Truckers Shut Down Oakland Port Terminals

An estimated 100-plus drayage truck drivers staged a several-hour protest at the Port of Oakland on Aug. 19, resulting in terminal closures and backlogs.

The truckers, who are non-unionized, said they staged the one-day action to show their displeasure with their treatment by the port when picking up and dropping off containers.

The drivers managed to shut down five berths during the day and began blocking other terminals before police were able to restore access in the afternoon.

The protest was against the delays the truckers say they sometimes experience during the drop-off and pickup process. Some drivers say they have spent hours in line at times, which winds up costing them money, since they’re paid by the load. The truckers have also said they’re concerned about the costs associated with retrofitting or obtaining new trucks to comply with port emissions requirements.

Long wait times have been at problem at the Port of Oakland for years; several shipping customers also have complained about the backlogs, particularly at the SSA terminal. The port’s executive director, Chris Lytle, eventually met with truckers Aug. 19 to discuss their concerns. The truckers have said that the protests are not planned to be on ongoing occurrence.

RILA Wants No Cut Hours for Truckers

A major retailer trade association has told the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) last week that proposed changes revising truck drivers’ current hours-of-service rules will not strengthen driver health and safety, but instead threaten to reverse gains made to safety on the roadways, congestion issues and environmental sustainability.

The Retail Industry Leaders Association (RILA), which represents more than 200 major retailers, product manufacturers, and service suppliers nationwide, told the FMCSA that while their members agree that driver health and safety is of the utmost importance, they strongly believe the currently proposed hours-of-service rules would not accomplish these goals.

“The proposed revisions to current hours-of-service rules would in reality cause more harm than good,” said Kelly Kolb, Vice President of Global Supply Chain Policy. “The most recent data from DOT shows that under the current system there have been significant gains in safety, making the trucking industry the safest it has ever been even as higher numbers of vehicles are on the roadways,” Kolb said. “Imposing these unnecessary changes deviates from the positive safety trends and sustainable advancements that the current system affords and comes at the expense of drivers and businesses, creating a string of future problems without making any valid improvements right now."

RILA submitted comments last week to the FMCSA voicing their concerns and asking the agency to retain the 11-hour daily driving limit and the 34-hour restart provisions as they currently stand.

Consisting of large supply chain users, RILA members depend on an efficient system to move the high volume of products throughout their supply chains. RILA argues that additional traffic woes only heighten the difficulty of delivering to stores in a just-in-time fashion. Increase the number of uncontrollable variables, the group said, while in the same instance narrowing the driver’s target drive time will exponentially intensify a driver’s stress level.

House Bill Seeks 21% Increase in Truck Max Highway Weight

A group of Congressional lawmakers is attempting to move legislation through Congress that would increase the federal maximum weight carried by freight trucks on interstate highways from 80,000 pounds to 97,000 pounds, a more than 21 percent increase.

First introduced to the House in March 2009 by Maine Democrat Rep. Michael Michaud, the bill, H.R. 1799, was co-sponsored by 23 Democrats and 30 Republicans. The last action on the bill was March 30, 2009, when it was referred to the House Ways and Means Committee and the House Subcommittee on Highways and Transit for discussion.

Despite almost a year of inaction, supporters in the House are now looking at attaching the proposed legislation to other "must-pass" transportation funding legislation in an effort to force passage of the new weight limits.

The bill has also found support in the Senate from Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, who has said he will take up the bill after the spring recess.

Supporters of the bill argue that heavier trucks would translate into fewer trucks on the highways and thereby reduce overall diesel pollution and traffic congestion.

Bill opponents point to the safety issues behind a 21 percent increase in truck weights. Heavier trucks take longer to accelerate from a stop, longer to reach passing speeds, and according to some opponents of the bill, present problems with stopping and maneuverability while on the highway. In addition, opponents say, heavier trucks would lead to more frequent and more costly increases in highway infrastructure maintenance.

Truck drivers, according to some trade groups, seem to be squarely lined up against the bill – mainly because the last increase in federal maximum weights never translated into higher per-load wages for drivers.

Commuters also appear to be against the bill. A recent American Automobile Association survey of 3,000 members found that 90 percent of respondents opposed permitting heavier trucks on the highways.

Judge Supports SoCal Harbor Drivers as Independent Operators

A Los Angeles Superior Court Judge has dismissed a suit brought by California Attorney General and Gubernatorial-hopeful Jerry Brown against a Southern California harbor trucking firm alleging the firm misclassified employees as independent owner operators.

Judge Elizabeth Allen White asked the lawyers for defendant Pac Anchor Transportation truck owner Alfredo Barajas to write up an order closing the case that she will sign.

The civil suit against Long Beach-based Pac Anchor was one of several brought by and publicized by Brown in 2008 in which he alleged that the trucking firms in question had engaged in "cost-cutting schemes, circumvented state employment taxes and labor laws, and took unfair advantage of drivers."

The suit was praised at the time by the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and other labor groups who have for years tried to get independent owner operator drivers reclassified as employees, thus opening the drivers up to organizing. Unions, under law, cannot organize independent owner operators but they can organize employees.

In her ruling, Judge White found that Brown’s case would have a significant effect on motor carrier prices, routes, and services and was therefore preempted under the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act, which prohibits states from enacting and enforcing laws that are "related to" motor carrier prices, routes, or services.

The judge found that Brown’s attempted actions threatened to erect entry controls that would discourage independent contractor drivers from participating in the trucking market, thereby frustrating Congress' intent to maximize competitive forces in the trucking industry.

Following the court’s decision, Pac Anchor lawyer Neil Lerner said, "This case should never have been brought, as it was clearly preempted by federal law, and since at least one California Appellate Court had previously so held.”

SoCal Ports' Clean Truck Program: Year One

The multi-billion dollar program by the adjacent ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles to cut drayage truck emissions up to 80 by 2012 celebrated its first full year of implementation this week.

The ports announced that the Clean Truck Program is well ahead of schedule with nearly 5,000 trucks of the 13,000 remaining in the ports-servicing fleet now meeting the cleaner 2007-or-later model year emissions. These nearly 5,000 trucks, according to the ports, now account for more than half of the 39,000 average daily container moves at the ports.

The truck plan was first announced in early 2007 and began implementation on October 1, 2008, with a ban on pre-1988 trucks. Another ban on pre-1994 trucks is set to take effect at the start of 2010 and a final ban on all pre-2007 trucks will take effect on January 1, 2012.

Under the program, the ports are currently charging beneficial cargo owners $35 per TEU for any container moved through the ports by a un-banned but pre-2007 model year truck.

Despite the announced successes, a year later questions and criticisms remain.

The ports still face a legal challenge to the program by the American Trucking Associations and other industry groups. The suit awaits trial in a US District Court in December after the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals said the lower court erred in initially ruling last year in favor of the ports. An additional legal challenge of the ports’ program by the Federal Maritime Commission was dropped earlier this year.

In addition, critics of the program have questioned the labor and competition cost of the program, pointing out that nearly 6,000 drivers have vanished from the ports’ drayage fleet since the program began. Critics also point to a loss of competition as nearly 300 mostly small trucking firms have also disappeared since the program began.

Opponents of the plan also point out that little hard evidence is available to support the air quality claims of the program and the ports admit that complete metrics of the first full year of the program’s operation may be up to a year away.