Just an Thought About The Turnover Rate

According to the ATA there is a driver shortage.

You believe what the ATA tells you? The ATA has an agenda to put illegal aliens behind their wheels so they constantly spout off about the driver "shortage".

If there were a true shortage, you'd see freight piling up on the docks, produce rotting in warehouses, stuff not getting delivered, etc.

The longer you stay in this business the higher pay you should be able to expect.

Nope. The more you make, the more vacation time you have vested, the more they want to get rid of you and get a guy to do your job for .26 cpm. There's a reason so many trucking companies were unionized back in the day.

There are some carriers who seem to do a decent job in retaining drivers.

Oh really? Name them.

ALL carriers have a more than desired turnover rate.

Mine doesn't. Snowman's doesn't. Belpre's doesn't.

Stick with your carrier for at least a year or two. That will reduce their turnover costs and give you an opportunity to hone your skills.

Yeah, that's great advice. Get stuck sitting around waiting on loads, doing short-hauls, not getting home...and suck up the BS just to hone your skills. LOL there's a big difference between paying your dues and playing the fool.

[kc0iv]

Nope. The more you make, the more vacation time you have vested, the more they want to get rid of you and get a guy to do your job for .26 cpm. There's a reason so many trucking companies were unionized back in the day.

Nope. The biggest reason most trucking companies were union was because most trucker made turn around routes. You didn't have go anywhere routes like you do today.

As an example. One of the better union runs was from Kansas City to Rawlins, WY. by P.I.E. which closed their door years ago. They used a three man team and drove non stop. Spent the next day, or days, in a bunk house and then made the return run. Upon returning they went to the bottom of the driver board and waited for next run. Depending on the needs of the company you might get to the top of the board in a couple of days or you might not get another run for two week. All that time was unpaid both at Rawlins and Kansas City. Also you paid for all your meals while you were away from home. All that for a income of around $25k if you had a good year.

I might also add it took about 10 years to get a regular route. Before that you were on the extra board. You got a run when the company needed a extra man. However, you had to be available subject to a two hour call time.

Secondly, there are very few trucking companies that were operation back in the day. I wonder why?

kc0iv

[belpre122]

The biggest reason most trucking companies were union was because most trucker[s] made turn around routes. You didn't have go anywhere routes like you do today.

Hence, the unfortunate birth of irregular route, hobo style, coolie carrier OTR trucking.

We are fortunately watching the demise of that circus.

Don't know what that has to do with unions KC0IV, but as long as it hastens the end of irregular-route, hobo style coolier carrier OTR trucking, I'm all for it.

73

[Rev.Vassago]

I think if GMAN were to compare those employees to his own business relationships, he might sing a different tune. When an O/O accepts a load, he does so based upon certain criteria, most of which have to do with profit. If the load has some unusual circumstances about it, then the O/O will adjust the rate accordingly. Running OTR as a company driver should be no different. Being forced to spend weeks (even months) away from home should be considered an "unusual circumstance", and should require a higher rate of pay than a local or regional driver who gets home more often. But it doesn't, and the OTR carriers know they don't have to make it so. The reason they can get away with this is for one reason, and one reason only:

Much of the problems that drivers have with their carrier are brought on by the drivers themselves.

The drivers don't know any better, and the OTR carriers take advantage of it. It's really not all that different from the lease purchase scams, only in one scenario they own you because you are renting a job, and in the other scenario they own you because you think that's the way it has to be.

Unfortunately, an OTR driver's worst enemy is himself, and the coolie carriers laugh all the way to the bank knowing it.

I'm sure the OTR carriers love those phrases (It's a lifestyle, it's what you make of it, etc etc etc), because it helps them pull the crap they do when their employees develop that type of attitude.

[TomB985]

Belpre...I'm still not getting this here....

Why and how do you see OTR driving dissappearing? I just don't get it. There are companies going under, but there are others, like MINE who are expanding in the current market.

How else are they gonna do it? Send everything LTL? :P Dedicated runs for EVERY business? Every business having it's own FLEET? :?

How's it gonna work, oh all-knowing oracle? :twisted:

[ohiomohawk]

Here in Ohio I think they will be an abundance of people willing to become truckers. It is estimated that 250,000 people lost jobs in manufacturing from 2000-2005.

General Motors has been shutting down plants about every other year here in Ohio and just announced it will be shutting down its SUV plant in Dayton in 2010, that will affect about 5,000 people directly but will indirectly impact several thousand more.

THERE WILL BE NO MORE GM PLANTS IN THIS PART OF OHIO AFTER 2010 :sad:

I was a machinist making $35,000 a year ( for 5 years) till I was laid off in 2004.

In 2005 I had the great oppurtunity to work at Walmart, Target and Lowes for a whopping $190.00 a week and decided to try OTR. I did OTR for 15 months with Schneider/Walmart then found a local company and i am home daily

OTR was no picnic but kept the bills paid and sure beat retail but I have decided to go to school online while I drive locally.

[Rev.Vassago]

Belpre...I'm still not getting this here....

Why and how do you see OTR driving dissappearing? I just don't get it. There are companies going under, but there are others, like MINE who are expanding in the current market.

How else are they gonna do it? Send everything LTL? :P Dedicated runs for EVERY business? Every business having it's own FLEET? :?

How's it gonna work, oh all-knowing oracle? :twisted:

Rail is expanding at a dramatic pace. Coolie carrier companies like JB Hunt and Schneider are moving a HUGE portion of their long haul freight via rail now. They are even expanding the size of many tunnels to accomodate these intermodal cars.

OTR will never entirely disappear, but in today's market it doesn't have as much of an impact.

[TomB985]

Oh, I agree, the industry will have to change with the times, and that's to be expected. I heard one major railroad company is investing over 5 billion dollars into expanding it's network and improving tunnels, as you just mentioned. Much of the long haul, coast to coast stuff IS moving to rail...

But there is so much a train just can't do, and never will be able to do. Like it or not, OTR driving will NEVER disappear; I don't even think it'll get a whole lot smaller than it is right now.

Which is fine, as it serves as a great way to get into the industry, and there are those of us who really enjoy the traveling.

May not be your cup o' tea, but that doesn't mean that there aren't people who enjoy it...

[Rev.Vassago]

The funny thing is, those guys running the coolie carriers' trailers on rail are getting paid a heck of a lot better than the guys running those same trailers on the road.

The rail companies know that it's a difficult profession, and they pay better rates to get better employees. If rail companies paid lousy rates, they'd get lousy employees too. But they know they cannot afford to do put a multi-million dollar piece of equipment with millions of dollars of freight into the hands of an unqualified person. Perhaps if the OTR carriers would reach this same conclusion, we would see a change.

[Ronin]

they wouldn't do that rev, it would be the INTELLIGENT thing to do!

Nope. The biggest reason most trucking companies were union was because most trucker made turn around routes. You didn't have go anywhere routes like you do today.

I'm not getting it. Why were turn around routes the reason trucking companies were unionized?

[kc0iv]

The biggest reason most trucking companies were union was because most trucker[s] made turn around routes. You didn't have go anywhere routes like you do today.

Hence, the unfortunate birth of irregular route, hobo style, coolie carrier OTR trucking.

We are fortunately watching the demise of that circus.

Don't know what that has to do with unions KC0IV, but as long as it hastens the end of irregular-route, hobo style coolier carrier OTR trucking, I'm all for it.

73

Where drivers have regular runs, reporting to the same terminals, the possibility of a union is greater. Secondly, by operating out of one terminal drivers have personal contact with one another. Something the OTR drivers don't have.

I make no bones about it I never needed a union. I was respected and thereby received all the benefits union people received and I didn't have to pay union dues. The only time I was paid union scale was the couple of times I was in a union. All the other jobs I had I received an income and benefits higher than union scale.

If you or anybody else needs a union then by all means find a company that has a union. It makes to difference to me one way or the other.

Irregular route came about because of de-regulation. Every Tom, Dick, and Harry could get into trucking. In the process they drove down the rates. Add to that the unions inflexible demands and company after company closed their doors.

The other major factor was the change to just-in-time freight. Truck companies no longer had the luxury of taking extra days to make a pickup/ delivery.

What I can't understand is why all the talk about "coolie carrier." A term I find offensive and racial. If someone doesn't want to drive OTR then don't. For those drivers that like to travel around the country I find nothing wrong with it. The same with unions. If someone want or needs a union then find a company that has a union.

kc0iv

Where drivers have regular runs, reporting to the same terminals, the possibility of a union is greater. Secondly, by operating out of one terminal drivers have personal contact with one another. Something the OTR drivers don't have.

Yes, such an arrangement would help facilitate an organizing effort. But you dodged the question: WHY were trucking companies organized in the first place?

I make no bones about it I never needed a union. I was respected and thereby received all the benefits union people received and I didn't have to pay union dues. The only time I was paid union scale was the couple of times I was in a union. All the other jobs I had I received an income and benefits higher than union scale.

LeBron James of the Cleveland Cavaliers made $40.5 million last season. And you know what? He's a card-carrying union member who shells out union dues. Hmmmm...why would someone who earns $40.5 million see the value of a union?

Irregular route came about because of de-regulation.

Here we go again. Deregulation did not CAUSE irregular-route trucking, but I would agree that it did help to facilitate it.

[ohiomohawk]

Here are some amazing numbers to look at.

When I went to Schneider to train in 2006 they were taking in about 80 students a week like 50 weeks out of the year.

About 50 out of 80 students graduated each week.

A trainer who worked there for several years told me that basically out of the 80 students who came each week only 10-15 students actually complete 1 year.

80 students X 50 weeks= 4,000 students a year
12.5 students X 50 weeks= 625 who complete 1 year

Bring in 4,000 a year end up with 625 :? :?

In order to maintain a fleet of 15,000 + trucks, Schneider has to hire several thousands to keep hundreds.

Those are just rough numbers out of thier Green Bay facility, they have like 5 other major training facilities.

[belpre122]

Bring in 4,000 a year end up with 625 :? :?

In order to maintain a fleet of 15,000 + trucks, Schneider has to hire several thousands to keep hundreds.

Those are just rough numbers out of thier Green Bay facility, they have like 5 other major training facilities.

Let's not forget that most of the problems encountered by these drivers were caused by the drivers themselves. By no means is the company responsible for problems.

[ohiomohawk]

True belpre122, Schneider is a good company. I left them because I am not a fan of OTR. If I ever decided to go back to OTR I would probably go back. I found a local Class A position and now get home daily

I was treated well by Schneider for the 15 months I was there, I would suggest them to anybody trying to get started.

[kc0iv]

The only reason I was ever in a union was because I wanted a certain job and I was required to join the union. As your example of LeBron James I suspect it has to do with the NBA being unionized and to be a ball player he is required to be in the union.

I see this is turning into to a pro - anti union discussion in which I really don't want to get into.

Let me repeat if you want to be a union member so be it.

kc0iv

Here are some amazing numbers to look at.

When I went to Schneider to train in 2006 they were taking in about 80 students a week like 50 weeks out of the year.

About 50 out of 80 students graduated each week.

A trainer who worked there for several years told me that basically out of the 80 students who came each week only 10-15 students actually complete 1 year.

80 students X 50 weeks= 4,000 students a year
12.5 students X 50 weeks= 625 who complete 1 year

Bring in 4,000 a year end up with 625

In order to maintain a fleet of 15,000 + trucks, Schneider has to hire several thousands to keep hundreds.

Those are just rough numbers out of thier Green Bay facility, they have like 5 other major training facilities.

15,000 drivers and a 120% turnover rate in 2006 meant that Schneider had to hire 18,000 people per year to replace those that quit. :shock:

As your example of LeBron James I suspect it has to do with the NBA being unionized and to be a ball player he is required to be in the union.

No they vote on whether to keep the NBA Player's Association every year. Believe it or not, a union is a very democratic institution. For a couple of years, the NBA Player's Association was actually voted out and the players operated without a contract. This is also true of the NFL and MLB Player's Association as well.

The answer to the question is that these players earning millions see value in having a collective bargaining agreement with the owners. That's the advantage of operating under a legally binding contract - both parties sit down and negotiate a set of written agreements such that neither side can screw the other over.

In trucking, the carriers hold all the cards. They can starve a man out, leave him sitting, roll back pay, play dispatch headgames, etc because the driver's only recourse is to quit or say "that's trucking" and suck up the BS.

[belpre122]

because the driver's only recourse is to quit or say "that's trucking" and suck up the BS.

Or, what is the standard mantra of the apologists? Oh yeah.

"It's a lifestyle."



Your lifestyle maybe.

[Kranky]

LeBron James wrote:

LeBron James of the Cleveland Cavaliers made $40.5 million last season. And you know what? He's a card-carrying union member who shells out union dues. Hmmmm...why would someone who earns $40.5 million see the value of a union?

Because if the NBA wasn't unionized, those guys would all be getting paid a flat fee per game, cutting each others throats for the opportunity to play, and the race to the bottom would be underway, just like in OTR trucking.