Load Acceptance Rates Included in Ranking

[bubblehead]

Sad way to move ahead if you ask me.

Very sad indeed, it says much about the character of the ones that advance their career with such tactics. I have seen this used in the finance industry. They just have to move fast enough to be comfy in their new position before it fails. It always gets blamed on someone else or something else....

 

[jjoerger]

Look at the bright side. The contractors that want to bump up there acceptance rates by taking low paying runs will eventually go broke and leave the business.

 

[zorry]

Wow ! That team took everything ! Too bad they went broke !

**** ! Now we have to give it to that team that keeps asking for more money and keeps their truck in such good shape .

 

[layoutshooter]

How many will be able to wait it out till that happens? If they do, will there enough business left?

 

[zorry]

It's a fine balance for the company and the I/C.

Brought on by the fact that we both have to compete with ........

 

[layoutshooter]

It's a fine balance for the company and the I/C.

Brought on by the fact that we both have to compete with ........

There is more than one way to compete. Cutting rates is normally one of the worst ways. Providing superior service, even at a premium, is a smarter, LONG TERM, way.

 

[TeamCaffee]

I agree it is to bad that it has come to this new change but at the same time I am REALLY glad the change was not to flat rate.

If the load offered does not pay enough turn it down. What I do not agree with is that each load has to be a home run. We look at averages and do not have a set bottom rate, which is why I cannot tell anyone what our bottom pay per mile is. What we need per mile to run is on a sliding scale depending on our income in the past few weeks.

Sitting costs us money and we need so much money every day we are out here to cover our fixed costs.

It is not all about PPM it is a balance including revenue per day. In this way we look at loads different then truck load carriers as most of those drivers know they are going to run as many miles as they can each and every day.

If we run two loads with ASAP deliveries one a 1000 miles for 2.50 a mile and our next load is 1000 miles at 1.20 that picks up as soon as unload we are still ahead.

What we need overall per mile to run does not govern freight rates the market governs freight rates.

Trucking companies or FXCC does not govern freight rates the market does and if FXCC wants to charge a customer 2.00 a mile and the other expedite companies say they will charge 1.75 guess who gets the freight? FXCC has to stay competitive. If they say no to a company that has a combination of high paying freight and low paying freight guess what the customer is not going to give us their good paying freight and then give their lower paying freight to someone else. They move all their freight to another company.

I have heard the question could FXCC take a smaller cut on the lower paying loads? If this is going to happen they will then take a bigger cut on the higher paying loads as they also have a lot of costs. Which is my mind equals flat rate and that is something I do not want to see.

Not sure how this problem is going to be solved as we need a certain income each month in order to be profitable. FXCC changing the rules does not change what we need each month, so we will have to figure how to run smarter. Knowing our costs is one of our ways to run smarter and knowing how to trim costs is another. This is one of the reasons we are so anal about our fuel mileage as that is our biggest cost.

 

[jjoerger]

If we were offered loads at a decent all miles rate we would have a higher acceptance rate. We have to decline a lot of loads and make a counter offer. That decline counts against us, even when we accept the load the next time it is offered. (at a higher rate)
We take loads at a lower rate when necessary and occasionally get the home run. We are willing to go anywhere providing it pays at least what we consider a fair all miles rate. For us all miles means DHPU, Run and DH to our planned layover. There is a minimum average rate that we have to get to make running our truck worthwhile. We did flat rate for 6 months and know that rate is to low to maintain a quality truck and earn a decent income. Even with a paid for truck.
This change along with eliminating most planned layovers and changing the miles paid to an express center are attempts to add to the companies bottom line. None of these changes benefit the contractor in any way.
We will continue to operate as we have in the past.

 

[layoutshooter]

Then there is the problem of all trucks NOT being equal, but being expected to run for the same rates. Linda's example of 2.50 for the first load and 1.20 for the next may well work for a dry van truck. It is does not work for reefers all that well. Too many loads at 1.20 would kill us.

Again, what is the rate to run the load? At 1.20 per, including FSC etc, is lower than what many vans are paid. Not good.

 

[TeamCaffee]

Joe did you miss the averaging part of the equation?

 

[psm127_dad]

... Linda's example of 2.50 for the first load and 1.20 for the next may well work for a dry van truck. It is does not work for reefers all that well. Too many loads at 1.20 would kill us.

Again, what is the rate to run the load? At 1.20 per, including FSC etc, is lower than what many vans are paid. Not good.

What about fleet owners? A single truck operation is a lot better able to absorb a few lower paying loads when it meets their business needs. But FDC has encouraged us to bring on more trucks... I can tell you that after the split, we absolutely can not stay in business at $1.20 per mile much less put aside enough to eventually replace equipment. Lowering rates WILL result in less maintained, older trucks; which lead to less experienced drivers willing (due to business ignorance) to drive for lower rates.

It seems to me that FDC wants to expand their business via lower rates & yet maintain the image that has gotten them the higher end clients. Both customers have levels of expectation...
1) price over service, price over safety, price over experience
2) service balanced with price, but an emphasis on service, experience, safety

I see no way these two models can co-exist long term.

(someone told me they would give me a penny for my thoughts, so I gave them my 2 cents worth... now we are trying to figure out what to do with the other penny.)

 

[zorry]

[QUOTE

(someone told me they would give me a penny for my thoughts, so I gave them my 2 cents worth... now we are trying to figure out what to do with the other penny.)[/QUOTE]

Save it. You'll need it down the road.

 

[ChanceMaster]

I wonder if FXCC staff and dispatchers would accept a lower hourly rate or salary when working on these high volume customers accounts ? That's what they are asking us to do.

My next question : Would forcing us to take a load at a flat rate omit the IC relationship ? Isn't our ability to accept or decline loads one if the strong foundational aspects of being a contractor vs being an employee ?

Or perhaps the future thinking is IC's can turn down as many flat rate loads as they want and maintain the IC status.

I enjoy working for the Fed,but wish their was some discussion and clarification before dropping potentially game changing rules on us.

 

[redytrk]

I asked one of our esteemed executives why we haven`t had a rate increase in over 20 years. (Express has one nearly every year). His response was the competition prevents this.
So you mean we have to maintain our high standards and still meet the price because of Penske yellow rejects.

 

[zorry]

I've never met an esteemed executive.

I've met executives that got ME steamed.

Same thing ??

 

[iceroadtrucker]

The Bean Counters (NUB) Got to Love them!!

Got to Love them

 

[iceroadtrucker]

A loss of more trucks is what they want (to be replaced by O/Os and drivers that don't really understand this business). The biggest expense that any company is able to avoid by using contractors is idle assets. They don't have to pay for the care and feeding of all these contractors and their equipment. Now if they dumb down the fleet of contractors, they can better serve their customers...the stock holders.

I shake my head.
Pride in wearing the Uniform Yup Reading the above dont dont make me proud.
AREEBAAA

 

[runrunner]

First In First Out is the only thing that should determine who gets the load,other than equipment. Any thing other than that is hogwash period!

 

[iceroadtrucker]

when we were at a previous carrier you were able to turn down loads and not have them count against you if you met the criteria of the dh to pu miles were over a certain percentage of the load, or if you were a team and it was under certain miles. I do not agree with the new implementation of the acceptance rating being used. All they are using it for is to get trucks to run at a lower rate, save more money for themselves. In turn this will bring rates down across the board, and all that will be left are those who are not business minded and run loads at whatever rate because they see a little bit of income from it.

Sent from my vs870 4g using xparent pink tapatalk 2

hmmmmmmmmmm
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
ok

 

[iceroadtrucker]

There is more than one way to compete. Cutting rates is normally one of the worst ways. Providing superior service, even at a premium, is a smarter, LONG TERM, way.

Yupper Superior Service goes along way.
Elphants never forget
YUPPER