

Leo Bricker, 73's K5LDB, OOIDA Life Member 677319
Owner, Panther trucks 5508, 5509, 5641
Highway Watch Participant, Truckerbuddy
EO Forum Moderator
----------
Support the entire Constitution, not just the parts you like.

 

[terryandrene]

A 40% load acceptance rate is indicative of a 60% unacceptable offer rate. High unacceptable offer rates are not necessarily indicative of Cherry pickin'.

We have a rather low acceptance rate at this time of year and have turned down several well paying runs, three in excess of $800; we've also refused several non-profit load offers. When our carrier looks at the avail/refusal statistics alone, we would appear to be Cherry Pickers, but nothing could be further from the truth.

When we are not available for a run offer, we always go out of service. We rarely go out of service when we are enroute a personal destination, because we always hope to get an offer that fits our personal schedule. On a recent outing we had spent a weekend in Boston, While enroute Boston to Willmington, NC for a scheduled Coast Guard reunion, we took a load from Boston to Madison Square Garden. We were on duty for that job from 0500 until mid-afternoon. while deadheading through MD we were offered a load around midnight that was going north, opposite our destination. Even though I told the dispatcher that we were tired and not interested, we were awarded a refusal; c'est la vie. That is but one of many similar situations when we were enroute home for Doctor appointments or other binding commitments. Were we Cherry Pickin'? Absolutely not.

Our carrier prefers their O/O's to go out of service if the driver is not willing to consider a load going in any direction. Our business policy is to stay available for the maximum time and consider all offers on their merit.

 

[Teflon]

"If the dollars for driver 2 are recalculated up to 100% acceptance like the other two then the payout would be $20,054. I think one problem is lack of a concrete definition for cherry picking. I'd say 40% acceptance is cherry picking which could possibly also be called excessive refusing".


Good point Mr. Bricker…but you misread my post.

Driver 1: 100 40 17176.00
Driver 2: 77 80 15442.54
Driver 3: 100 100 14401.35

The second figure is the acceptance percentage , driver number one has the lowest acceptance, and driver number 3 has the highest but driver number one made much more money. If 40% acceptance defines a “cherry picker†then in my example the “picker†makes more money.

The “in service†percentages have nothing to do with what I was trying to say. “Cherry picking†(Mr. French’s term, not mine) is determined by “acceptance†percentages, not “in service†percentages. It is very possible for me to be in service only 10% of the time and have a 100% acceptance, and vise versa.

If I take the 198-mile load, I can estimate 1 hr. deadheading, .5 hrs. loading, 3.5 hrs. driving, and .5 hrs. unloading, for a total of 5.5 hrs. to get the job done. That is if everything goes according to plan, which it usually doesn't. And during that 5.5 hrs. I have given up the chance at several good long runs. As you know, teams who are not man and wife may have to split the pay. (Most teams that do not own the truck get only 40% of that) Then after the load, I have to drive to find a parking place and wait for my next load. Then I have to hope I get a decent load. Then I have to deadhead again. It is the dead time created by the short loads that end up killing a team’s income. On the longer runs, I make much more money for the time spent. Picking my loads, I can run 12-15 loads a month and have more time off. If I accept the shorter loads, I may make as much money, but I have to put in more days and have considerably more "dead time".

 

[Teflon]

All of these concerns I believe are supply and demand issues that effect every company. Right now, the supply is higher than the demand, which is evident at truck stops and any load board that one looks at. I think Chris French is expressing his frustrations just like owners and drivers do. It is a delicate balance between trying to cover customers needs, and drivers keeping their trucks as profitable as possible.
No easy task on either side.

Davekcnd
owner
22 years
PantherII
EO moderator

I agree totally, there is a supply and demand issue. However, Mr. French’s article does nothing to help solve the problem. It is his one sided stance and general tone that I take issue with, his condescending attitude that bothers me. He shows frustration yes, and a lack of understanding. His words simplify a very complex issue. If owners and drivers do not take a stand against these management types, everyone will end up paying a price. If Mr. French is a reflection of Panthers overall management philosophy, so be it. If he is not, then he should brush up his diplomatic skills and rethink his message.

Oh, by the way it is “affect†not “effectâ€

 

[Turtle]

:
You didn't come off as rude at all. It was my fault, actually, because I was addressing solos, not teams, when I used the 500 loaded miles litmus test. That's what I get for being a solo van driver and thinking like one.

For teams, it's different, as you'd have to take a close look at those 500 miles, time of pickup and delivery, and what kind of area it was taking you to.