|
Hey, Bandit's Cousin!
Thank your company for me for the hell that they are putting the entire HHG industry through. :wink:
I hope you know what I'm talking about. If you don't, they are worse than I thought. |
Yeah WTF ? The whole deal is ridiculous !!!!........ Actually I have no clue what your talking about. :?: So what is the deal ? :) :)
|
Originally Posted by TK THE TRUCKER
Yeah WTF ? The whole deal is ridiculous !!!!........ Actually I have no clue what your talking about. :?: So what is the deal ? :) :)
Earlier this year the Household Goods Carriers Bureau (HGCB) approved the adoption of Tariff 600 and scheduled it to replace Tariff 400-N on January 2, 2008. A tarriff that was created and pushed by UnitedThe new tariff is the industry’s response to customer requests for further simplification. The first step in customer-focused simplification in Tariff 400-N was well received, but it still left too many items to be reviewed and approved and too many unpleasant surprises at destination. The reduction of the number of tariff charges to be approved, verified and audited will save time and hassle for service providers, carriers and customers. Everyone likes a win, win, win. Especially the carriers on this one The following charges will be rolled into Item 135, Origin and Destination Charge: Extra Stops, Light and Bulky Articles (except weight additives) and Pickup or Delivery at Third Party or Self Storage Warehouse. The Origin and Destination Service Charge and Insurance Surcharge will be rolled into transportation revenue. What this means is that accessorial pay, which used to be something that the driver got 100% of, will be lumped in with the transportation charge, which the driver gets about 52% of, depending upon their lease agreement In an effort to bring discounts to a much more reasonable level, all transportation-related rates will be reduced by 50% and all SIT-related rates will be reduced by 25%. Finally, the minimum weight will be increased from 1,000 to 1,500 pounds. The rates developed from the aggregation will be revenue neutral, i.e., neither a rate increase nor decrease. Yeah - revenue neutral for the customer, but not for the driver. The carrier wins by screwing the driver It is impossible to have every shipment be revenue neutral as it depends of the level and location of services, but in total the charges under the current and future pricing tools should be the same.but not the compensation I won't even go into the other changes that are afoot. They claim it isn't deregulation, but it reeks of it. |
I wouldn't call UVL pathetic, as there are much worse carriers to pull for. Not necessarily pointing fingers, or naming names, but they all have their strong/weak points. I NEVER hear positives about Graebel, but then there are people that also seem to do alright with them (you). I pull for the highest revenue generating agent in the Atlas Van Lines system, (as in the teens of millions a year)...downside, is the agent I pull for is a big self-hauler, and they are a full pack and load hauler as well. Just depends on what/who's bullshit you can put up with. I'm more than happy here. So, you lose what...$1k a trip? If that? The I/C's in the HHG industry have been taking pay hits annually from the introduction of this, and the loss of that..part of the business, I guess...as long as I'm not pulling for England, I'm happy :)
|
Originally Posted by Teal 95 KW
So, you lose what...$1k a trip? If that?
The I/C's in the HHG industry have been taking pay hits annually from the introduction of this, and the loss of that..part of the business, I guess... Like I said - I'm not even gonna go into the other part of it. |
I never stated that it wouldn't affect me. You cannot place the blame 100% on UVL, for the new Tariff being placed into action. What I was talking about, was the big hype when Tariff 400N was brought into play. I couldn't find the article I was lookng for, but here's an excerpt from HouseholdDrivers.com, with the breakdown of the paycut that was taken when this tariff was set in motion.
Skip said: Skip remembers a time when an 18% fuel surcharge was charged to assist with the high cost of fuel. In 1983, the moving companies of America chose to roll that 18% fuel surcharge–formerly delegated to only the transportation unit–into the tariff as a transportation rate increase. At that point, they then received half of the fuel surcharge. Clever, huh? Now to modern times! This tariff 400N was touted to drivers as having long carries and stair carries built into the Item 135 charges. In addition, a 3.8% increase in transportation charges was included to help compensate drivers for the long carries and stair carries removed from the new tariff. Excuse me!! The transportation companies receive half of this 3.8% increase. A lower increase from previous years (an increase that is generally negated by an increase in sales discounts). It seems to me that all they're doing is sliding money from drivers' accessorial charges into the transportation charge, thereby decreasing the drivers' compensation while increasing the companies' bottom line. Well... The truth be known, a 10,000 pound shipment from South Beach, FL to San Diego, CA with many long carries and an elevator at origin, paid the truck over $1,000.00 under the old tariff for those two services alone (these figures are from a shipment I hauled last year). This particular shipment, I could not get into the complex before 9:00 a.m. and had to be out by 4:00 p.m. I had to hire six men in order to meet their timetable (four more men than is needed for a normal 10,000 pound shipment). It cost over $800.00 in labor to load. Well... Rating the same shipment under tariff 400N, if I take the Item 170 charges plus an origin and destination washer service from the combined new tariff Item 135 charges, only $73.00 goes to the truck. Let's do the math! $1,000.00 - $73.00 = $927.00 this means I received a $927.00 pay cut for the same shipment! Pay attention, $927.00. • Question: How many comparably sized shipments with no long carries or stairs do I need to load and deliver before I break even? • Answer: 12 • Question: How many pounds do I have to load and deliver before I break even? • Answer: 240,000 • Question: At 112,000 pounds loaded and delivered per month average for the past year, how many months will it take me to break even for that one shipment? • Answer: Just over two months Remember, we're breaking even for only one 10,000-pound shipment with excessive long and/or stair carries. Last year I encountered 17 shipments with more than 500 feet of carry (a straight truck couldn't have gotten closer) out of the 78 total shipments I hauled–that's almost 22% of total shipments hauled. In order to break even, I would have had to haul 204 shipments with no long carries or stair carries in addition to the 17 labor-intensive shipments. I for one stand to lose greatly with this new tariff. What we really need is an exemption (go back to the 400M tariff way of charging for apartments, condominiums, high rises, and mini-storage warehouses) in situations where inside long carries and stair carries can be excessive. Skip's number one rule of staying in business: if it costs me more to do a job, I have to be able to charge more for the job–averages be damned. Bottom line is, we are in a position where there is no provision for jobs that are extremely labor-intensive when we use Tariff 400N. Look at the shipments you've hauled in the past and do the math yourselves. Will you make money or lose money? It seems to me that the Household Goods Tariff Bureau should have asked a few drivers to contribute their knowledge and experience when developing the Tariff 400N. |
Well, as long as you guys, are willing to haul, for that pay, they have no reason, to pay you more!
Market is very weak, and everybody is affected! :sad: And since your expenses still stay the same, or more, that 30 grand, comes from your bottom line. Brace yourself guys, we have a real rough times ahead! |
Originally Posted by Teal 95 KW
I never stated that it wouldn't affect me. And, if I recall, it was the American Movers Association that came up with the whole deal,
and the carriers as a whole pushed it through. Not just United. |
Pay cut or not, it's still better than yanking a reefer, flat, or dryvan around!
|
It's all a big screwy ordeal, I believe somebody once told me (a Bekins Driver) that Bekins was one of the only carriers out there, not operating under 400n, b/c the owner didn't belive in screwing his I/C's out of money that is rightfully theirs. Don't know if there is any truth to that statement, or not but it sure sounds nice lol.
|
So, you lose what...$1k a trip? That said, why should anyone get paid $1k less a trip? Trucking expenses are going up all the time. As long as O/O's and drivers continue to shrug their shoulders and accept less, and less, and less for their work, the companies will keep paying less, and less, and less for said work. How low will it go?????????? |
Originally Posted by Teal 95 KW
It's all a big screwy ordeal, I believe somebody once told me (a Bekins Driver) that Bekins was one of the only carriers out there, not operating under 400n, b/c the owner didn't belive in screwing his I/C's out of money that is rightfully theirs. Don't know if there is any truth to that statement, or not but it sure sounds nice lol.
|
Originally Posted by Teal 95 KW
Pay cut or not, it's still better than yanking a reefer, flat, or dryvan around!
So may be next year, they'll cut some more. What a hell! Still better than "England"! :P :sad: |
If these new changes go through, I'm contemplating getting out of the business altogether. Labor is getting terribly expensive, people are filing more claims then ever trying to make a buck, fuel is reaching all time highs, surveys are consistently coming in several thousand pounds lower than they should, and the carriers are trying to take away our accessorials - my bread and butter. Accessorials are normally between 30-50% of my revenue on a trip - a single 19,000 lb trip I am loading next week has over $2000 in accessorials. Under this new tarrif, it would have about $1000. Sure, the transportation charge is supposed to go up $1000 to cover it, but GVL takes 48% of that. So, I would have to live with $480 less in my pocket. That is unacceptable.
|
Things are tough all over guys.
I guess it's not as simple as I/C's not doing business with UVL's huh? |
Originally Posted by Rev.Vassago
I won't even go into the other changes that are afoot. They claim it isn't deregulation, but it reeks of it.
|
Originally Posted by RostyC
Things are tough all over guys.
I guess it's not as simple as I/C's not doing business with UVL's huh?
Originally Posted by allan5oh
Originally Posted by Rev.Vassago
I won't even go into the other changes that are afoot. They claim it isn't deregulation, but it reeks of it.
|
The memo I got from the AMA doesn't say anything about United influencing the new tariff change, although they are a component. The other components (ie: other carriers) were at the meeting to discuss the new change as well.
The reason for the new tariff is to combat the aggressive discounts in the arket. Heck, Allied/North American approved 74% discount around a month ago. Now thats another competition is the rate-war. United lost just as many drivers as the other carriers once 400N was passed. The purpose was to put discounts to an end, and that lasted a whole 2 weeks. This is another change to a tariff just like any other. Bekins were (and still might be) operating under the 412 tariff. I know 2 years ago, they were. To point the finger at United is a bit bold and outlandish when you think about it. Why would United want to make LESS money? |
Sidenote: Where did your memo come from, Rev?
Money has been leaving this industry for years. My father, 30 years and still going, always tells me about the old days. Back then, once you put a piece of furniture on the truck you made money. When I bought my dad's truck, he told me "You have to be a business man FIRST, and a mover 2nd". It was vice versa in the old days. Things have to get worse, before they can get better. I have about 2 months until I get into enclosed car hauling. My dad is getting his trailer converted for the car hauler while me and him are vacationing in the dominican republic this winter 8) Like it or leave it. I'm going with the latter option :wink: |
Originally Posted by BanditsCousin
The reason for the new tariff is to combat the aggressive discounts in the arket. Heck, Allied/North American approved 74% discount around a month ago. Now thats another competition is the rate-war.
To point the finger at United is a bit bold and outlandish when you think about it. Why would United want to make LESS money? |
Rev, it doesn't bother me one bit. I'll be long gone before the new tariff goes into effect. To say "United" will make more money iss ill-put when you should be saying "Graebel and all other carriers" will make more money and the contractos less.
BTW- when did you find out about all this? I've know for about 2 and 1/2 months now. You still never told me where you got your memo from. I'm guessing from Graebel? It seems a bit biased, although it addreses the changes well. |
I read in Land Line mag about Settlement against Allied , North American, & Global Van Lines was settled, pending a few details. Any of you guys involved? New I/C agreement, and some compensation coming to some I/C's.
|
The issue addressed in Landline is a separate issue from the new tariff change. The clas action lawsuit with Sirva has to do with the contract between the drivers and company.
|
Originally Posted by BanditsCousin
Rev, it doesn't bother me one bit. I'll be long gone before the new tariff goes into effect. To say "United" will make more money iss ill-put when you should be saying "Graebel and all other carriers" will make more money and the contractos less.
BTW- when did you find out about all this? I've know for about 2 and 1/2 months now. You still never told me where you got your memo from. I'm guessing from Graebel? It seems a bit biased, although it addreses the changes well. |
I would need substantial proof that Graebel and other carriers protested it, let alone United pushing it. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying I'm not convinced.
You may be the Reverend, but your word alone is not gospel :wink: I don't have an allegience to my carrier like people have to their home sports team, or whether Chevy's are greater than Fords. I'm not happy with the changes, so I'm leaving, not whining. |
I missed the response to United maing more money- they won't. ALL the carriers will make more money, and less for the contractor.
My dad says th only reason for new tariffs is to make the carriers more money. My dad went on an exclusive tran-border fleet to make the kind of money he did just 10-15 yrs ago. Conisidering his 30 years in the industry v.s. our infancy in the industry I put more faith in his words than most other hhg drivers. Like I said above, I'm not defending United, but I would like to know who's responsible for the rate decrease. Considering the industry didn't have a stellar year in the past 18 months, its no wonder the corporations need to improve their botom lines, no matter where they take the money from. Its still better than England 8) HHG has been god to me, nut to take any more pay cuts isn't in my business plan. I'm runing the busy season and bowing out with pride and dignity. |
Considering the industry didn't have a stellar year in the past 18 months, its no wonder the corporations need to improve their botom lines, no matter where they take the money from. or whether Chevy's are greater than Fords. |
Originally Posted by Rev.Vassago
If these new changes go through, I'm contemplating getting out of the business altogether. Labor is getting terribly expensive, people are filing more claims then ever trying to make a buck, fuel is reaching all time highs unacceptable.
If you get out of the "business", does this mean you will be leaving the truck message boards? |
Originally Posted by ben45750
Sounds like someone is having a bad month?
If you get out of the "business", does this mean you will be leaving the truck message boards? |
I got an interesting memo from United yesterday about the Surface Transportation Board trying to eliminate common rates. I'll post it (copy) it when I get a chance.
There's a lot of finger pointing to be done here. My dad offered to cosign for a car hauling trailer if I jump ship on HHG :) |
The surface transportation board is (and has succeeded) at eliminating the common rates (ie: 400n) so that every van line has its' own tariff. That means Graebel, Atlas, and United, and EVEN Mayflower have a different tariff. As good as it seems (unregulated), its gonna open the doors for 1/2 arse moving companies to provide poor service, at a great price.
Is United still the devil in a blue humpstrap? If United did lead the way for T600 tariff, it would have been to keep common rates. Common rates keep the rates higher, as opposed to all over the board, from high to low. September 4th, thats the day. But, United can still be evil if use use the logic that because United is the largest, thus being the leverage to screwing drivers. I won't confirm or deny that, because, frankly, I don't have proof. But next tiome you post "my accounts are better" after I post about the accounts my agent has, you should probably have proof. Namely "my accounts sometimes don't have fsc!" I have to bark back, Rev. My name was the title of a post tying me to a carrioer that is afoul, hence lumping me into the image of such carrier with clear intent to make me appear foolish, part of the problem, or something of that nature. Lets all make great money this summer and see what money is left in this particu;ar industry as we make plans to have an "out" if this change is signifigantly non-benfecial to our personal operations. |
|
Originally Posted by BanditsCousin
But next tiome you post "my accounts are better" after I post about the accounts my agent has, you should probably have proof. Namely "my accounts sometimes don't have fsc!"
I have to bark back, Rev. My name was the title of a post tying me to a carrioer that is afoul, hence lumping me into the image of such carrier with clear intent to make me appear foolish, part of the problem, or something of that nature. Of the two options - Tariff 600 and every carrier having its own tariff, I would rather that every carrier have its own tarriff, because I know what tariff my company will be using. The 400N tariff was created based on it, but it includes more than the 400N tariff did. As for carriers creating a "bargain basement" tariff, it's no different than the carrier who discounts the current tariffs like mad. |
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 08:21 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved