[R3B3L]

Originally Posted by BigDiesel

Try to explain that logic to the so-called " O/O's " who are seeking welfare from the government.......

Thats almost as sad as soldiers getting welfare :sad:

[DD60]

The real problem is that there are too many owner operators and carriers who are hauling freight for less than it costs them to operate and have a fair profit.



EXACTLY. The best regulation for brokers is the carriers themselves. Plenty of loads with better rates out there yet I still see idiots moving loads for 1.00 a mile because it is destined for CA. :roll:

[no_worries]

allan5oh wrote:
The problems are:

1) In the future, brokers will not negotiate fuel surcharges


True that. If the broker is required to pass on money that has a special name (like FSC), then the broker will simply not negotiate the FSC into the rate (or negotiate some crap amount) and raise the standard rate by that specific amount.

When a broker approaches a shipper attempting to land their business, who do you think has the upper hand? Most brokers would prefer to negotiate a flat rate with shippers. The FSC is more often than not required by the shipper as a way to protect them against volatile fuel prices. The shipper often demands an adjusting portion of the rate in case fuel prices drop. (Historically, diesel prices are highest in the winter when annual shipping contracts are often negotiated.) You can't just have some arbitrary adjustment, it has to be pegged to something. I don't understand why people don't see that the FSC protects shippers just as much as it protects carriers.