As I’ve written in the past, one of the things that makes the trucking industry so compelling to write about is its people. The Canadian trucking industry is comprised of hundreds of thousands of people from all walks of life. And practically every one of them has an interesting story to tell.

Let me introduce you to Mike Dingler, an owner/operator with International Truckload Services (ITS) in Belleville, Ont. Mike works the nightshift, running drop-and-hook domestic loads between ITS in Belleville and customers in the Greater Toronto Area, Hamilton and Brantford to the west and Cornwall and Brockville in the east. What’s extraordinary about Mike, is that he does all this despite being confined to a wheelchair.

I recently spent an evening with Mike, as we ran a load of paper from ITS’s Belleville yard up to the space it leases from Maritime-Ontario in Brantford and then back to Belleville with an assortment of general freight. I’ll be telling his story in the June issues of Truck News and Truck West. But when I have a good story to tell, I have a really hard time keeping it to myself – even just temporarily - so I’ll share a few details with those of you who frequent this blog.

Mike is 44 years old and has always been mechanically inclined, spending his younger days tearing down engines, transmissions and other components and then carefully reassembling them. He lived on a farm in Durham Region and was comfortable operating heavy trucks and farm equipment from a young age. At the age of 20, he fell asleep while driving a pick-up truck with a load of wood and careened 151 feet off a dead-end road before a large tree abruptly stopped the truck in its tracks.

“I never broke one bone in my body but it tore the main aorta from my heart. I don’t remember anything,” he told me. Mike was airlifted to Sunnybrook Hospital and once stabilized, sent to the renowned Lyndhurst Centre for rehab. They were to teach him how to use his wheelchair, but after several weeks of being put off by doctors, Mike called a buddy to come pick him up. He left the rehab centre and learned how to get around in the wheelchair on his own.

Since then, Mike’s been getting by on a $1,000 monthly disability cheque and doing odd jobs to make ends meet. He decided he wanted to earn a better living, get off disability and improve his lifestyle. So, he did what most of us would consider unthinkable and decided to pursue a career in trucking.

Of course it wasn’t easy. There are few, if any, paraplegic truck drivers out there, so off-the-shelf driving aids weren’t readily available. Mike found a 2004 Freightliner with a Meritor automatic transmission on Kijiji and traded his pick-up truck for it in a straight-up swap. He then built his own hydraulic lift system to get him in and out of the truck and installed controls allowing him to work the throttle and brake by hand. Mike then had to get the entire system approved by the MTO.

Next up, he needed a job. Mike went to work with Musket Transportation but when the contract he was serving went away, he moved on to ITS. Chris McMillan, field operations manager with ITS, told me Mike quickly proved his abilities during the road test.

“Belleville has some really interesting corners and after the first hard right-hander at the bridge downtown, I knew that Mike would be a great addition to the ITS family,” Chris told me. Still, the company wasn’t planning to treat Mike any differently than any other company driver or owner/operator. Nor did Mike want special treatment.

Mike’s been working at ITS for a couple months now and by all accounts is doing a great job. He does his own pre-trip inspections and even more remarkably, most of his own maintenance, including oil changes. He has a forklift in his shop to which he’s attached a platform to the forks so he can raise himself up to whatever height is necessary to perform maintenance and repairs. He has also welded together two creepers, so he can get underneath the truck without his feet dragging along the ground. It’s a good thing too, as repairs have been plentiful. In his first weeks with the truck, the starter, clutch and air compressor all needed replacing. Welcome to life as an owner/operator, Mike.

Mike can couple and uncouple the trailers, but many yards park the trailers so closely together that he can’t get to the landing gear in his wheelchair. He has hired his cousin to come along with him to handle coupling and uncoupling. His assistant also earns his keep by running into any offices that aren’t wheelchair-accessible to pick up the required paperwork.

What’s unique about Mike is not only the fact he’s a paraplegic truck driver, but also the fact he goes about his business with a consistently positive attitude. He’s thrilled to be on the road and realizes he’s lucky to be alive. He hopes to one day get daytime work with ITS, but he’ll bide his time and earn it just like everyone else has to. He really doesn’t feel like anyone owes him a thing. His outlook is refreshing and invigorating.

This blog was intended to be a short glimpse into Mike’s life – a teaser, really – for the feature coming out in the June issues of Truck News and Truck West. I failed to keep it short, but believe me, I could go on much longer and I will do so in the print edition. This is a story you don’t want to miss.

Meanwhile, I want to hear your stories. Do you know any professional drivers with disabilities? How have they overcome the challenges that are inherent to the job?

Permalink | Comments (6)

I was in Indianapolis the other day covering the Green Truck Summit and Work Truck Show, when I checked my voicemail and found a message from Steve Russell, chairman and founder of Indianapolis-based Celadon Trucking. My first thought was ‘Shit, what have I done to piss him off?’ You see, the real big wheels generally only call me when they take umbrage with something I’ve written. But in this case, Steve wanted to talk about the company’s growth plan for Canada and the fact I was in his backyard struck us both as far too coincidental to ignore.

I hopped in a cab and headed over to see him and ended up spending the better part of the afternoon with Steve discussing a wide range of topics. It was a visit that both inspired and energized me, and provided me with plenty of fodder for future blogs.

One of the things that’s been on my mind lately, as we have mourned the passing of trucking pioneers such as Don Schneider and Pat Quinn, is the fact there seem to be very few opportunities for ambitious entrepreneurs to build a trucking company in this current regulatory environment. If you look at the major players today, few were created in the last decade or two and many pre-date deregulation. Opportunities still exist, particularly in underserved niche markets, but the odds are stacked against anyone launching a start-up trucking firm.

It’s often been said that the barriers to entry have become more substantial in recent years. I tend to disagree with that. While the OEMs aren’t giving away new trucks on a promise, as they once were, it’s still easy enough to buy a used truck and find some freight to haul. The barriers to entry haven’t changed substantially, but in my view, what has changed is the barriers to success have gotten far more difficult to overcome.

Trucking companies today face an overwhelming list of societal, human and compliance requirements that didn’t exist in the past. At the same time, costs have risen and as a result, trucking operators no longer have any margin for error. None whatsoever. Think about this for a second: a small fleet or one-truck operator that’s involved in an accident will need to generate $200,000 in revenue to cover the $10,000 insurance deductible, assuming they’re running a margin of 5%. Good luck with that. And that’s not to mention CSA implications and all that other stuff. One mistake can put you out of business.

Another limiting factor when it comes to growth for a small company is the cost of new equipment. Steve grabbed a pen and paper and scribbled out for me the new trade-in formula: In 2006, he pointed out, a new truck cost $95,000 and a three-year-old truck was worth $50,000, so a company looking to upgrade would require a loan of $45,000, which was easy to get. Today, a new truck costs $125,000 and a three-year-old truck is worth $50,000, so the company requires a $75,000 loan and nobody will write it.

Because of this, fleets are hanging onto trucks longer. They then find themselves with a seven-year-old truck worth $20,000 and need a $100,000 mortgage to upgrade to a new truck. Meanwhile, the maintenance costs on a seven-year-old truck are 18 cents a mile compared to five cents a mile on a two-year-old truck, Steve pointed out. The only option for many smaller companies is to start trading in two or three older trucks for one new truck and suddenly a 180-truck company becomes a 150-truck company and so on. How do you grow a fleet under those conditions? It’s nearly impossible, which is why we’re seeing so many acquisitions, where trucks come packaged with drivers to operate them and customers to serve with them.

Steve expects to see the truckload industry undergo significant consolidation in the years ahead. There are currently thousands of truckload providers. Steve thinks there could eventually be only dozens, pointing to the rail and LTL industries of examples of where capacity is controlled by only a handful of providers.

Last month, I asked Dan Einwecther, founder CEO of Challenger Motor Freight if he would be able to replicate his own success if starting out in today’s environment. While he didn’t rule it out entirely, he admitted it would be much more difficult.

“Back then we had a much freer reign in many ways as an industry – whether from a regulatory perspective or compliance – we’d just go. It was definitely a different time,” he told me. “We have more responsibilities placed on our shoulders today, both financial and safety, employment regulations, how we treat our employees, our obligations to society – it’s dramatically more complex.”

When I asked Steve the same question, he was even more cynical. Steve started Celadon in 1985 by leasing 50 trucks at a cost of about $30,000, which by today’s standards would equate to maybe $200,000. Today, he said, to start a trucking company with 50 units, you’d need at least $3-$4 million just to get started. Who, in their right mind, would make such a significant investment for such meager returns?

“That’s why there are very few start-ups,” he said. “What start-up company can you name that has started in the last five years?” I certainly couldn’t name one.

I think of all the great trucking companies today, and how most were built upon a similar foundation: one guy with a truck, a vision and a truckload of ambition. I admitted to Steve I found it somewhat sad that the same opportunities don’t exist today and may never exist again. The glory days of trucking seem to have passed, which to me, as an observer with a passion for the industry, was a melancholic realization. Steve was less sentimental, more philosophical in his response. Look at Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, he said. He started from scratch and is worth $20 billion. Same with the founders of Groupon and other tech firms. There are still opportunities to build something substantial from nothing and to become incredibly wealthy, he said.

“But as an asset-based trucking company? Not a prayer.”

So I throw it over to you, folks. As the title suggests, have we seen the end of the trucking tycoon?

Permalink | Comments (10)

There’s been so much talk over the past 12-18 months about natural gas being the fuel of the future for the trucking industry, you had to expect an explosion – in the figurative sense - was imminent.

That explosion may have happened over the past few weeks.

First there was Navistar International announcing a partnership with American gas supplier Clean Energy that effectively addresses the two primary barriers standing in the way of the widespread adoption of gas-powered trucks: the cost of the trucks (they're $30-$50K pricier) and availability of the fuel. In short, the two companies formed an alliance under which they’ll provide fleets with gas-powered International trucks at the same purchase price as their diesel equivalents, provided fleet owners agree to fuel up at Clean Energy fueling stations.

Clean Energy will essentially offset the incremental cost of the technology and then charge a premium on the gas for a period of five or six years, but all the while the fleet will still enjoy fuel prices significantly lower than diesel.

For its part, Clean Energy has committed to build hundreds of natural gas fueling stations on well-travelled highways throughout the US and eventually it vows to have a natural gas station every 250 miles. This program is feasible for Canadian carriers running south and at the announcement, I received assurance that Canadian fleets would not be excluded from the offer.

Jim Hebe, the outspoken sr. vp of North American sales operations with Navistar, told a group of us truck writers the night before the announcement that if the program doesn’t change the trucking industry, he’d “Pack my shit and go home.” I didn’t see him packing his bags after the program was launched. It could be a real winner. For one, Challenger CEO Dan Einwechter had this to say about the program in an exclusive interview with him you can read in the March issue:

“The International announcement last week with Clean Energy in the US, I found that very intriguing. They took a problem and found a different way to approach it and that will help, I believe, get that to the next level. Six months ago I would’ve still said I’m not really sure (about natural gas). Now I would tell you, boy that looks pretty intriguing.”

Just days after Navistar’s announcement, Shell revealed plans to build a natural gas corridor between Edmonton and Calgary, which will set the stage for the roll-out of a broader network of natural gas fueling stations across North America. Shell’s plan doesn’t offer a solution to the high cost of gas-powered trucks, but the company did promise to offer up gas trucks for one-week trials so fleets can gain some comfort with the technology.

It’s another forward-thinking initiative that should go a long way towards nudging natural gas closer to the mainstream. There’s good reason to consider natural gas as a potential fuel for the trucking industry.

For one, we’re sitting on vast quantities of the stuff - at least 100 years’ worth - and new fracking methods are making it possible and cost-effective to extract natural gas from previously untapped depths.

There’s no other way to look at it; we’re sitting on a goldmine and, as natural gas advocate T. Boone Pickens said at the Navistar announcement, we’d be foolish to let the opportunity unused.

Still, lest we get too enthusiastic, there is a potential fly in the ointment for natural gas. As Dan Einwechter pointed out to me in the same interview I previously referenced, gas is cheap in part because there’s no road tax on it. If the trucking industry suddenly transitioned to gas, you can bet the feds would move quickly to tax natural gas in much the same way that they do diesel today.

It’s a reasonable point. One we need to pause to consider before we go leaping headlong into natural gas. Still, the price gap between natural gas and diesel is significant and expected to remain that way for the foreseeable future.

It very well could be that we’ve reached the proverbial tipping point and that natural gas is ready to take off as the fuel of the future for the North American trucking industry. What do you think? Will gas-powered trucks be the norm in the next 5-10 years? Let's hear some prognostications, people.

Permalink | Comments (3)

The following is a spin-off from my column in the December issues of Truck News and Truck West, which will be hitting your desks and cabs next week. I thought I'd repeat my thoughts via my blog, so that readers can weigh in with their own opinions and get some dialogue flowing...

In mid-October, B.C. carriers lauded a decision by the province to permanently include long-haul truck driving among the professions qualifying for inclusion in its provincial nominee program (PNP).

That essentially means B.C.-based long-haul trucking firms will be able to recruit qualified drivers from overseas and the province will expedite their immigration process, fast-tracking their transition to permanent resident status.

Reaction has been mixed. Many fleets insist they can’t find qualified Canadian drivers willing to accept the pay and lifestyle afforded by a career as a long-distance truck driver. Bringing experienced drivers from countries in Europe and the Middle East fills a vital need for the industry and will benefit the economy, proponents contend.

On the flip side, others are left wondering how conditions for professional drivers will ever improve if we’re simply willing to look further abroad for workers who will accept the way things currently are? Have we no appetite to improve conditions for our existing workforce to make professional driving an occupation in which one can earn a decent living, achieve some semblance of work/life balance and take pride in their profession?

In a recent e-mail exchange, Larry Hall, a former fleet owner and head of the North American Truckers Guild, told me he feels the PNP is “the single biggest thing to happen in this industry since deregulation.” He went on to say it “has the potential to undermine our entire labour force,” and he insisted the nation’s professional drivers are “willfully ignorant” of the program’s implications.

I certainly wouldn’t go that far. In my opinion, the PNP is a stopgap measure that will not have far-reaching implications on the industry, simply because it’s an ineffective, expensive and shortsighted solution to the driver shortage. It’s costly (some estimates peg the cost of recruiting a foreign driver through the program at $10,000), many drivers either return home or jump ship to another carrier when their initial contract expires and in many cases drivers who arrive here realize they were sold a bill of goods and the realities of long-haul trucking in Canada are not as glamorous as they imagined or were led to believe.

I feel the PNP programs will have limited long-term success and eventually will fade into oblivion as progressive carriers seek more effective, permanent solutions to attracting workers (and some are already doing this). While I’m skeptical of the PNP, I do believe immigration will play an important role in keeping the industry rolling.

We have an abundance of foreign-born and second generation employees working as truck drivers in this country; progressive fleets could be tapping into this pool more effectively and offering training and compensation that would elevate the quality of our overall driver force. They’re right here, folks, you don’t need to cross any oceans to find them.

As far as the PNP is concerned, I think when we look back on it five years from now, we’ll find it had no significant impact on the trucking industry, good or bad. Larry’s not so sure.

He sees the PNP as an elaborate ploy by big carriers to drive down wages. The answer may be somewhere in the middle. What do you think? Should provincial governments be enabling Canadian trucking firms to recruit from abroad when they’re having difficulty finding drivers here at home? Please discuss…

Permalink | Comments (72)

I visit a lot of fleets and I’ve noticed an interesting trend. The companies that run the nicest, most modern equipment are the same companies that have the longest serving drivers and the most content workforces and consequently, the lowest driver turnover.

“No S#!^, Sherlock,” you say. “Drivers are like fish, they like nice, shiny objects.” But is it really that simple? Can you buy a fleet of shiny new trucks, keep them polished and clean and expect drivers to be knocking your doors down, applications and abstracts in hand and then be eternally grateful for the opportunity to drive your shiny trucks? I hardly think so.

From what I’ve seen, it works best when approached from the opposite direction. Treat your drivers right, treat them as professionals and pay them fairly and you will reap the financial rewards that will allow you to upgrade your equipment more regularly and run a first-class operation. It may not happen overnight, but if you manage your operation prudently, it will happen.

The only way a for-hire trucking company can run modern, premium equipment is by first addressing driver turnover. By providing a good workplace and treating drivers with respect and as the professionals they are, trucking companies will see a boost to the bottom line that will afford them the luxury of replacing equipment sooner and directing financial resources towards keeping the equipment properly maintained; running and looking good.

Take for example, J.F. Kitching & Son, an aggregates hauler north of Toronto. I recently visited them because I was interested in the fact they are the first Canadian fleet to run Cat’s new CT660. That truck aside, what I learned was that the company has very little driver turnover and without that expense - which so many trucking companies just accept as a cost of doing business - they are able to turn over their trucks every five years. Every five years. This is an aggregates hauler. Some of their competitors are running 20-year-old dump trucks that spew out black smoke at every upshift. (With apologies to Stephen Large…I know not all 20-year-old dump trucks are pieces of garbage).

I asked driver Ken Robinson what J.F. Kitching was like to work for. He’s been there for 17 years, so he should know. “I came here to work part-time,” he told me. “They treat me like gold and I’ve stayed here. I don’t plan on leaving.”

Grant Kitching, patriarch of the family, told me it boils down to treating drivers well. They’re paid by the hour, which is also unusual in their sector of the industry. He said the company benefits from that arrangement as much as the drivers do. When drivers aren’t pushing hard all day to get an extra trip in, they’re easier on equipment and less likely to be involved in accidents. This translates to savings on everything from brakes and tires to insurance premiums. That’s real money that stays in the company’s bank account and can then be used to pay drivers a little better than the guy down the road or to upgrade equipment more frequently. At the same time, drivers are content and less likely to jump to another carrier or pursue another type of trucking altogether. The cost of replacing drivers has been well documented. Once again, without that expense, companies like J.F. Kitching & Son can pay a little better and invest more into their equipment.

This is not rocket science and I understand I’m oversimplifying a rather complicated issue. But for companies that think they can’t afford to upgrade their equipment regularly, run premium iron decked out with all the driver-friendly accessories or pay their drivers an above average, hourly wage, ask yourself that age-old question about the chicken and the egg. You just may find that investing in your drivers first will free up the resources to invest in other aspects of your business, including those nice shiny trucks.

- Note: For anyone who was wondering where my most recent blog on sleep apnea went to, it and all the related comments were wiped out during a recent server interruption of some sort. I’m bummed out, not because it was a journalistic masterpiece by any stretch of the imagination, but because it has garnered some very thoughtful responses. But nothing can be done about that now, so maybe we’ll just have to address that subject again another day.

Permalink | Comments (20)

I recently visited with L. Ritchie Cartage, a 40-odd-truck fleet out of Scarborough that initially caught my eye because they run a well-kept fleet of city and highway tractors that I encounter pretty much every day on my commute. I love the red and black paint scheme and the classic styling of the fleet, which is comprised mostly of Western Stars.

It’s always interesting to visit trucking companies on their own turf to see what makes them unique. For a relatively small operation, L. Ritchie Cartage is surprisingly sophisticated when it comes to spec’ing equipment. The carrier has taken a strong interest in spec’ing ergonomic equipment that’s user friendly for drivers.

Sylvia Rhodes, president of L. Ritchie, told me her interest in ergonomics was piqued when the company was invited to participate in a study on the subject with WSIB and the Centre of Research Expertise for Musculoskeletal Disorders (try saying that one five times fast). The study eventually helped shape current requirements for ergonomic workplaces.

Some of the things that factor into equipment spec’ing decisions include: alignment of the steering wheel in relation to the driver’s seat; placement of grab handles; force required to crank up trailer legs; force required to secure trailer doors; location of cup holders; and dash layout.

Watch as Sylvia describes ergonomic requirements in her own words:

As you may have noticed in the video, L. Ritchie is also spec’ing automated transmissions, which is a curious spec’ on a classic-styled long-nose like the Western Star, yet no doubt a driver-friendly option. Think of the force that’s required to work the clutch on any given day, especially on the company’s city trucks. While the cup holders may seem to be a good reach from the driver’s seat, another consideration is what happens in the event of a spill? In this instance, at least the driver is unlikely to be burnt shall his cup floweth over.

As Sylvia mentions in the video, ergonomics, in L. Ritchie’s case, are enough to sway a purchasing decision from one brand of equipment to another. The emphasis on ergonomics seems to have translated to a very low turnover rate, at least among the carrier’s longest serving drivers, some of whom measure their years with the company in decades – not years.

Permalink | Comments (0)

If you were a Canadian owner/operator hauling into the US between 1991 and 2002, the carrier you worked for at that time may have a cheque for you. As I first reported last week, a group of about 35 carriers has won a landmark settlement against Canada Revenue Agency that will see up to $15 million returned to their owner/operators.

The issue involves the federal excise tax paid on diesel that was consumed outside Canada. The carriers, represented by Manitoba-based lawyer Israel Ludwig, managed to convince CRA that the diesel they brought into the US qualified as an ‘export,’ making it eligible for an excise tax rebate. Carriers received rebates for company-owned trucks in 2003, however, the battle continued on behalf of owner/operators for several years.

CRA’s position was that, as independent businesspeople, the owner/operators should have filed on their own. Ludwig, on the other hand, argued that’s not how the industry works. Often, the carrier orchestrates fuel purchasing using company cards and then deducts it from their owner/operators’ pay. In November, CRA agreed to reimburse the carriers for the excise tax paid by their owner/operators. The first cheques have gone out to three fleets that served as test cases: Nolan Transport, Bison Transport and Penner International.

Nolan has already made payments to the owner/operators that qualified for the rebate with some of them receiving up to $16,000. Owner/ops who bought fuel in Canada and did most of their driving in the US stand to gain the most. While Israel told me it would be illegal for carriers to pocket the rebate rather than pass it on to the owner/operators who earned it, there are some concerns about just how hard some of the carriers will work to track down owner/ops who may not have worked for them for more than a decade. I visited Nolan Transport the other day, and co-owner Kelly Nolan admitted it’s a lot of work. Yet, she has enjoyed calling past owner/ops, catching up and, oh yeah, telling them she’s got a cheque for them.

Kelly comments on the experience in this video.

The other 30-plus carriers involved in the settlement will be receiving cheques in the next 60-90 days, Israel told me. Carriers that weren’t audited back in 03 or 04 will have to wait till their audits are complete, to determine just how much they’ll receive. While I suspect most, if not all, carriers will do the right thing and pass the funds onto their owner/operators, I’ve filed an Access to Information request with CRA to see who was involved in the settlement and how much each carrier received. (Israel wouldn’t provide me with the list due to client confidentiality obligations). I’m hoping we can play a role in connecting these companies with owner/operators who may be in line for a payment.

It’s a great story, as it’s not every day owner/operators get an unexpected cheque from Revenue Canada. Unfortunately, if you weren’t working at the time for a carrier that was among the few dozen who brought this case to court, you won’t be able to make a claim. The feds passed legislation in 2003 that closed this loophole and prevents any further claims on fuel purchased in Canada and consumed elsewhere.

Permalink | Comments (13)

“It’s my luck that this would happen to me.” Those were the words American driver Ray Dillow, 51, reportedly said to media following an accident at a shipper’s yard in which a Canadian driver lost his life on Nov. 30. You can bet it won’t be the last time he hears those words. And there’s a very good chance that a judge and jury in a civil courtroom will hear them as well. Those simple words may very well haunt Dillow as profoundly as the accident itself.

Insurance companies have often instructed their trucking company clients to advise drivers never to speak to media at the scene of an accident, and Dillow’s remarks are precisely the reason. He was no doubt in shock, having reportedly struck and killed a Canadian truck driver just moments earlier in a crowded yard.

A Canadian driver is dead; never to return home to his family and according to media reports, the dog that was found in his cab is now in the care of the local dog warden, a painful little detail that really hits home.

Dillow’s comment, as cold as it may sound, was likely innocent enough. Perhaps he’s not to blame for the incident and maybe the severity of it had not yet hit home when he made the remark. Maybe he didn’t even know the Canadian driver had succumbed to his injuries. Even so, he will receive little empathy in a US courtroom should a civil lawsuit be initiated. You can’t take those words back. You can’t take any words back when spoken in the presence of media, which is why it’s best to say nothing at all in the immediate aftermath of an accident. It’s a point insurance companies will continue to emphasize but one that is clearly easily forgotten in the heat of the moment.

My heart goes out to the family of the Canadian driver who lost his life on the job Nov. 30. The investigation will run its course and blame will be assigned. Deserved or not, the target on Dillow's back grew exponentially when he spoke those nine simple words.

Permalink | Comments (4)

I spent Friday at the Ontario Trucking Association’s annual convention, where the topic of an impending driver shortage was once again on everyone’s mind. This time, however, it seems trucking company executives are taking a different approach to the issue. While in the past, trucking execs following the mantra “He who has the drivers wins,” conducted hiring blitzes with attractive signing bonuses and as many perks as they could load into the truck cab and added capacity at the behest of shippers without a second thought. This time, if they’re to be believed, trucking company execs will be much more restrained when it comes to adding capacity.

Rick Gaetz, CEO of Vitran Corp., got an applause when he made the following point: “In 2005, instead of worrying about where we were taking our companies, we became consumed with where we were going to get new drivers. We became consumed with increasing our driver pools, which has one simple effect; it drives down price - end of story. The driver shortage is going to be much worse going forward. As crass as this may sound, the driver shortage is your friend to get your company back to the point where it earns enough return to reinvest appropriately in your business and pay drivers what they deserve.”

Gaetz later re-emphasized: “The driver shortage may be the biggest friend that you’ve had in your career and we have to find a way to deal with it, not to exploit it or take advantage of it.”

Jeff Bryan of Jeff Bryan Transport agreed: “This driver shortage is going to present an excellent opportunity for us to grow our business organically with great customers and good rates.”

So there you have it. Trucking industry leaders are saying all the right things. They say they will respond to the driver shortage differently this time around, and use it to their advantage to get a fair rate and to pay drivers what they’re worth. It’s a noble thought and if industry leaders have the resolve to carry through, everyone will be far better off.

Permalink | Comments (3)

I received the following note the other day about the loss of industry pioneer and well-respected businessman Vic Pettigrew. While I didn’t know Vic personally, I thought I’d turn this space over to Bill Cameron of Parks Transportation, who wrote this thoughtful eulogy. Over to you, Bill...

On October 9, Victor Pettigrew passed. He was previously the third generation owner of Millers Garage, Owen Sound's International dealer. At the time of his retirement just a few years ago, the company had been operating over ninety years.

Victor had a well-earned reputation as one of the more obliging, nicest people you could do business with. Over the years, more than one brand new truck was ordered with nothing more than a handshake for a down payment. His Yellow Pages ad always had his home phone number, as well as at that of at least one parts staffer. After hours parts availability was, in his opinion, a necessity.

"We're under no obligation to be here 24/7," he told me once, “but we damned well better be available 24/7."

This was mentioned during one of many long conversations I had with him over the years - conversations that occasionally actually concerned business. If he knew you, and you had time and an inclination to solve the world’s problems, he was game.

I've seen more than one farmer or small contractor bring an old truck into the shop, only to have Victor do his best to convince them the vehicle was not worth repairing. It didn't matter that his shop wasn't particularly busy that week; his integrity didn't have a dollar figure.

My well-worn story about the man is not a rarity. Countless other small operators can tell a comparable tale. A few weeks after we started in business, our 20-year-old truck had a rear differential give out. Victor’s full shop, and busy mechanics, suddenly, like magic, had a space and mechanic for our truck (this was a common occurrence).

We had been in business long enough to accumulate a stack of fuel bills and toll receipts, but not long enough to have many receivables flow in. I sheepishly asked if I could take the truck away, even though I couldn't pay for a few weeks. He just laughed and said "You can't pay my bill if you're not driving it, of course you can take it."

They don't build trucks like that old 4070 COE anymore, and they sure as hell don't make businesspeople like Vic Pettigrew anymore either.

Bill Cameron
Parks Transportation

Permalink | Comments (3)

I spent the better part of last week in Dallas, attending the first annual Commercial Vehicle Outook Conference. It was a good conference, with a wide range of respected speakers from industry representing OEMs, carriers and freight forecasters.

The overall tone of the conference was upbeat. Industry analysts feel the industry is headed in the right direction, despite waning consumer confidence and a slowdown in housing starts. When it gets right down to it, it’s freight volumes that matter most, and they are trending up in virtually every mode, presenters at the conference pointed out.

But the road ahead is not without its bumps. There were two concerns weighing heavily on the minds of fleet executives who spoke at the conference. One is that US hours-of-service will, in fact, be reduced as early as this fall. Perhaps I’m naïve. I thought the current review was Obama’s way of placating special interest groups who had challenged the current rules, claiming they are unsafe, and that after a thorough review no substantial changes would be implemented. After all, highway and truck safety have both improved under the current HoS rules, so they can’t possibly be a concern. Looks like I was wrong on that one. Industry reps at the conference seem resigned to the fact that US hours-of-service will be reduced by one or two hours per day and the 34-hour reset could even be extended to 48 hours.

"The hours-of-service rewrite is a political football and it will have nothing to do with good science," said ATA chairman Tommy Hodges, who also runs Titan Transfer. "It's a political football that is going to get passed over our heads. There's a good possibility we will lose one to two hours of driving time and there's a strong possibility we'll lose the 34-hour restart."

Losing two hours of driving time per day would be a 18-19% productivity hit in the trucking industry, including for those of you running into the US. Fleet executives on-hand said it will require a change of mindset; trucking companies will need to start measuring productivity based on time, not miles.

A possible reduction in legal working hours for truck drivers may be compounded with what was predicted at the conference to be a driver shortage of unprecedented proportions. It’s possible CSA 2010 may make up to 200,000 current drivers unemployable.

"This industry historically thinks in terms of miles," said Tom Kretsinger, president and CEO of American Central Transport. "I think one of the key measures will have to be time. What percentage of this limited time can we put to good revenue use for us and the driver." (Another sign that a shift towards hourly pay for drivers is gaining momentum?)

As for CSA 2010, there’s growing recognition that the safest, most compliant drivers will have an Ace up their sleeves when it comes to partnering with the best carriers and commanding top rates. I’ve wondered, aloud at times, whether we’ll see tiered pay packages based on the CSA 2010 scores a driver brings to a carrier. It may happen.

Hodges referred to CSA 2010 as the ‘Free Agency for Drivers Bill.’ He said the safest drivers will be like a free agent pro athlete, able to offer their services to the highest bidder, knowing just how important a driver’s CSA 2010 score will be to his/her employer.

“A driver who knows he's got a good record, knows how to abide by the rules and knows his value to my company, he'll say 'look at my score, you're going to pay me 50 cents/mile or I'll go over to XYZ and they will,” Hodges predicted.

Kretsinger took it a step further, saying “I’m not managing this company at the moment. The drivers are, because they’re in short supply.”

A potential reduction in legal working hours, coupled with a driver shortage that’s already becoming evident, combined with a possible purging of existing drivers brought on by CSA 2010, could result in a major capacity crisis, presenters said. Several said there will be instances where freight sits undelivered on shippers’ docks. It will be fascinating to see how it plays out over the next couple of years.

Permalink | Comments (7)

I’m going to wade into meslippery’s favourite subject for a moment; paying drivers by the hour. Just how realistic is this? I was surprised to see Lou Smyrlis tweet the following during a speech by Kriska Transport’s Mark Seymour at the recent TransCore User Conference: ‘Paying by the mile is going to have to change: Seymour.’

That’s a pretty bold statement from a fleet executive, especially one as esteemed as Seymour, who currently also serves as chair of the Ontario Trucking Association. I wonder if that remark will bring some heat from his co-horts at OTA?

At any rate, it needed to be said. Driver pay isn’t sufficient and it’s encouraging that the industry’s top executives acknowledge that. Seymour isn’t the first to do so. At last year’s OTA convention, a panel of trucking executives was equally candid about the subject. Moderator David Bradley posed the question: “Drivers have been paid on a productivity basis for most of the industry's history. Now with GPS and possibly EOBRs, you really can get a handle in terms of the driver's performance. Is it time to pay drivers by the hour?”

To which Vaughn Sturgeon of Warren Transport (now Atlantica Diversified Transportation Systems) said: “If you think the driving force is going to continue on without demanding changes, you are fooling yourselves. Canada is approaching 70% of its population in the current workforce. We have a demographic tsunami heading our way. We are going to need to attract new people who are not used to our pay practices. They are just not going to put up with it.”

And then Bruno Muller of Caron Transportation added: “The whole discussion in this industry is how much more can we squeeze out of the driver? We are in for a crash down the road. If you are totally honest and account for what the driver gets paid for the total amount of hours he puts in, the guy is basically working for minimum wage most of the time. I don't think there is any way to soften this. I believe drivers are underpaid not 5% or 10%, I think drastic numbers. And that carries through to the owner/operators. When the economy picks up, we haven't got a chance of competing with other industries. And there will never come a day when we have a computer driving a truck. Take it to heart; we have a problem: Our people don't get paid enough and it's going to hurt us big time down the road.”

Those are some profound admissions from industry leaders. When speaking with our recently crowned Owner/Operator of the Year, Howard Brouwer, he said driver pay is the number one issue facing the industry. And while he tracks his costs meticulously and runs a smart operation, he would welcome the switch to hourly pay.

“It would take a lot of stress off you,” Brouwer said of hourly pay. “The biggest thing right now, with the hours-of-service, is the stress of running the miles in that 14-hour day, especially when you get sitting at a customer’s. The stress level goes sky high. If I sit, I get bored. When I get bored, I get tired. So now you have a bored, tired truck driver on the road. With hourly pay, you can be relaxed and do the job properly because you’re not worried about making up that time.”

This is no secret, but Brouwer says the onus is on carriers to make shippers accountable for detention time. Only then, is hourly pay feasible.

“The trucking industry has to look more at detention time at customers,” he said. “They don’t want to say to customers that ‘You have to pay for our equipment sitting in your driveway,’ but they have to. Customers demand 98% on-time delivery but then you sit in their yard for six hours waiting to get loaded.”

We seem to be at a tipping point. Drivers, for the most part, would welcome the switch to hourly pay. Forward-thinking fleet executives agree change is necessary. But as long as there are fly-by-night operators running with a blatant disregard for the regulations, as is the case today, it will never happen. Fortunately, technology is now allowing for the more effective and efficient enforcement of the rules. Carriers that don’t adhere to the regulations will soon be exposed and squeezed out. CSA 2010, EOBRs, satellite tracking – these are the great enablers for enforcement agencies that should spell the end for non-compliant carriers. Then, and only then, will it be possible to make some progress when it comes to how - and how much - drivers are paid.

Permalink | Comments (19)

The 25th edition of the Fergus Truck Show came and went over the weekend and already there are rumblings it will be the last. The body’s still breathing folks, so let’s not bury it just yet. It may be premature to be discussing alternative venues in southern Ontario but that’s exactly what many visitors to the show were doing on Saturday and Sunday.

Indeed the show has its challenges. Shrinking crowds and escalating costs are chief among them, exacerbated by a growing reluctance on the part of landowners to rent space needed for camping and parking.

It seems that somewhere along the way, the event morphed from truck show to music festival, yet organizers have heard those complaints and are trying to return the show to its roots.

Many of us were expecting disaster last weekend after the show dropped its full-time staffers and announced it would be run entirely by volunteers. However, things ran smoothly, for us at least, and the volunteers were always ready to help out when called upon. From the moment we checked in, Cassie ensured we had everything we needed and our important Owner/Operator of the Year presentation went off without a hitch.

For that we are thankful. (More on the Owner/Operator of the Year later).

The volunteers worked tirelessly throughout the weekend and at no time did we witness anything resembling chaos or disorder. Well done.

There are always complaints surrounding an event of this magnitude, but most we heard concerned the weather and the dwindling crowds. One ultimately affects the other and it seems Fergus Truck Show organizers just can’t catch a break when it comes to weather. The weather gods were smiling Sunday, however, and you couldn’t have asked for a better day for a truck show.

There were still some breathtaking show trucks on display but the overall truck count was down, way down. The spirit of the show’n’shiners remained strong, however, with countless hours spent primping and polishing their rigs.

For me, truck shows like Fergus are all about the people. Here are a couple stories that stood out from the weekend:

When making the rounds with colleague Adam Ledlow and our video equipment, we ran into Dale Holman, one of the very first Truck News Owner/Operators of the Year. His son Cory was on-site polishing their 94 Freightliner dubbed Generations.

Dale was the first owner of the truck, and he put a million miles on it. His father Floyd then took over and added another million miles. Floyd passed away, and now it’s Cory’s turn to add his million miles to the odometer.

The truck still gets nearly 9 mpg, if you can believe that. On the door you’ll find inscribed the names of three generations of Holmans: Floyd (flanked by angel wings), Dale and Cory. It’s trucking families like that who are the backbone of the industry. Watch for their story on Adam’s Fergus episode of our WebTV show Transportation Matters in the coming weeks.

The other moment that really struck me was when we had a very special visitor to our booth, 10-year-old Jackson Felkar. Jackson is wheelchair-bound and comes from a trucking family, Felkar 5 Trucking out of Dutton, Ont. They haul livestock.

According to his parents, Jackson is an avid fan of Truck News. He gets excited when it arrives in the mail and he even takes it with him to school. Below, you’ll see a picture I took of Jackson at our booth with publisher Rob Wilkins and associate publisher Kathy Penner.

It’s moments like the ones I just mentioned that make going to the truck show worthwhile. If it wasn’t for the show, I wouldn’t have known what ‘Generations’ meant when I passed that white Freightliner on the highway and I wouldn’t have known that the work we do here makes a kid’s day in Dutton, Ont. when the latest issue arrives in his mailbox.

The Fergus Truck Show, and others like it, have their challenges. But let’s not lose sight of the fact these get-togethers are important for a whole bunch of reasons and at the end of the weekend, the memories we take with us hopefully outweigh the inconveniences encountered or the discomfort wrought by an uncooperative Mother Nature.

Jackson Felkar pays us a visit at the Truck News booth at the Fergus Truck Show. His family runs Felkar 5 Trucking hauling livestock out of Dutton, Ont.

Permalink | Comments (2)

A professional tanker driver unloads at an Ontario plant. He’s from the States and far from home. Unloading can be laborious at times, especially following a long run and all the rigors of the road. After unloading and taking a few moments to chat with a fellow driver, he climbs back into his rig and prepares to leave.

The driver he was just talking to notices something is wrong. Suddenly, the tanker driver is slouched in his seat – the victim of a heart attack. Scenes like this play out all the time and from this point, then can have one of two outcomes.

In this recent, real-life scenario, it was a fortunate outcome. Several employees at the Home Hardware paint division plant to which the driver was delivering were volunteer firefighters. And the facility had been equipped with an Automated External Defibrillator (AED). Witnesses leapt into action and were able to administer CPR as well as defibrillation. The driver survived and is reportedly doing well.

The above story was relayed to me by Kevin Hall, vice-president of Keith Hall Transport, himself a volunteer firefighter. He tells me these AEDs are incredibly easy to use (even with no training) and not overly expensive. You can get them for as little as $1,500 nowadays.

According to the Heart and Stroke Foundation, when combined with CPR, an AED can increase the likelihood of saving a heart attack victim’s life by 75% or more over CPR alone. The same group also says: “Defibrillation improves survival rates by up to 30% if delivered in the first few minutes. With each passing minute, the probability of survival declines by 7 to 10%. Making defibrillators easily accessible has the potential to save thousands of lives.”

With the proven effectiveness of AEDs and the ever-decreasing cost of the equipment, I have to wonder why more terminals aren’t equipped with the devices – especially flatdeck terminals and others that involve a lot of hand bombing and manual loading and unloading. Efforts have been underway to get these life-saving devices into every hockey rink, where out-of-shape middle-aged men have been dropping dead for years. Why don’t we start putting the same emphasis on getting them into loading facilities, where out-of-shape, middle-aged men are also regularly exerting a lot of energy? Something to think about.

If I’ve persuaded you to consider implementing an AED program at your facility, here’s a great document from the Heart and Stroke Foundation that will get you started: http://tinyurl.com/33rt8xs. You hope you never have to use it but if you do, there’s a very good chance you’ll eventually save someone’s life.

Do you work for (or deliver to) a company that has AEDs on-hand? If so, please share your observations/experiences.

Permalink | Comments (0)

On a recent tour of Volvo’s New River Valley truck plant in Dublin, Va., I had the chance to listen to truck expert Frank Bio discuss aerodynamics and fuel efficiency. He gave a 10-minute overview on the subject in front of a Volvo VN. Here are four quick tips (all of them easy and inexpensive to implement) that I thought were worth sharing:

Slow down: When travelling down the highway at 65 mph, 30-50% of the energy generated by the engine goes towards simply moving the vehicle through the air, Bio noted. A lot of customers are beginning to slow down to improve fuel mileage. Bio said many customers that used to gear to run 72 mph are now reducing their road speed down to 67 mph, which causes a 3-5% fuel economy improvement. There’s just one caveat, Bio says, you must also keep your rear axle ratio set where it will allow the engine to continue running in the sweet spot.

Remove the bug screen: Bio mused that Volvo has spent millions of dollars in engineering to find and remove slight percentages of drag, only to have a customer slap a bug screen on the hood. A bug screen hinders fuel economy by 1-2%, he pointed out. At the very least, he suggested, remove the bug screen in the wintertime when bugs are a non-issue. If nothing else, that should nullify the fuel economy degradation that winter brings.

Spec’ full-length fairings: A full-length fairing on the tractor, which extends from wheel to wheel, can improve fuel economy by 1-3% on its own, Bio noted. You can choose between short, medium and full-length fairings – but the fuel savings really come from the full-length cab fairings.

Minimize trailer gap: Reducing the gap between tractor and trailer from 60 inches to 40 can result in fuel savings of 3%. Moving from 50 inches to 40 inches saves about 1.2%. For those who can’t optimize the trailer gap, Volvo now offers an inexpensive trim tab that mounts to the back of the cab and can be adjusted to optimize air flow over top the trailer.

Permalink | Comments (1)

I’ve always felt that being connected to the trucking industry makes my daily commute a lot more tolerable. I’ve got plenty of eye candy to help pass the miles. My wife always catches me craning my neck at the passing rigs and she shakes her head while I wonder what it must be like to have no appreciation whatsoever for the nice iron we see on a daily basis. Unfortunately, she’s the norm and I’m the exception in the grand scheme of things.

Anyhow, I figured it was time to write a blog acknowledging some of the more pristine fleets that run our highways. I’ll start the discussion with three fleets that never fail to turn my head. But first, the criteria I used in my (highly unscientific) selection process:

* Equipment type: Must run well-maintained, late model equipment.
* Logo/Paint/Decals: Must have recognizable paint scheme and nice use of colours.
* Operator Pride: This is the most important one to me. The equipment must scream pride of ownership. Credit goes not only to the fleet or owner/operator, but the driver who keeps it looking that way when it leaves the yard.

Before anyone takes this too seriously, this is intended only as a fun discussion, not a serious competition. I don’t want to offend anyone I left out. And of course, I welcome other suggestions as well. Let’s keep a running list. One last point, I’m judging these trucks on how they look on the highway and at the truck stops – not the truck shows where they’ve been polished up for hours. Without further ado, here are the fleets I am continually impressed by, in no particular order:

Sleeman Breweries: I always get a little thirsty when I see a Sleeman truck. The trucks and trailers are colourful, easily-recognizable and well-maintained. This fleet looks like it turns its trucks over every year - the equipment’s always clean and shiny. I also like how the trucks are a variety of different colours while maintaining the same distinct branding. The Sleeman fleet is among the sharpest looking fleets on the highway.

Samuel: This company is in the metal business, but it is equally attentive to the iron it runs down the road. You can tell it’s a Samuel truck at first glance. And as much attention has gone into the tarps as the tractors themselves.

L. Ritchie Cartage: The black Western Stars with the red lettering are distinctive, yet subtle. No fancy graphic logo, just the name of the company in bold lettering. The trailers are equally distinctive. These trucks and trailers scream operator pride.

An honourable mention to Kurtz Trucking. Want to challenge me on my selections or add to them? Let’s hear it!

Permalink | Comments (14)

I’ve written quite favourably about Ontario’s LCV program and in doing so, I’ve invited some criticism from drivers and engaged in some interesting debates. As I see it, drivers stand to benefit from the program. Carriers have told me they pay 20-30% per-mile premiums for LCV drivers. Here’s an opportunity to take the training, get certified, enhance your value and make more money. For the motivated driver, what’s not to like about that? If only it were so simple.

In talking to several LCV-certified drivers, it seems there’s a significant discrepancy between what carriers say they pay their LCV drivers and what those drivers are actually making.

One such driver, Kassie Gibner, shares her experience: “Although it's quite the experience to pull the LCVs, and the money that's saved and made for the company is sizeable, typically it only pays three cents a mile more than running a single. Not even remotely worth it as a driver to take on the added responsibilities and extra work, only to be under such incredible scrutiny by everyone from the companies themselves to the OTA to the public.”

Worse yet, she tells me she’s at risk of losing her job because she’s the only LCV-certified driver at her company and she’s no longer willing to pull doubles for a measly three cents a mile extra. Jumping to another carrier that pays better may be an attractive option, but it’s now clear why a clause was cleverly tucked into the regulations that makes the LCV certification non-transferrable. She’d have to re-certify if she moved to another fleet.

At any rate, she’s not the only one who has told me the extra pay isn’t worth the added responsibility and scrutiny. Many drivers say that even with a small per-mile premium, pulling LCVs is a losing proposition when you factor in the reduced speed and extra time spent hooking up and inspecting equipment.

So where are the savings going and why aren’t drivers getting their fair share?

Some drivers tell me the big carriers are lining their pockets with the efficiencies afforded by pulling Twin-53s. I don’t buy that. I see very few carriers getting rich running LCVs. My suspicion is that the vast majority of the savings are being passed onto the shipper. But why?

Eric Gignac of Groupe Guilbault perhaps said it best at last year’s OTA convention: “Why should we give the savings to the customer? That's what I'm hearing in Ontario and that scares me a lot. You need a shipper who gives you two truckloads at the same time at the same place with the same appointment time with equal weight. If you have that in Ontario, you're lucky. We don't have that in Quebec. You have savings but you also have extra costs - permits, paying more for the driver…”

Damn straight.

As an observer, I see quite clearly there’s something fundamentally wrong with this picture. More than anything else, the success of the Ontario LCV program hinges on the professionalism and abilities of the drivers. They are being touted as the elite, the cream of the crop. So treat them like they’re elite and pay them like they’re elite. Otherwise, there’s a very real possibility this program will fall flat.

In closing, if you’re the manager of a fleet that is participating in the LCV program and pay your LCV-certified drivers fairly, go ahead and tout your LCV pay packages by commenting below. Consider it a free ad on me (just don’t tell Kathy). Perhaps it’ll put some pressure on the others. In all seriousness, let’s get some dialogue going. Fleet managers, what do you pay your LCV drivers? Drivers, what are you being offered to pull Twin-53s?

Permalink | Comments (34)

Okay, I don’t know if I’m completely gullible and took this hook, line and sinker or whether this job posting is legit. Either way, a reader forwarded the following job posting to us.

Among the highlights: ‘We don't pay per hour as our experience is that driver's tend to slack off and not much productivity is done and it damages our companies reputation.’

And this: ‘We don't know exactly how many runs you will do per week, maybe as low as none, or as much as 4 runs to Sherbrooke. It is up to you to keep in contact with dispatch every few minutes and also the days you are not working.’

And also this gem: ‘I am disclosing below that the trucks and trailers do have mechanical problems, some 50/50 chance of geting put out of service at the inspection station. You need to be mechanically inclined to fix/repair minor defects like brake chambers, suspension system,fifth wheel etc.. on truck/trailers. These are normal things that every AZ driver should know how to fix/repair if necessary.’

And just in case you were still thinking of applying, be forewarned: ‘MY JOB IS TO MAKE SURE THE LOAD GETS TO THE CUSTOMER ON TIME, IT IS UP TO YOU HOW YOU GET IT THERE. I DO NOT WANT YOU TO WASTE MY TIME IN PERSON, IF YOU ARE NOT SATISFIED WITH THE EQUIPMENT YOU ARE DRIVING. PLEASE NOTE: YOU ARE GETTING PAID TO DRIVE.’

And to cap it off: ‘Serious applicants only.’

Now for the really scary part, the update: 'UPDATED 1 POSITION FILLED, 1 LEFT'

What do you say, has it really come to this or have I been had?

Permalink | Comments (11)

Very few, if any, segments of the trucking industry have emerged unscathed from the recession of the past two years. But it seems dump truck operators are a particularly hard-hit bunch.

Gord Balford, an owner/operator in the Barrie, Ont.-area called me the other day to dicuss the sector’s many problems. He has sold his pup trailer and parked his Western Star gravel truck, because there are too many guys running their trucks for $70/hour and even major customers are exploiting the situation.

Making matters worse, he said companies are dragging their feet when it comes to paying drivers. He said one company just paid him just last week for work he did for them in August.

Balford said the final straw for him was when he bid what he felt was a reasonable rate on a job hauling wood shavings - but someone else came along with an end-dump and undercut his rate by a full 50%. That’s when he put his pup up for sale and parked his rig.

“This is how cutthroat it is and it’s getting worse,” he told me.

The obvious answer to the problem is that it’s simply a matter of supply and demand. Just like in the freight business, there are too many trucks chasing too little work. But wait a sec, what became of all the federal stimulus spending we were promised? I got the sense there’d be a new building going up on every corner, every mile of roadway would be getting an upgrade and gravel pits would be running low.

Instead we hear of rate wars, owner/operators selling their equipment and parking their trucks and companies that require their services taking months to pay up.

Ron Singer is the president of the Alberta Construction Trucking Association (ACTA) and is also a columnist for Truck West magazine. In this month’s columns, he identified several issues facing construction truckers in his home province. They’re the same everywhere in this country –except maybe Vancouver which is buzzing with pre-Olympic activity.

Ron says gravel trucking rates are down 10-30% in Alberta, depending on the region. It used to be you couldn’t help but make money if you had a gravel truck in resource-rich Alberta. Now, the industry is being put to the test and it is not responding well. Singer says he’s noticed a steady decline in professionalism and ethics within his own industry, which he notes is in correlation with the steady exit of the more experienced drivers who’ve had enough and hung up their keys.

In Alberta, the ACTA at least has a plan. For starters, it’s been surveying construction truckers across the province to learn about their most pressing concerns and to determine what they’re getting paid. It also developed a Code of Ethics and Standards that all of its members must adhere to. Next up, and this is the big challenge, the association hopes to get buy-in from all construction truckers. Singer feels that if everyone in the business unites, they can force some real change when it comes to rates and working conditions. We’re not talking about union organization and we’re not talking about price-fixing – his group is just asking guys to respect one another out there and demonstrate a level of professionalism and courtesy that seems to have been waning in recent years.

As we’ve seen with Obama, promising change is a lot easier than actually delivering it. But gravel haulers need to work together and buy into a common vision if they want their rates and working conditions to improve. Think it’ll never happen? There is a precedent for this. The Truckers Association of Nova Scotia (TANS) is a pretty effective little industry group out east that looks after its members and has even convinced government to agree that a certain percentage of trucks on any taxpayer-funded job site will belong to independents.

Nova Scotia dump truckers are not without their problems, but there’s a level of respect among them that’s almost non-existent in many other parts of the country. Singer says TANS is the model ACTA aspires to. I wish Ron and the ACTA well in their endeavour to raise the professionalism of their own industry. It’ll be worth watching and, if successful, celebrating.

EDITED TO ADD PICTURE: Here's a picture of the dual/use vehicle Norm alluded to. How about it? Would you consider running a gravel truck with a removable dump body if it provided you the versatility to haul freight/logs or other commodities when things are slow?

Permalink | Comments (37)

It’s Christmas Eve and it’s pretty quiet here in the office. But before I head out to spend time with family, I wanted to leave you with two heart-warming stories that will hopefully provide some Christmas cheer at the end of an otherwise difficult year.

By now you may have heard of the sudden closure this week of Arrow Trucking in the States. The 1,400-truck fleet reportedly closed down unexpectedly, locking its doors, cancelling its fuel cards and instructing drivers to turn their trucks in to the nearest Freigthliner or Kenworth dealership.

As many as 1,000 drivers were stranded all across the US – many without money for food, fuel or a ride home. (Daimler Trucks was providing Greyhound bus tickets in exchange for their truck, but it was an imperfect solution for many of them, since they were flatdeckers and carried a lot of gear with them).

So far it doesn’t sound like a very nice story at all, but what happened next was extraordinary. The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers’ Association (OOIDA) set to work and set up a Facebook site to help arrange rides home for stranded Arrow drivers. The site exploded that evening and within hours hundreds of professional drivers were posting their location, the direction they were headed and their contact numbers.

Drivers were offering rides, hot meals, showers – even a place to stay and in some cases money for food or shelter. The offers continued pouring in and still do today, although it’s hoped most Arrow drivers have found their way home in time for Christmas. You can check out the Facebook page here, it’s bound to put a smile on your face.

Some major carriers such as Swift and Schneider also got in on the act, instructing their drivers to help out any stranded Arrow driver they come across. (Smart PR move, by the way. These drivers will forever remember who gave them a ride when they were in need and who do you think they’ll want to drive for in the future)?

Job offers were also posted as well, which should give many of the displaced Arrow drivers some comfort, knowing they may not be out of work for long. It was really nice to see our American truck driving friends rally to look after one another and I’m confident the same would have occurred here had the need arisen – thankfully it has not!

The other trucking-related story that caught my attention this morning came from Moose Jaw, Sask., where several professional drivers arrived at the yard for work to find a litter of six puppies abandoned in a crate and left outside in -18 C weather.

The truck drivers took the puppies to the Humane Society, but there was no room at the inn (to borrow an analogy from the original writer). So the drivers returned to the yard and ensured they found a good home for each of the pups. Whoever coldly abandoned the puppies must have known that truckers are good people and would ensure they were taken care of.

In both instances, professional drivers provided a refreshing reminder that getting the load to its destination on time is not always the most important priority. Helping our fellow man (and man’s best friend) in their time of need still trumps any delivery of freight.

On that note, I want to wish everyone a Merry Christmas, enjoyable holiday and Happy New Year. It’s been a tough year for nearly everyone connected to this industry, but let’s all hope for a more prosperous 2010!

Permalink | Comments (8)

In writing an article on Alberta’s new licence restrictions for those who take their road test using a truck equipped with an automated or automatic transmission, I got to searching the various provincial government Web sites for background information.

As always, the regulatory regimes vary widely from province to province. Canada sure is a hodge-podge of rules and regulations – how we manage to conduct interprovincial trade is beyond me. But as always, you can count on Ontario to have the most hairbrained schemes of them all.

Ontario, as you may know, has a ‘Restricted’ A/Z licence for those who take their road test using a truck with an automated transmission. Fine. Other provinces do as well. But in the other provinces that have such policies in place, the restriction simply prevents them from operating a truck with a manual transmission. Not in Ontario, however. Here, drivers holding a ‘restricted’ licence are also forbidden from operating a vehicle with air brakes or trailers longer than 45 ft.

So consider this scenario: An owner/operator – for argument’s sake, an experienced driver who downgraded their licence and got out of the business for a while - shows up to take their road test in their own truck with an automated transmission pulling a 53-ft. trailer. They take their road test and pass with flying colours. They are then given a ‘Restricted’ A/Z licence – and it’s now illegal for them to drive their own truck and trailer home! Never mind the fact they have no intention of driving an 18-speed or any other standard transmission-equipped truck.

Think I make this stuff up? It’s all here in the MTO’s FAQ.

Of particular interest is Question 7, pertaining to drivers who show up with a truck that has an automated transmission:

What if I decide to continue with the road test and I pass but my vehicle can't be driven with a restricted Class A licence?

In this situation the applicant has brought in a vehicle that does not meet their needs… Applicants who choose to proceed and pass will receive a Class A licence with the restrictive "R" condition code but will not be licensed to operate this vehicle unless being taught by an accompanying driver who holds a full privilege Class A licence.

So there you have it. As far as MTO is concerned, that truck with auto gearbox “does not meet their needs” even if that’s the truck the owner/operator plans to operate day in and day out.

In fairness, last month the MTO eliminated the standard transmission requirement for senior drivers taking their annual road tests. That’s a step in the right direction. But why should any driver who takes his/her road test using an automatic be prevented from operating a truck with air brakes or pulling a 53-ft. trailer? (There’s a separate test for air brakes and the transmission does not affect the maneuverability of the tractor or the length of the trailer)!

Then again, government types with better educations and bigger salaries than mine come up with these policies, so there’s got to be a good reason behind it…right?

Permalink | Comments (9)

It’s no secret among professional drivers that there are too few places for truckers to stop for rest. Now it appears the situation is on the radar of some influential decision-makers.

The Owner-Operator Business Association of Canada (OBAC), of which we’re a member, is asking all its driver members to complete a Transport Canada survey that may be used to help direct future funding.

In the words of OBAC: ‘Here's an opportunity to add your two cents to this most important debate. We need every driver to get involved; it's drivers themselves who can identify areas in Canada where designated truck parking is difficult to find, and help determine how shortages of parking impact your safety, productivity, and personal well-being.

‘Take the survey yourself, then get at least five more drivers to add their voice, even if you have to walk them to a computer and help them turn it on.’

If the link above doesn't work, just visit http://www.surveymonkey.com/truckparkingcanada.

Permalink | Comments (12)

I just got finished reviewing the tape, so to speak, of the latest Driving for Profit seminar held Nov. 3 in Toronto. I was unable to attend in person, but Adam Ledlow recorded it for upcoming episodes of our WebTV show Transportation Matters. I strongly suggest you check out these installments if you operate trucks in the US.

There are big-time changes coming to the way carrier safety ratings are scored by the FMCSA and there are implications for drivers as well. Look for more on CSA 2010 in the January issues of Truck News and Truck West and in future episodes of Transportation Matters. This was far and away the best Driving for Profit event to date and thankfully it was very well-attended. I have a hunch you’ll be hearing more about this well-run seminar series in the near future.

But to my point, I wanted to pass along the opening remarks from guest speaker Jeff Davis, who in addition to establishing himself as the foremost authority on the subject of CSA 2010, still finds time to oversee safety and human resources for Dayton, Ohio-based fleet Jet Express.

Davis began his presentation by telling fleet managers in attendance “I’d like to thank you Canadian carriers for making five days of my week just great.”

He went on to say he commutes 30 miles along I-75 each work day, which gives him the chance to check out the iron he sees along the way.

“I’ve come to appreciate the Canadian equipment that I see running up and down the road,” he continued. “I can tell it’s Canadian equipment two ways: First of all, you’re the guys and gals with the great paint jobs. They are done nice, you take a lot of pride in your equipment and the overall appearance of your equipment is absolutely breathtaking. I know how hard it is to run a fleet of trucks, how hard it is to wash one truck let alone 300, how expensive it is to put nice wheel covers on equipment…the pride that comes through your equipment, in my eyes, is just breathtaking. It’s quite an example to US carriers, how well you maintain your equipment.”

If you think he was just blowing smoke, I doubt it. Davis actually took the time before the seminar to check out the SafeStat records of many of the carriers in attendance and wasn’t afraid to point out some of them had cause for concern in advance of CSA 2010. He seems like a straight-shooter, so if you’re a Canadian carrier or driver operating in the US you can take pride in Davis’ comments and realize the little things do not go unnoticed.

Permalink | Comments (3)

In my last blog, and especially in my most recent column (which is rolling off the presses as I type this), I was critical of the police and specifically the OPP for what appears to be some overzealous enforcement tactics towards professional truck drivers. I contended that the OPP officer who fined a driver for smoking in his rig and some other police officers who have wrongly come down on truck drivers were undermining attempts by the likes of RCMP Sgt. Rob Ruiters, who has worked tirelessly to promote increased cooperation between police and truckers.

I stand by my remarks, but an incident last night has left me wondering if I was perhaps too harsh towards the OPP?

Let me explain: Last night, my wife (seven months pregnant and a Nervous Nellie at the best of times) blew a tire on her way home from work. Stranded on the side of Hwy. 7 with traffic whizzing by at ungodly speeds (as it always does on that stretch of highway at that time of day), she sat frightened in her car as the realization dawned on her that she had forgotten her cell phone at home.

She flagged down a motorist and called me, I called CAA and then headed out to where she said she was located. By the time I arrived, some 20 minutes or so later, one of Ontario’s finest was just finishing attaching her spare. When I pulled over, Const. Cox wiped the dirt off his hands and said she was good to go.

Well, didn’t I feel like the world’s biggest jackass, having just hammered out a column that took the OPP to task and suggested they are unfairly antagonizing truck drivers? Again, in the cases I cited in my column, I still believe the officers in question were wrong in fining professional drivers for minor or non-existent offences.

However what I failed to do was acknowledge that for every one of them, there are hundreds or thousands of other officers in the OPP and other forces who deserve credit for the many things they do each day that go above and beyond what’s required of them – including Const. Cox, who stopped to help my wife, settled her down in the midst of an anxious situation and then changed her tire – even waving off a tow truck driver who at one point swooped in for the sale.

Those of us in the trucking industry are constantly reminding members of the non-trucking public that the actions of one aggressive or obscene truck driver are not indicative of the profession at large. I suppose it’s also worth considering that the overzealous and inappropriate conduct of a few cops does not speak to the overall professionalism and pride of the force in general. Thanks, Const. Cox, for unwittingly providing me with this important reminder by way of your selfless actions.

Permalink | Comments (4)

As the Ontario DriveTest strike drags on (and on and on and on), it seems professional drivers are getting mixed messages on the validity of their expired driver’s licences.

One driver, who ironically called me weeks ago to see if it was okay for him to operate in the US with an expired Ontario A/Z licence, called back to let me know he was in fact pulled over by a police officer while in the US. To his surprise, the officer was aware of the Ontario DriveTest strike and asked our intrepid driver if he had a copy of the MTO letter handy. He did, and was turned loose without further incident.

Here in good ol’ Ontario, however, another reader was involved in a minor accident with an expired licence. He tells me the police officer who arrived at the accident told him that he wasn’t allowed to drive with an expired licence – DriveTest strike or not. His licence was downgraded on the spot.

So there you have it, while the MTO has assured drivers that they can continue to operate with an expired commercial driver’s licence while the DriveTest strike continues, it appears not all officers interpret the situation the same way.

On a related note, I became concerned about whether professional drivers would be insured in the event of an accident with a seemingly expired driver’s licence, and so I posed this question to my contacts at Markel. Here is what they had to say: ‘I checked with our Underwriting department to confirm. If a person’s license has expired and they are unable to renew because of the Drive Test labour dispute, they will still be covered by insurance in the result of a crash. The Ontario Government has implemented a regulation that speaks to this issue. Please see the attached link to the regulation below.’

The link, if you’re interested, is here.

Meanwhile, the Ontario Liberals need to get over their fear of unions and step in to put an end to this strike. Imagine the backlog that’s going to exist when the labour dispute does come to an end. Thousands of new drivers as well as those requiring upgrades and renewals will be in the queue. It’s time the province extends signing authority to outside agencies and re-evaluates why this essential service is outsourced to a publicly-trade, profit-motivated, foreign company in the first place. Mind you, I suspect that’s exactly what the union wants.

Permalink | Comments (0)

Are you planning on getting vaccinated against H1N1? It’s a question every Canadian must ask in the coming weeks, as health authorities roll out a massive vaccination effort in hopes of minimizing the toll this potentially deadly strain of the flu will take.

Professional drivers, by the very nature of the job, are at a high risk of encountering viruses. You cover a lot of ground and must often rely on shared showers and restroom facilities. You have plenty of face-to-face contact with shippers and other drivers from all over North America and if you do get exposed, the long hours and stressful conditions of the job can make fighting a virus more difficult.

At the same time, if a pandemic should cripple Canada, professional drivers will have a pivotal role to play in keeping supply chains moving. You’ll be needed to transport pharmaceutical supplies and vaccines to hospitals and clinics while ensuring stores continue to be stocked with everyday necessities such as food and gas.

Just last year, medical journal Biosecurity and Bioterrorism released a report that indicated utility workers and truckers should be among the first to receive vaccinations in the event of a pandemic (right there along with doctors and nurses).

It seems Canadians are divided on whether or not the vaccination is necessary. Some are willing to forgo the vaccine and take their chances while others are running out to get the shot, even if it means spending three hours in a line intended only for high-risk candidates.

Personally, I have never received a flu shot before, but I just may this time once the line-ups have subsided and high-risk Canadians have been taken care of. My wife is pregnant with our first child and the last thing I want is to bring the H1N1 home to her. But that raises another concern altogether – whether the vaccination is safe for pregnant women? We’ve asked friends, family, doctors and midwives and nobody seems to know for sure. The more pregnancy-friendly version of the vaccine’s not yet readily available, and even though pregnant women fall into the ‘high-risk’ category, should they really have to stand in line three hours (usually outside) while young, healthy, able-bodied people who do not fall into the high-risk category selfishly ignore requests to wait and instead flood the clinics in droves? (Okay, there’s my rant for the day).

There are no easy answers without the benefit of hindsight and we’ll all have to decide whether to get vaccinated based on our own comfort levels with the vaccine itself as well as our ability to beat the H1N1 if need be. As professional drivers, you have another challenge - just finding a place to receive the vaccination. You’re often away from home and I’ve yet to hear of any truck stop clinics offering the shots. So what’s it going to be, Road Warriors? Are you going to get the shot or take your chances?

Permalink | Comments (2)

Well, you knew it had to happen eventually. According to reports by the Canadian Press, an Ontario trucker has been fined for smoking in his rig. Apparently police pulled over the trucker and ticketed him $305 for smoking in the workplace, a violation of the Smoke-Free Ontario Act. If the driver wasn’t fuming before, I bet he was after being handed the ticket.

The Smoke-Free Ontario Act was passed in 2006, and I blogged about it at the time. In what turned out to be somewhat prophetic, I wrote the following in my blog:

‘While the province of Ontario has reported in the media that its anti-smoking law should supercede any federal mandates, the Ontario Trucking Association has argued that the federal rules (which exempt vehicles) should be enforced. I can imagine how we’ll find out the final answer. You’ll be driving along the 401, minding your own business when one of Ontario’s finest will flash his lights and pull you over. Panic will strike as you wonder if your load has somehow come loose? But nope, the officer will instead hand you a hefty ticket for driving along with the window down with a cigarette butt dangling from your fingers. Just what this industry needs – more regulation!’

Has it really gotten to this? Has Ontario’s speed limiter law been so effective at slowing down the big rigs that the police are now spending their time on the roads gazing up into truck cabs in pursuit of smokers so they can get their trucker-ticketing fix?

I hope the offending trucker fights this charge and that the courts blow it off – bad pun intended. I’m not a smoker and I can’t stand the smell of the stuff – but what you do in the cab of your truck should be up to you, if you’re not endangering anyone else that is.

Permalink | Comments (32)

Not surprisingly, I really enjoy driving and I wish I could spend less of my time chained to my desk and more time out there on the road. Last week I took the opportunity to drive to Ste-Therese, Quebec for FPInnovation’s VIP day, held in conjunction with its latest Energotest in nearby Blainville.

The event was held at the Paccar plant, and I’ll be reporting on some of FPInnovation’s latest projects shortly. They’ve got some interesting new tests on the go, specifically related to the fuel-saving potential of hybrid commercial vehicles.

Now, for a few observations from my trip.

1. LCVs: Saw my first four Ontario LCVs. I saw one SLH LCV headed each way on my way to Montreal and passed another of SLH’s LCVs on my way back home the next day. I passed a fourth as well, but the name of its owner escapes me. These trucks are easy to spot because of the signage on the back, and as I’ve often said before, they’re slow and predictable. I’m not surprised the public hasn’t risen up against the use of LCVs in Ontario, because they’re perfectly safe vehicles with which to share the road. The equipment was shiny and new and in each case was being driven by a true professional. It’s nice to see Ontario get on-board by finally allowing these productive and safe combinations. Yesterday at the Ajax/Pickering Board of Trade meeting, David Bradley told me about 18 LCVs have been approved in Ontario and that’ll slowly ramp up as more carriers complete the necessary driver training.

2. Public peeing: I’m not referring to truck drivers here. On a couple of occasions I passed motorists who shamelessly stopped alongside the 401, whipped out their um, units, and relieved themselves in full view of passing (with an ‘a’) vehicles. C’mon, people. No matter how much coffee you’ve had to drink, take a few minutes to pull off the highway and into one of the many roadside communities to use the proper facilities. I guess this is a result of the closure of most of Ontario’s service centres, which today is a hot topic of discussion thanks to an article in the Toronto Star. While the closure and reconstruction of these facilities was poorly planned and will no doubt drag on much longer than first expected, there’s still no excuse for taking a whizz on the shoulder of the highway.

3. Speed limiters: As I’ve written before, I’ve never understood the need for speed limiters but at the same time, I’ve often felt the safety arguments against their use were overstated. Now, I’m not so sure. My personal observations are highly unscientific, I’ll admit, but man there sure were a lot of elephant races. In many cases, four-wheelers responded as you’d expect, by trying to pass aggressively on the inside. I just sat back and watched the mayhem unfold. Yesterday during his speech at that same Ajax/Pickering Board of Trade meeting, Bradley said the “boogeyman” scenarios (ie. elephant races and NASCAR-style wrecks) feared by many truckers have not materialized. For the most part, he’s correct, at least when it comes to accidents.

But I would argue there are certainly more elephant races. Bradley also said in those instances, you have to question why the trucker in the left lane has pulled out to pass at that time in the first place? That’s a valid point - in many cases there was no need for the truck in the outside lane travelling at 105 km/h to be trying to pass another truck doing maybe 103. But in many other instances I observed, it was just the common courtesy of allowing merging vehicles to safely join the flow of traffic that left the trucker stuck in the fast lane, unable to get back to the right because other motorists wouldn’t give him the space to do so. Improving lane discipline is needed and will hopefully come in time as four-wheelers realize the limitations of trucks these days and truckers adapt to driving trucks locked at 105. Next time a trucker moves over to the left lane to allow you to merge onto the highway, maybe consider backing off to let him back in front?

At any rate, here are a few pictures I snaped. And please spare me the comments about taking pictures while driving – I had the camera at the ready and simply picked it up and clicked these pictures without so much as looking at the display screen. Distracting? Maybe. But no more so than taking a sip of coffee.

Two trucks pull out to pass a slower moving truck. They didn’t do anything wrong, but completing the pass took a long time and cause frustration for other motorists. Note the brake lights on the white car. He dodged into the inside lane and aggressively tried to pass the trucks on the left to no avail.

Again, the trucker in the ‘fast’ lane didn’t do anything wrong here when trying to pass the slower moving truck on an uphill grade. But without the extra juice, the move once again took a long time to complete.

This is a case of a trucker perhaps being too nice for their own good. The driver in the left lane moved over to allow merging traffic to enter the highway and then was stuck out there alongside a truck travelling at about the same speed.

Permalink | Comments (5)

More than two weeks into a strike by unionized DriveTest employees (including road test examiners), a growing number of new drivers have had their lives put on hold. And driver instructors at some training schools are now facing the prospect of layoffs since graduating students currently have no way to acquire a newly-minted A/Z licence.

Kim Richardson of KRTS Transportation Specialists reported last week that if the strike drags on much longer, he’ll have no choice but to lay off 50-60% of his truck training division staff. Meanwhile, he says many of the students his school has turned out in recent weeks still wait in limbo, unable to take their road test and begin their driving career despite having job offers in hand from respectable carriers.

Many of these individuals were former steel plant workers, stretched thin financially after being laid off by US Steel this past spring. They just want to work.

Once again, Ontario workers who want nothing more than to make an honest living are being held hostage by a union.

It begs the question I’ve asked before: why are our road tests being conducted by a unionized, publicly-traded company from Europe in the first place?

Permalink | Comments (15)

There’s no doubt, the last couple of years have presented some of the most trying times ever faced by the trucking industry. And while nobody’s popping the champagne just yet, there’s reason to believe the economy is slowly beginning to find its legs. Some bold prognosticators have already declared the recession over in Canada and in parts of Europe. But I’ve yet to hear any fleet managers or owner/operators voicing such optimism.

At any rate, a return to better times is inevitable, which raises a few questions: Have you taken advantage of the opportunity to improve your business or was it merely a matter of survival? Are you a stronger company coming out of this recession or will you emerge battered, bruised and still vulnerable?

Here at Truck News, we’ve faced many of the same challenges those of you operating trucks have faced. There’s been a significant decline in advertising (our version of ‘freight’) and in some months we’ve had less space to work with within our traditional printed products. But the editors here didn’t go on an extended vacation. Instead, I’m proud to say we’ve found new ways of disseminating information.

We launched and grew our weekly WebTV show, Transportation Matters, which has no equal anywhere in the North American trucking industry and we’ve developed our own YouTube channel. We’ve expanded our blogs and provided a great forum for two-way conversations between our readers and editors as well as other bloggers from within the industry. And we’ve become active on social media sites such as Twitter to further enhance our communication capabilities.

(Edited to add: And how can I forget about our new subscription-based online information video series The Driver's Seat, found at www.TheDriversSeat.ca?)

After all, we are purveyors of information, and we need to seek out new ways to communicate even when times are slow. We’re fortunate that the Web offers us unlimited opportunities and space.

Now I’m not trying to boast about all this (okay, maybe just a little), and I know our world is different than yours. But before you accuse me of comparing apples to oranges, take a look around and see what the fleets around you are doing. And ask yourself a few questions.

During the slowdown, have you taken advantage of a stable workforce to implement meaningful, lasting driver training? It doesn’t have to be costly, but when drivers aren’t jumping ship every few months due to an abundance of job opportunities, some well-run fleets have stepped up training initiatives. It establishes loyalty and improves the quality of your driving force.

Have you elevated hiring criteria? When you do hire drivers, you can now be more selective about who you put behind the wheels of your vehicles. Are you taking advantage of that and revisiting hiring tactics that may have been compromised when there were always more loads to move than drivers to move them?

Have you driven out inefficiencies and unnecessary costs that may have crept into your operation in better times when, let’s face it, it was difficult not to become complacent? Have you shed the deadwood?

And have you sought out partnerships or developed new business opportunities as other carriers have closed their doors and left customers high and dry? One successful Ontario fleet has seized an opportunity to work with US carriers that don’t want to restrict their trucks to 105 km/h to run into Ontario. It’s picking up 25 loads per week at the border and delivering them into Toronto. This isn’t about speed limiters – it’s about identifying and taking advantage of emerging opportunities.

As the trucking industry prepares for recovery, ask yourself: Are you stronger/leaner/more competitive coming out of this than when you went in? If not, you may have missed a major opportunity.

Permalink | Comments (0)

According to a report in today’s Toronto Sun, one of the ‘street racers’ who caused the wreck that resulted in the death of professional driver David Virgoe was caught violating his bail conditions by operating a vehicle. (I use the term 'racers' loosely - to refer to them as racers actually does a disservice to those who participate in the sport of racing responsibly in a controlled evironment).

I don’t think I even need to give Virgoe’s back story any more – his name is synonymous with professionalism and heroism after he steered his truck into the ditch along Hwy. 400 a couple summers ago to avoid hitting other motorists as two young drivers engaged in street racing.

The bail violation will cost Prabhjit Multani’s parents $60,000 of the $80K they posted for his bail – and he’ll have to pay the rest when he’s able. Apparently the police were keeping an eye on him, so when he hopped into his parent’s van and took it for a spin, they were able to quickly pounce and enforce his bail conditions. While it’s disheartening that 22-year-old Multani showed such blatant disregard for Canada’s legal system, it’s nice to see the police were monitoring the kid and didn’t hesitate to nail him when he breached the terms of his bail.

The Sun article explained that Multani received a 21-month jail sentence as well as a 10-year driving ban. It also says Justice of the Peace Linda Kay warned him: "If you breach any of these conditions, your parents will lose that money."

Yet he did it anyways – he made the decision to risk it all and drive. His parents are, by all accounts, hard-working immigrants who likely put up a good part of their life savings for their son’s bail in good faith. And now it’s gone. While you can’t help but feel for them, if this kid has any decency he’ll pay them back every cent over time. And there’s no sympathy owed to the younger Multani – none whatsoever.

Permalink | Comments (2)

I thought I was done writing about speed limiters for a while, but editorial director Lou Smyrlis’ latest blog and its responses have compelled me to address the issue once again. Based on the phone calls and e-mails I’ve received in recent weeks, it appears hard enforcement of Ontario’s speed limiter law has fanned the flames and sent the law’s critics into an uproar.

It seems everyone is still determined to beat the system. Some drivers are carrying waivers and asking MTO inspectors to take responsibility for any damage that occurs to the ECM during inspection. The result: A fine. Others are sealing off the plug-in slot, warning that whoever breaks the seal is responsible for damage. The result: A fine. I’ve been told some are even – and I hope this isn’t true – jury-rigging the plug-in slot so it delivers an electrical surge that can destroy the inspector’s reader. Not only is this dangerous, but the result: Most definitely a fine. See a pattern?

You can try every trick in the book to deter inspection officers from enforcing this law, but the end result is that you’re still going to get a fine. Can you afford it? Or would it be more reasonable to comply and adapt and move on?

Hey, I’m not telling you how to run your business – but isn’t it time to ask yourself that question? Also, is it really fair to be challenging the inspection officers who in most cases are just out there doing their jobs – just like you? This law has been dumped into their laps and I’m sure many of them would prefer not to have one more thing to worry about. Don’t direct your anger at the inspection officers.

‘No problem there,’ you say, ‘my anger is directed squarely at the Ontario Trucking Association, which dreamt up this harebrained scheme in the first place.’ Listen, I don’t like Bill 41 any more than any of you and I think the time and resources that were spent developing and endorsing this policy over the past five years could’ve been better spent. But having said that, is the OTA really to blame?

Consider this: The sole purpose of the OTA is to represent its members. Those members, for the most part, wanted to mechanically limit truck speeds in the province to 105 km/h. You can question their motives – was it really done with safety and the environment in mind, or for competitive reasons? I have my own opinion on that. But what you can’t question is that the OTA has done a remarkable job at representing its members’ interests and guiding this law through all the legislative hurdles. Who really thought it stood a chance when the OTA first announced its intentions in November, 2005? Not me.

Regardless of what you think about the OTA, it’s a successful, powerful and well-run lobby group that gets things done on behalf of its members. And as far as I know, it’s not an exclusive club. If you run a trucking company – big or small – I doubt very much that the OTA would refuse your membership dues. Would your opinions carry as much weight around the boardroom table as those of the bigger fleets that play a more active role in the association? Maybe not, but at least you would be heard. At least you’d be part of the process. I’m tired of the argument that the OTA represents only mega-fleets and has an agenda to beat down the little guys.

Now if you still want to be angry about Bill 41, then by all means, go right ahead. I don’t blame you. But at least direct your anger where it’s deserved: Queens’ Park. The Liberal government should take 100% of the blame for ushering in this law without first arming itself with all the information, namely the Transport Canada studies that were not long from being released when the law was passed.

It’s worth noting that between 2005 and 2009, Elections Ontario financial records show these same Liberals received over $30,000 in donations from the OTA. I’m not suggesting the Liberals were “bought” – I’m sure $30K is a drop in the bucket for the Ontario Liberals. But was it enough to grease the wheels? It does raise some interesting questions, especially considering the law seemingly went through the entire legislative process pretty much untouched by our entrusted lawmakers.

Frank Klees, a pretty clever Conservative MPP who was opposed to the speed limiter law, read the following during the debate in the Legislature: “I received an e-mail that, quite frankly, concerned me as a member of this Legislature and as a former minister...I'd like you to listen to this, Speaker, because you will be interested, as will any other member of this Legislature, to know the arrogance with which some stakeholders approach this place: ‘As for the amendments, we have none, and in fact I would go further and say that we would be very strongly opposed to any amendment. This is our bill. Every period, every comma, every semicolon was put there by us, and we would be very, very unhappy were it to be amended in any way’."

If he was referring to the OTA, then good on ’em. As a lobby group, they managed to draft a policy and then guide it through the legislative obstacle course right through to fruition, virtually untouched. That’s a pretty remarkable accomplishment and I have nothing but respect for the OTA for getting it done. Score one for OTA - who wouldn’t want an organization like that in their corner?

But the bottom line is, it never should’ve happened that way, yet the Liberals allowed it to happen. They didn’t do their due diligence. They didn’t arm themselves with all the facts. They didn’t give speed limiter opponents the opportunity to properly prepare and state their cases. I was at the so-called public hearings and they were a farce. OOIDA had 10 minutes to explain its position. Some of the Liberals on the committee tapped away at their Blackberries during the hearings. They were disinterested in the proceedings – their minds were made up. Transport Minister Jim Bradley and his underlings were little more than puppets on a string and if you believe the anti-speed limiter rhetoric, then it would be fair to say that they got thoroughly bamboozled.

So what can you do? Vote. You’ll have to wait til 2011 to do so, but that’s the best course of action. Don’t harass MTO inspection officers. Don’t dig your heels in and vow to fight every ticket unless you can afford to pay hundreds, maybe thousands of dollars in fines. And don’t blame the OTA. If you want revenge, then vote in the next provincial election. There’s a perception out there that truckers don’t vote – prove them wrong. Be heard.

But even then, don’t expect Bill 41 to be undone. It’s been speculated lately that the Conservatives, if elected, would overturn Bill 41 or 'order a review' (as if that wording itself isn’t a cop-out). If you haven’t guessed, in the interest of full disclosure, I’m a card-carrying Conservative. Yet, if elected, I wouldn’t expect the Conservatives to make overturning Bill 41 a priority. First, they’d have to win the election and they’ll be hard-pressed to do so in Ontario. Next, they’d have to risk alienating the public by reversing a law that on the surface, let’s face it, slows big trucks down. You really think that’s going to happen? Not likely. Many of you vow to fight this law to the end and I wish you luck.

However, you may save yourself a lot of aggravation by simply laying down your sword and adapting to the new reality. Professional drivers have proven their resilience over the years - life will go on in a speed limited world. But keep that sword handy, because in 2011 you’ll have your chance to wield it once more, and take aim at the appropriate target.

Permalink | Comments (14)

During this year’s Private Motor Truck Council of Canada conference, Roy Craigen of Transcom Fleet Services gave a presentation on Empowering for Productivity. I think all of us in attendance felt somewhat empowered by his presentation, and chatting with a friend afterwards we agreed that the trucking industry would be much better off if there were more Roy Craigens around.

Despite the fact he’s a Roughriders fan (Go Stamps!), I consider Roy a real pal and I think most people who’ve met him would proudly refer to him as a friend. He’s one of the most genuine people-oriented guys that I know. I one time met him for coffee at a Tim Horton’s as he was passing through my neck of the woods. It was a Sunday morning in the summertime when most young’ens would rather be doing something other than schlepping at Timmy’s for near minimum wage.

When the girl behind the counter poured us our coffees with a smile, Roy said “Thanks for coming in today, we really appreciate what you do.” He said it without a hint of sarcasm, but she shot him a suspect glance. Chances are her supervisor had never taken the time to thank her for coming in on a beautiful Sunday morning and doing her job with a smile. Why was this stranger taking the time to acknowledge her for a job well done? Chances are it made a lasting impression. And that’s just Roy.

During his presentation, Roy asked the question: Why do we invest more in our equipment than in our people? A new tractor gets the following: A building; top of the line diagnostics equipment/computers; regularly-scheduled maintenance; and 24-hour assistance when required – all for an asset with a five-year life expectancy.

A professional driver on the other hand, receives: Access to a driver’s room; vending machines; and bulletin boards for communications – and the driver has 30 years of productivity potential. And yet pretty much any fleet manager says drivers are the company’s greatest asset – but where’s the evidence of that?

“That is not a very good support mechanism,” Roy pointed out, especially when the driver controls pretty much every big ticket item within a fleet: fuel, maintenance, customer service, image, insurance costs, etc. to name but a few. Roy urged fleet managers to think of a professional driver, not as a trucker, but as the manager of a mobile profit centre – they control every expense! And yet they are so often evaluated and beaten down, even by so-called “reward systems” that are frequently based on punishment.

“It hardly inspires,” he said. “If I lost my bonus in January, what does that do to me the other 11 and a half months I’m going to be driving your equipment?”

Here are a few more suggestions from Roy: Make driver orientation an event in which to showcase your organization. Become a tough line-up to crack. Drivers should leave an interview or orientation session asking ‘I wonder if I can measure up to these guys?’ Celebrate accomplishments (ie. becoming a Canadian citizen). Allow drivers to evaluate the company (“We have an army of people that get out of bed every day to assess drivers, let them evaluate us.”) Make sure your operations employees and dispatchers actually like drivers! “We’ll hire someone who can type 70-80 words per minute only to find out many months in, that they don’t like truck drivers!”

I can’t possibly do justice to Roy’s presentation in a single blog entry, but if you ever get the chance to hear him speak, take advantage of it. Your drivers will thank you for it.

Permalink | Comments (0)

Enforcement of Ontario and Quebec’s speed limiter laws took full effect July 1 and enforcement officers in Ontario didn’t hesitate to fine drivers who didn’t have their engines locked in at 105 km/h or less.

However, the tool the MTO is using to detect whether or not a vehicle complies with the law has raised some questions. As pictured on the cover of the July issue of Truck News, the MTO is using an Ez-Tap, read-only device to plug into the engine’s ECM and determine whether or not the speed limiter is set at 105 or less.

The device, however, does not display other parameters such as tire size and gear ratios, which engine manufacturers admit can influence actual on-road speed. Naturally, this has not been lost on speed limiter opponents – most notably OBAC - who are questioning the validity of these enforcement tactics.

The MTO would likely require costly OEM software to read all the parameters that influence road speed. Not only is it costly, but it varies from engine manufacturer to engine manufacturer. To equip all scales or enforcement branches with every required version of OEM software would incur a considerable expense. Using the OEM software rather than a simple read-only device also opens the whole can of worms regarding the ability to change or corrupt ECM parameters and accessing additional information, raising questions of privacy rights.

It’s not clear where the MTO will go from here, whether they’ll acquire a more effective enforcement tool, invest in the OEM software or stick with the Ez-Tap device. However, owner/operators who are bent on fighting charges under Bill 41 may have a compelling case. Of course, it may be less time-consuming and costly to just get on with it and comply with the law.

As a side note, Quebec enforcement officers are apparently showing some more flexibility when it comes to enforcing that province’s version of the new law. Until July 31, they’ll offer drivers or owners of non-compliant trucks a seven day grace period to have their speed limiters locked in at 105.

- Enforcement officer Travis McMunn shows the Ez-Tap tool the MTO is using to measure compliance with Ontario's speed limiter law.

Permalink | Comments (7)

Tweet, tweet. That’s right, Truck News is on Twitter. Why? That’s a pretty good question – one that I too asked when it was first suggested we give it a try. After all, I’m not so vain as to think you folks really care what I had for breakfast or what random thoughts I had on the drive into work.

However, after giving it some more thought, I realized Twitter holds enormous potential for those of us in the business of collecting and disseminating information. And if we’re not exploring new ways to communicate with our readers, than we’re really not doing our jobs.

Consider a few of the possibilities for those of us in the publishing world:

* Truck News editors often enjoy face time with significant industry players. Twitter can allow you to submit questions you’d like us to ask key industry stakeholders, essentially involving yourself in the interview process. We can then share their responses with ‘followers’ immediately.

* No other means of publishing is more immediate. When new products are introduced, Twitter allows us to post pictures and newsflashes almost instantaneously – from anywhere in the world. Subscribing to our Twitter feeds will assure you are the first to find out about breaking news or new product introductions. Think of it as instant text alerts – like the type you sign up for at TSN.ca on trade deadline day (okay, maybe that’s me).

* Join in the conversation. Respond to our Tweets and banter back and forth with like-minded (or not) individuals from the trucking industry. Challenge Tweets you disagree with and create a dialogue.

* Receive live reports from industry events. Thinking of heading to a truck show but want a report on the weather, attendance, schedule or which exhibitors are or aren’t there? Find out what’s going on at the show, as it happens.

Joining Twitter is just the latest step in an ongoing journey for those of us in the publishing world. We’re no longer just a magazine - we’re a continuous conduit of information. You can’t afford to receive information on a strictly monthly basis, and fortunately the Web and new technologies like Twitter are allowing us to better serve your needs in more interactive formats.

So with all that being said, we hope you take the leap. You can find me and sign up for my alerts at www.twitter.com/jamesmenzies. If Lou’s commentary is more to your liking, you can find him at www.twitter.com/lousmyrlis. (Of course, I hope to establish a much larger following than him, as there’s nothing like showing up your boss). Adam Ledlow can be found at www.twitter.com/adamledlow. Look for the same type of humour from him that you've come to know and love from our WebTV show Transportation Matters.

Hope to Tweet to you soon.

Permalink | Comments (0)

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: The trucking industry has a wonderful story to tell about the incredible progress it has made towards reducing its emissions over the past decade. A new report out of the US suggests the EPA07 engines were particularly effective, going well beyond EPA requirements and reducing emissions by much more than required by law.

According to a release by the American Trucking Associations, EPA07 engines produced 98% less carbon monoxide, 10% less NOx, 89% less particulate matter and 95% less non-methane hydrocarbons than required by EPA under its 2007 diesel engine emissions standards. (I haven’t read the entire 158-page report, but if you wish to do so, be my guest).

That’s a pretty remarkable accomplishment, even if it did come at a tremendous cost. With the next go-round just months from away in January 2010, it appears some fleets are viewing the 2010 emissions standards as an opportunity, rather than a costly burden.

In a sluggish economy with weak freight volumes, it would be easy to postpone the purchase of EPA2010-compliant engines. However, fleets at the recent Private Motor Truck Council of Canada (PMTC) conference have instead said they plan to proceed with new equipment purchases in 2010 and some are even welcoming the latest round of emissions standards.

“We’re not going to skip 2010, we’ll be out there buying trucks next year,” vowed Serge Viola, national fleet manager with Purolator Courier.

That message was echoed by other environmentally-conscious fleets at the conference.

Mark Mostacci, national fleet manager with TDL Group (better known as Tim Horton’s), said his fleet will be ordering 40 new tractors in 2010.

“We’re not going to avoid it, we’re going to embrace it,” Mostacci said of the EPA2010 emissions standards. He said his fleet took a similar approach in 2007 and despite some initial challenges, ended up enjoying better fuel mileage on its 07 vehicles and recouping its investment.

I realize that the opinions of a few industry leaders do not a consensus make. But it’s still good news for truck and engine manufacturers, and perhaps it’s why Volvo decided to roll out its EPA2010-compliant vehicles early. The company announced last week that it is now accepting orders for 2010-compliant engines at the behest of its customers.

“A number of customers have expressed an interest in placing SCR-equipped units in their fleets ahead of 2010,” said Scott Kress, senior vice-president, sales and marketing.

Don’t forget, Volvo’s EPA2010 trucks and engines will come with a non-negotiable $9,600 emissions surcharge and other manufacturers are likely to be in the same ballpark. Yet customers are looking to buy these more expensive vehicles early? What does that say about our industry? Apparently fleets are beginning to see real value in going green, even at a substantial cost. As shippers monitor their carbon footprint all the way through the supply chain, fleets that are embracing the changes foisted upon the industry by the EPA are seeing green in more ways than one.

Permalink | Comments (0)

The following is a letter from Ontario Transport Minister Jim Bradley in response to recent coverage of what Truck News has referred to as discriminatory driver testing requirements for senior drivers in Ontario...

Dear Mr. Menzies:

Thank you for your e-mail and clipping from Truck News, regarding driver testing for commercial drivers aged 65 and over.

Ontario’s licensing policy regarding commercial drivers aged 65 and over is not arbitrary. Research shows that aging, coupled with medical conditions and the use of medication, could adversely affect a person’s driving ability. That is why the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators’ medical standards for drivers recommended that age-related factors be considered when making driver licensing decisions.

The 65 and over Commercial Driver Program provides a more rigorous licence renewal process for older commercial drivers. These drivers are more likely to develop medical conditions affecting their ability to safely operate a commercial motor vehicle. Any decline in driving-related skills can seriously affect road safety, as even a single commercial vehicle collision can have significant consequences. Road safety statistics show that between 1997 and 2006 commercial drivers aged 65 and over were one and a half times more likely to be involved in an injury collision than commercial drivers aged 45 to 64.

Improving overall truck safety and truck driver behaviour is a major commitment for my ministry. Working closely with the trucking industry and our road safety partners, we have developed a strategic plan to enhance truck safety that includes re-assessing the training, testing and licensing of commercial drivers.

Additionally, in 2008, my ministry joined with 28 industry stakeholders, such as the Ontario Trucking Association, to review senior commercial driver licence renewal requirements. The review covered all commercial licence classes including straight, combination and dump trucks as well as buses and school buses. Although no decision has been made to amend the licence renewal requirements for commercial vehicle operators, my ministry continues to monitor and evaluate the issue.

Again, thank you for your e-mail and please accept my best wishes.

Yours sincerely,

Jim Bradley
Minister

To that I would respond, the Minister seems to have missed the point. No road test is going to uncover a medical condition – unless jumping jacks, push-ups and blood pressure checks are going to become part of the pre-trip inspection requirements. An annual medical, I’m willing to guess, would be accepted – even welcomed – by the majority of senior drivers if it meant the annual road test requirement was eliminated. It’s the road test that is costly, time-consuming and in most cases unnecessary.

Permalink | Comments (15)

Before long, you'll likely see the first of Ontario’s long combination vehicles (LCVs) puttering down the 401. They’ll be hard to miss.

Already there’s been much debate about whether or not LCVs are viable on Ontario’s congested roadways. Certainly there’s cause for concern about the lack of rest areas along Ontario highways. You could also make a case Toronto-area passenger traffic is not capable of safely sharing the road with Twin-53s.

Driving alongside LCVs is pretty simple: they’re slow and they’re predictable. I have shared the roads with them many times while living in the prairies and never once encountered a problem. However, that was the prairies – driving in Toronto is altogether different. This hasn’t been lost on the MTO. The permit conditions for LCV operation are exhaustive – more restrictive, in fact, than anywhere else they’re allowed to operate. Participating carriers will have to be on their best behaviour if they want this program to succeed. If even one of these Twin-53s ends up on its side, cargo strewn across the 401, you can bet the program will never make it past the ‘pilot’ stage.

Despite the challenges in operating LCVs, the advantages of running them are simply too great to pass up. Ian McCubbing, Edmonton terminal manager with Bison Transport, told delegates at the recent Canadian Fleet Maintenance Seminars (CFMS) that his company reduces greenhouse gas emissions by 32% and slashes costs by 40% compared to making the same deliveries using two five-axle tractor-trailers.

In Bison’s case, some of that savings is passed on to the skilled drivers who pilot these behemoths. LCV drivers with many fleets reportedly earn a 20-30% premium.

Before anyone gets too worked up over the prospect of LCVs eliminating jobs and squeezing out professional drivers, let’s consider that local drivers will still be required to pull singles to their final destinations. And let’s also remember that when the economy picks back up, we’ll once again be facing a shortage of qualified drivers and an aging workforce.

Where safety is concerned, studies suggest LCVs are safer than any other vehicle on the road, thanks to the restrictions placed on their operation coupled with the fact they’re typically driven by the very best professional drivers.

So what’s not to like? Motivated drivers have the opportunity to work for an LCV-approved carrier, complete the training course, upgrade their licence and earn a 25-30% pay increase when pulling Twin-53s. Carriers have the opportunity to reduce their operating costs, better compensate their most highly-skilled drivers and deliver greater value to their customers.

But what about the added congestion motorists will have to contend with? One study cited by McCubbing has suggested removing LCVs from LCV-approved routes in Alberta would result in an 80% increase in five-axle truck traffic. If that’s true, then perhaps LCVs can actually lessen road congestion in Ontario.

Simple math shows that two trailers and a single tractor occupy less space than two tractors each pulling a 53-ft. trailer. The big unknown will be how the motoring public adapts to sharing the roads with LCVs.

This may be the deciding factor in whether or not the Ontario pilot project succeeds. Unfortunately, it’s also the one factor that’s almost entirely outside the industry’s control.

Permalink | Comments (5)

The Ontario Ministry of Transportation was on-hand at this year’s Canadian Fleet Maintenance Seminars to offer some insight on how trucks will be inspected for compliance with Ontario’s new speed limiter law. The law has been on the books since January, but full enforcement doesn’t kick in til July 1.

MTO inspector Travis McMunn was performing demonstrations at the outside truck display. All that’s required is a laptop computer with a wireless plug-in device that’s inserted into a slot underneath the truck’s dash. It accesses and displays on the computer a few lines of information, most importantly the speed limiter setting.

The device doesn’t have the ability to read additional information such as historical data or alter any settings, McMunn explained as he demonstrated an inspection. Within seconds of plugging in the device, the laptop computer displays the speed limiter’s parameters – or whether it’s inactive.

McMunn says he typically starts the program on his laptop in the morning, minimizes and lets it run all day so it takes little time to inspect a vehicle for compliance. It only takes a few seconds to plug into the truck’s engine and view the speed limiter settings. McMunn said the tool enforcement officers have been supplied with work with all the various engine makes.

Because it takes so little time to view a truck’s speed limiter setting, McMunn said it’s likely officers will check every truck they inspect – but that’ll be up to their own discretion. He said compliance was initially very low at the beginning of the enforcement period earlier this year, but there’s been a noticeable increase in compliance as word has spread.

Truckers that are not in compliance will receive a fine, but they will not be placed out of service and their carrier’s CVOR will not be affected. There’s a provision in the law that allows police officers to assume a truck does not have its speed limiter activated if it’s caught travelling faster than 115 km/h.

The topic of speed limiters came up during the CFMS Shop Talk session and it appears the issue is just as divisive as always. One attendee said he felt better police enforcement of existing speed laws was the way to go, but another delegate piped up and declared Bill 41 the “best piece of legislation” ever introduced in Ontario.

- MTO inspector Travis McMunn shows the device that's used to read a truck's speed limiter setting.

- The device plugs into a slot underneath the dash and instantly displays the settings on the officer's laptop computer.

Permalink | Comments (14)

Yesterday morning another informative Driving for Profit seminar was hosted by NAL Insurance and KRTS Transportation Specialists. As always, it was well worth attending. These events provide practical, real-world advice at an affordable rate and allow participants to be back in the office for the afternoon.

The most recent edition featured Ray Haight, who recently completed his term as chair of the Truckload Carriers Association. It also included tips on business networking from networking guru Allison Graham, and an insightful presentation on how to respond to accidents by Trucknews.com's resident blogger (not to mention, general manager of Caravan Logistics), Kevin Snobel.

For his part, Haight discussed how to conduct a ‘SWOT Test’ (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats).

His presentation will be covered in an upcoming issue of Truck News, but in the meantime, I wanted to share an interesting observation from Haight that came out of the ‘Threats’ portion of his presentation.

And that is the continuing threat from the lingering “undead.”

Haight pointed out that fleet bankruptcies are well below what was anticipated and the reason for that is quite simple. Banks and finance companies, which would traditionally move in on a trucking company that’s on the brink and repossess its assets, now place very little value in those assets. It’s a sad state of affairs when the banks see so little value in a trucking company's equipment that they'd rather simply give them more rope with which to hang themselves.

Instead of closing in and repossessing the assets of troubled trucking companies, according to Haight, finance providers and banks are giving these fleets more time to “dig themselves out” of trouble.

The result, in many cases, is simply prolonging the inevitable and allowing these companies to die a slow death. In the meantime, they continue to operate as what Haight referred to the “undead” – cutting rates out of desperation and providing more headaches to well-run carriers who find themselves competing with “companies that shouldn’t even be in business.”

Yet another challenge that trucking companies could do without. However, fortunately it wasn’t all doom and gloom at the seminar. Haight also highlighted some ‘Opportunities’ which simply didn’t exist when the industry was firing on all cylinders. I’ll cover those in an upcoming blog entry as well as the June issues of Truck News and Truck West.

Permalink | Comments (0)

A few years ago it was the bird flu. Now it’s the swine flu. Why can’t these damned animals keep their flues to themselves?

As far as the avian flu was concerned, it never did blow up into the global pandemic that was feared. Hopefully the same will be true of the swine flu. However, there is a startling difference between the two. The avian flu could only be contracted when coming into contact with an infected bird. The swine flu, however, is currently being spread from person to person. Not good.

But I refuse to get caught up in the media hype at this point. There are reports of some deaths, but still more people have died of the regular ol’ flu than swine flu this year. I don’t wear a mask to work and I’m not stockpiling emergency supplies. I’m not cancelling any travel plans (mind you, I don’t have many at the moment) and I’m not avoiding pork…mmm, pork.

Having said all that, it may be worth considering the role trucking will play in the event of a global pandemic. It’s pretty easy to do, since we did all this two years ago amidst the bird flu fears.

Here’s a story from an informative presentation that was made by a Transport Canada rep during a PMTC conference in 06.

Here is a story about a prudent fleet (Erb) that planned for the worst.

This is how trucking associations in Canada prepared for the possibility of an outbreak.

And here's a column by publisher Rob Wilkins about a study that was done that recognized the need to treat truckers first, so they can help keep our society moving in the event of a pandemic.

NOTE: You'll need to be a subscriber to access the archives. Hopefully, like the bird flu and SARS, the swine flu will fade away without taking a serious toll on humanity.

Permalink | Comments (3)

It’s that time of year again, time to give some recognition to the best owner/operator you know. For the 16th year in a row, Truck News and Truck West will be presenting our annual Owner/Operator of the Year Award, sponsored by Goodyear, Castrol and Freightliner. As in past years, this year’s award presentation will take place at the Fergus Truck Show.

The winner will receive: a diamond ring fit for a champion; $3,000 cash; and a trip for two valued at up to $2,500. They’ll also receive a trip to the Fergus Truck Show, including accommodations and a celebratory dinner with the Truck News gang (that’s the real highlight, as past winners may - or may not - attest)!

The nomination process is simple. Check out the ad in any recent issue of Truck News or Truck West. We’re looking for an owner/operator who exemplifies professionalism, boasts a safe driving record and is involved in industry or community causes. Acts of heroism or environmental stewardship are also considered.

Nominations are due June 1.

Personally, I can honestly say that presenting this award is the highlight of my job. Every year it’s humbling to pore through the dozens of worthy nominations and it’s always a challenge to narrow the field to just one winner. This exercise serves as a great reminder that owner/operators are the backbone of this industry and they continue to make outstanding contributions to the trucking biz – often with little thanks.

This is our chance to give a little something back. In its 16-year history, the Truck News Owner/Operator of the Year award has become one of the most prestigious awards a Canadian owner/operator can receive. I’m reminded of this each year at Fergus as past winners stop by the Truck News booth to catch up, reminisce about that infamous dinner and proudly display their ring. So far, 15 men and women from across Canada have won the award.

I encourage all fleet managers to take the time to nominate your very best owner/operator for the award. But the nomination process isn’t open exclusively to fleet managers. Co-workers, relatives, safety inspectors – anyone at all can nominate a candidate they feel is a deserving owner/operator. But don’t wait too long – the deadline is fast approaching!

Permalink | Comments (0)

Our recent coverage of the discriminatory road test requirement for all senior A/Z licence holders in Ontario has created quite the stir. My phone’s been ringing off the hook from drivers wanting to know what can be done. The requirement is not new – it’s been a thorn in the side of senior drivers for years.

What is new, however, is that there are now equipment stipulations that require road tests to be completed using a manual transmission and minimum 45-ft. trailer (amont other things). Believe it or not, there are a ton of senior drivers using automated transmissions – not because they can’t shift gears, but because they felt it was a safer and more efficient spec’.

Many of these drivers have accumulated millions of miles of safe driving, some dating back to when two-stick transmissions were the norm. The new requirements were intended to prevent unskilled entry-level drivers from obtaining an A/Z licence without the skills required to operate a typical tractor-trailer, but they’ve had the unintended consequence of chasing some of this industry’s greatest assets out of the industry.

Times are tough, and the costly burden of renting a truck with a manual transmission for a road test is too much for some to bear. So they’re begrudgingly calling it quits – and the entire industry, in fact all road users, are losing out.

Many callers have asked me ‘What can we do?’ I’m normally not a fan of online petitions or letter writing campaigns, but now that both OBAC and the OTA are on-board (and the PMTC has also lobbied against the current requirements), there’s reason to believe something can be accomplished here.

There’s a precedent for this. Remember the Lunchbag Letdown Campaign in 2007? The CTA, OBAC and the Teamsters set aside their political differences and urged truckers to fill in a postcard and send it to Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, requesting that the meal tax deduction limit be increased from 50% to 80%. And it worked. More than 4,000 drivers sent in their postcards and it created an impression. The March 07 budget included a clause that would restore the meal tax deduction limit to 80% by 2011.

Hopefully, the fact that the vast majority of owner/operators, drivers and carriers are in agreement the system needs to be revamped will help nudge the province into action. The OTA has set up a Web site dedicated to the cause. You can see it here.

Included is their suggested fix. To summarize: A driver would be required to prove medical fitness every year after reaching the age of 65; the renewal period for a CDL upon reaching the age of 65 should be two years until the driver reaches the age of 71, and annually thereafter; and the driver would be required to pass the normal written test and written air brake examination, but would only be required to take a road test and practical air brake examination if they have more than: five demerit points, one preventable accident and/or one out-of-service violation.

Does it go far enough? Bearing in mind the province is more likely to tweak the rules than rewrite them altogether, I think it strikes a pretty good balance. Most drivers I’ve heard from are alright with the yearly medicals and they’re also okay with road tests for drivers that have anything less than a stellar driving record. The OTA’s suggestion would alleviate most senior drivers from the costly and onerous annual road tests while maintaining a strong emphasis on road safety.

If you feel the mandatory road test requirement for senior drivers is discriminatory, then have your say. I’ve practiced what I preach, and fired off a variation of the OTA letter as well as the recent Truck News coverage to my local MPP, Transport Minister Jim Bradley and Conservative Transport critic Frank Klees. It’s worth a shot.

Permalink | Comments (6)

- See below for updates
It’s an annual rite of spring. Here I am plucking away at my keyboard from a hotel in Louisville, Ky., home to the Mid-America Trucking Show. By all counts, this year’s show will be a tad subdued compared to previous versions. Some major OEMs (Peterbilt and Kenworth) will be absent and I’ve heard others have downsized their displays.

But Mid-America remains North America’s largest trucking trade show, and it’s a must-attend event for us, since most manufacturers use the show as a platform from which to launch new products. The first event on the press itinerary is a demonstration at a nearby Cummins distributor. That’s all I know about that, but we’ll be reporting on it shortly after it concludes on Trucknews.com.

As always, we’ll be filing stories over the next few days from Louisville. As in past years, we’ll tag them ‘MATS Report’ for easy identification. And the May issues of Truck News and Truck West will include full coverage of the show’s highlights.

I really enjoy the Mid-America Trucking Show. There, I said it! I think I may be in the minority among my peers, since journalists are typically run pretty ragged during the show’s three main days. But I always look forward to it, especially since there’s no shortage of news to report from here and it’s a great chance to catch up with folks from the industry, some of whom you only see once a year.

One of the highlights for me is the drive – that’s right, I drive the 10 hours from Toronto. This comes as a surprise to a lot of people, but it’s actually a nice, low-stress trip. I remember a couple years ago when I was making the drive, I got a call from editorial director Lou Smyrlis who was flying down. He was stranded at the Cincinnati airport and there were no more flights out until the next day. I just happened to be driving through Cincinnati, so I made a short detour to the airport and picked him up. It goes to show that air travel is far from certain these days, and I’d rather travel at my own pace in the comfort of a rental car – this time a racing red Dodge Charger (that’s sure to catch the attention of border guards on the way back).

This year’s drive down was uneventful, except for coming upon the burnt out shell of a Peterbilt on the highway north of Louisville. The fire apparently occurred shortly before I happened along, and northbound lanes of I-71 were completely closed. I hope the driver is alright.

Last night I went out to an “authentic barbecue pit” for a Louisville specialty – a pulled pork sandwich.

Well, that’s about it for now. Lou and I will be doing our best to keep you up to date over the next few days through both the blog and the Headline News section of the site. Be sure to check back often!

Volvo says it’s done with active re-gens
Volvo made the impressive announcement this morning it will no longer have to actively regenerate its diesel particulate filters (DPF) when it adds SCR to its 2010 engines. In millions of miles of real-world testing, the company has noted that all DPF regeneration is conducted passively. That’s significant, because each active regeneration requires a dose of fuel.

Volvo continues to emphasize the importance it places on safety. The company presented a brand new Volvo VN tractor to the ATA’s America’s Road Team crew. It’s a program similar to the OTA’s Road Knights. They’ll use the tractor to help spread the word about highway safety.

Volvo also introduced its own version of Bendix Wingman, which it’s calling Volvo Enhanced Cruise.

- Nice ride! Members of America's Road Team have a new ride, courtesy of Volvo.

SCR stakeholders hold morning pow-wow
EPA2010 technologies continue to be the hot topic of discussion here at Mid-America. This morning, executives from each of the engine manufacturers that will use SCR (Daimler, Cummins, Mack and Volvo) held an ‘SCR Summit’ along with a few members from the supplier community. Noticeably absent was Navistar, which is the lone wolf in the EGR-only camp.

The engine execs showed complete solidarity in their positions that SCR is far and away the best solution for 2010. TA and Pilot truck stop chains were also present on the panel and assured the media they’d have DEF available at the pump in advance of Jan. 1.

Per Carlsson, president and CEO of Volvo Trucks North America, had perhaps the most pointed remarks.

“It strikes me as I sit here that even though we represent a very significant percentage of the world’s heavy-duty engine and truck production, we must not be very good leaders. And the thousands of engineers working for us around the globe must not be very bright. Because we’ve selected SCR for EPA2010. And according to the sole adopter of massive EGR, we’ve all made the wrong choice. This will certainly come as a surprise to the many customers around the world who are already using SCR.”

Check back at Trucknews.com later for a full report from the Summit.

Thermo King revamps straight truck reefer line
Thermo King introduced its all-new T-Series line of reefers for straight trucks this morning. The company claims the new series is 50% quieter, offers a 10% improvement in fuel economy and has 10% greater capacity than its predecessors.

The first of the models will be shipped beginning in August with the remainder of the line rolled out gradually over the following six months. The new reefers feature in-mold colour, a sleek, durable skin and a honeycomb grille that optimizes air flow through the condenser coil, the company pointed out.

As a bonus, a Hybrid SmartPower version of the new reefers can eliminate emissions altogether and cut fuel consumption by 40-60%. The reefer gets its juice from the truck’s hybrid system and can operate exclusively by battery for about 10 minutes before the reefer’s engine will need to restart. When the wheels are moving, it can operate off the hybrid system indefinitely.

- The new T-Series reefer unit, unveiled just hours ago at MATS

Who’s that nut on the motorcycle?
I just had to show this picture. You’ve gotta love the people who develop new technologies for the trucking industry. They take a lot of pride in their work and they also have a ton of faith in their products.

Take for instance Fred Andersky of Bendix. That’s him on the motorcycle, cutting off a tractor-trailer equipped with the new Wingman system. He then proceeded to apply the brakes! Cameras inside the truck’s cab showed the brake pedal in real-time, and there wasn’t a foot to be seen!

The tractor-trailer brought itself to a stop without any driver intervention and Fred survived to attend another Mid-America. You may remember Fred from this episode of our WebTV show Transportation Matters.

- Fred Andersky of Bendix has a lot of faith in the company's engineers.

Mack’s ready for 2010
In addition to announcing the availability of Wingman, Mack Trucks also took the opportunity to emphasize its readiness for EPA2010. The always colourful Dave McKenna debunked some SCR ‘myths’ and showed some customer testimonials from those who’ve been fortunate enough to test the new equipment in their day-to-day operations.

McKenna also took the chance to insinuate Navistar’s EGR-only approach has its flaws – most notably, its need to use credits to gain EPA compliance.

“One has to remember, when the credits are gone, then what?” he asked.

I’m not sure it’s fair to chastise Navistar over its use of credits at the outset of 2010. Other manufacturers may also use credit, even if they’re using SCR. Cummins, for instance, admitted last night it will use credits on certain engines as part of its own roll-out strategy. There’s nothing wrong with taking advantage of a credit program that has the blessing of EPA. Having said all that, McKenna does have a good point – credits won’t last forever, so hopefully for its sake, Navistar’s reliance on credits won’t be a long-term strategy.

McKenna also noted Mack’s SCR system will differ from Cummins, in that it will use an iron zeolite catalyst material. Cummins is keen on a new copper zeolite catalyst material that it says delivers even better fuel economy.

Finally, McKenna also took aim at claims the fuel savings achieved through the use of SCR will be nullified by the added cost of diesel exhaust fluid. He showed some charts that suggest SCR-equipped trucks will save about US$1,650 per year over trucks using only EGR based on diesel prices of $2.42/gallon and DEF prices of $2.28/gallon. This overall cost-of-ownership debate isn’t going away soon.

New Alcoa wheel lighter and brighter
Alcoa unveiled a new wheel it says is 2 lbs lighter than its predecessor and six times brighter than its competitors. The LvL ONE wheel was designed using a new proprietary process, according to the company. Two pounds may not seem like a significant weight savings, but over an entire tractor-trailer combination, the weight reduction totals 36 lbs. If you are comparing it to steel wheels, the weight savings is a more substantial 650 lbs. (Sorry, no pictures at this time - but I can tell you it looked pretty sharp).

Bendix introduces Wingman
Bendix had a lot to talk about at this morning’s press conference, which is refreshing given the downright depressing state of the industry. The company’s president, Joe McAleese is usually able to work a sports metaphor into his words, and this year was no exception. A big-time Steelers fan, he noted how the team didn’t stop working to improve itself during the team’s ‘dark years.’ It was rewarded this year with a Super Bowl victory. McAleese said Bendix is taking a similar approach, and continuing to expand during the downturn so it’s well-positioned to capitalize on the recovery.

Highlighting Bendix’s announcements was the introduction of Bendix Wingman ACB (Active Cruise with Braking). The system offers active braking interventions when required to avoid a rear-end collision.

The Wingman system is fully-integrated into the truck’s dash, the company pointed out, differentiating it from other systems on the market. It’s designed to be used with Bendix’s full-stability system. Later in the day, Mack Trucks announced it is the first OEM to offer the system, which it has named ‘Mack Road Stability Advantage by Bendix with Adaptive Cruise Control.’ Now that’s a mouthful. Let’s just call it Wingman!

- Here's a WIngman system in action, fully-integrated into the Mack dash.

LED manufacturers take the spotlight
So far today, the ‘coolest’ new product announcements would have to be from LED light companies Grote and Truck-Lite.

Grote has come out with a line of paper thin LEDs which can be attached as strips to trailers or inside vehicles. They are flexible and can even be wrapped around corners, providing a ton of possibilities. Show truck owners will love what the company’s dubbing LightForm.

The strips are less than 1 mm thick – thinner than a penny. They’re about 2% the size of traditional LEDs and can offer simple peel-and-stick mounting. Pricing is supposedly going to be competitive with traditional LED lighting.

- The LED strips from Grote are completely flexible and paper thin.

And for its part, Truck-Lite has come out with what it’s calling the world’s first seven-inch LED headlight. Truck-Lite officials say it’s been used in the military and its illumination capabilities are such that soldiers have been able to identify roadside bombs at night.

The company compared the light to a traditional incandescent equivalent and yep, it sure is bright. It’s expensive too, though - $350 a piece, so you’re looking at $700 US to do both sides. But then, you’ll get all the advantages inherent with LEDs, including longer life, improved durability, better visibility, etc.

- Truck-Lite's LED headlights provide improved visibility and durability, the company claims.

Cummins unveils 2010 engine lineup
Everyone has been saying they’re ready for 2010 - tonight Cummins backed it up with the introduction of its full 2010 engine lineup. The new engines will be on display at its booth here at the show, if you can make it to MATS in person.

Highlights included the ISX15, which will boast up to 600 hp with 2,050 lb.-ft. torque. When Cummins decided to abandon its plans to develop an EGR-only EPA2010 solution for heavy-duty engines in favour of selective catalytic reduction (SCR) last August, it also discovered that it could scrap plans for a 16-litre engine and achieve the same performance capabilities from a 15-litre offering. And this is it: The ISX15, which the company says will deliver better fuel economy, performance and reliability than today’s ISX engine.

The new offering combines Cummins XPI fuel system with a single overhead camshaft that provides what the company is dubbing an “industry-leading power-to-weight ratio among big bore engines.”

It’s also promising fuel economy gains of up to 5% compared to Cummins 07 engines. Furthermore, Cummins is promising fuel economy gains of 9% compared to the 2010 in-cylinder solution Cummins was previously pursuing. Hmmm…much more on that later.

But for now, the other highlight was the unveiling of an ISX11.9 engine, suited for vocational, day cab, LTL and regional applications. It shares many parts with its larger brother, but will offer horsepower ratings of up to 425 with up to 1,650 lb.-ft. of torque.

Not a lot will change on Cummins mid-range engine line. They’ll all use SCR, and that’s been the case since Cummins announced its 2010 emissions strategy back in 2007. Check back at Trucknews.com for the full news report, to be posted soon!

Here it is, the 2010 Cummins ISX15

‘Road-ready’ electric commercial vehicle to be showcased at MATS
Electric Vehicles International (EVI) says it will be showcasing the first ever ‘road-ready’ electric commercial vehicle at the Mid-America Trucking Show this week. The Class 3-6 electric vehicles will be available for demonstrations at the show, the company reports.

Namely, the eviLightTruck and eviRoute 1500 will be on display. Both are already commercially available in the US. The trucks can be viewed at Booth #65216.

Michelin to raffle off set of X-Ones
Coming to the show? Michelin is raffling off a set of drive-axle X-One wide-base singles to one show visitor. Just show up at their booth and swipe your badge. You must have a CDL to qualify. The company will be making a live drawing at 12 p.m. Saturday. The wide-base tires will be mounted to new aluminum rims supplied by Alcoa. Michelin will be at Booth #18121.

Permalink | Comments (3)

As much as I like to criticize the Ontario Liberals, I have to say I’m impressed by Premier Dalton McGuinty’s acknowledgement that Ontario must reinvent itself and focus on creating an economy based on sustainable energy projects.

Ontario’s manufacturing jobs are disappearing and they’re not coming back. At the same time, there’s a strong push for sustainable energy projects and the province needs to capitalize on that demand. But if that’s to happen, we need to change our mindset in a number of ways.

There were two recent reports in the GTA media that caught my attention. First, there was the report that recyclables collected in blue boxes in the GTA are being shipped to China where they’re being cleaned, sorted, converted to re-usable materials and then shipped back to Ontario. How counterproductive is that? The article went on to say we simply don’t have the labour force willing to do the dirty work here in Ontario at a competitive cost.

Give me a break. With unemployment rates climbing, surely we have the manpower willing to do this job here at home – granted, at significantly higher wages than Chinese workers are earning. My father runs a unionized plant that competes with non-unionized companies. Obviously, his labour costs are significantly higher than his competitors’. However, he’s ultimately able to provide a cost-competitive product, because they’ve been vigilant about improving efficiency in every aspect of the production process. You can’t tell me Ontarians lack the ingenuity to make it feasible to manage our own recyclables here at home. Yes, our labour costs would be higher but surely that can be offset by reducing costs elsewhere. Start by eliminating the cost of shipping containers full of junk to China and back in the first place.

I know that sorting and cleaning recyclables is not a glamorous job, but you’re out of work you’ve gotta do what you’ve gotta do to eek out a living. I know this. When I first moved to Calgary, I was up at 4 a.m. every morning delivering newspapers I felt I should be writing for. I’m pretty sure if we have the facilities here at home, we can find the workforce that would be grateful to have a job to report to each morning.

The second article was similarly discouraging. Apparently, we’re sending truckloads of organic waste collected through municipal green bin programs to composing facilities in the US. Ontario composting facilities are said to be running beyond capacity or have been shut down due to “odour problems.”

This is another classic example of NIMBY-ism preventing Ontario from creating jobs and lessening its environmental footprint. Apparently nobody wants a stinky old compost facility in their neighbourhood. Think of the jobs that could be created by building and operating incinerators here in Ontario. Also, think of the environmental benefits of dealing with our own waste rather than trucking it down to the States for the Americans to deal with. We must weigh the emissions and fuel consumption created by each of those truck trips against the reduction in methane emissions created by organics in the first place. Are we really any further ahead?

The NIMBYs have also reportedly put a damper on the province’s plans to put windmills along Lake Ontario shorelines. If Ontario really wants to become a leader in sustainable energy development and build an economy based on this emerging industry, then it needs the support of its residents. This is no time for NIMBY-ism. We need to welcome the construction of organic waste processing facilities and windmills here in Ontario. Just don’t put them in my backyard.

Permalink | Comments (3)

At a recent Driving for Profit seminar, hosted by NAL Insurance and KRTS Transportation Specialists, business networking guru Allison Graham shared some insight on how to network effectively at business functions. This is Part 2 of this blog series. Part 1 looked at common networking mistakes. This segment will examine Allison’s “Top Tips.”

By way of introduction, Allison Graham is president of Elevate Seminars and Strategic Development, and author of the book Business Cards to Business Relationships; Building the Ultimate Network. To find out more about Allison or to order her book, visit www.elevatebiz.ca.

TOP TIP #1 - BE STRATEGIC: Rather than attending random events hoping to stumble across a good contact, Allison suggested putting some thought into which events will attract the types of contacts you want to meet.

“Ask the questions: Where should I go? Who shall I meet? Be strategic, put yourself in the position to win,” she advised.

TOP TIP #2 – CLOSE THE LOOP AND FOLLOW THROUGH: Too often, according to Allison, people leave a networking event with the best intentions of following up with a new contact – however they put it on the back burner and fail to reconnect.

“I guarantee each of you will have a reason to follow up with at least one other person you met today, for some reason,” she told the Driving for Profit audience. “The majority of you will get back to the office, get back into the normal grind and will not follow through with the commitment you made.”

When you’ve made a connection with someone through another contact, go back to them to thank them or provide an update, Allison urged. Also, if you say you’re going to do something with someone – whether it be lunch or a round of golf – make sure you follow through with that as well, she stressed.

“Unless you intend to spend five or six hours with that individual, do not talk about playing golf because each of those (failures to follow up) chips away at your credibility,” she warned.

TOP TIP #3 – KNOW THE MINGLING FORMULA: At an industry function, your goal should be to meet as many people as possible, said Allison, so you need to be efficient when it comes to working a room.

Spend a maximum of 10 minutes with each person you meet at a cocktail-type networking function, Allison advised. When approaching a new contact, Allison suggests: Initiating a conversation, getting their contact information and then moving on. It shouldn’t take more than 3-8 minutes per person, she added.

Many people struggle with how to gracefully end a conversation. She said there are three ways to accomplish this: the verbal disengage; the third-party introduction; and the ‘gotta go’ technique.

The verbal disengage involves simply ending the conversation. The magic word for a closing line is ‘well,’ according to Allison. ‘Well, it’s been good chatting with you…” “Well, we’ll have to talk about this again…” ‘Well’ accompanied by a statement is a good closing line, she explained.

The third-party introduction is what Allison termed the “natural mingling dance” that happens at networking events. When you’re speaking to somebody and someone you know comes along, introduce the two of them and then step aside. Allison says this technique only works if you’re in the middle of the action, with many people milling about. “Nobody’s going to come save you if you’re standing in a corner,” she pointed out.

The ‘gotta go’ technique simply involves tell the person you’re speaking with that you have to go to the washroom. But Allison warned to be sure you follow through and actually visit the restroom. “You can only say you gotta go if you really gotta go, because there’s nothing more insulting than somebody saying to you they’ve gotta go to the bathroom and then they go straight to the bar and begin filling up with more liquid!”

Permalink | Comments (0)

At a recent Driving for Profit seminar, hosted by NAL Insurance and KRTS Transportation Specialists, business networking guru Allison Graham shared some insight on how to network effectively at business functions.

For the second time in a row, I was unable to attend the seminar in person, but thanks to the wonders of TV – or WebTV in this case – I was able to catch all of her engaging presentation on video afterwards. Segments of her presentation will be featured in an upcoming episode of our WebTV program, Transportation Matters, and I encourage you to keep an eye out for it. This is an episode you won’t want to miss.

By way of introduction, Allison Graham is president of Elevate Seminars and Strategic Development, and author of the book Business Cards to Business Relationships; Building the Ultimate Network. During her presentation, she offered insight on common networking mistakes as well as ‘top tips’ on how to get it right.

Business networking is one of those things that seems to come naturally to some, yet poses a real challenge to others. Just glance around the room of any business function and you’ll see it yourself. There are those who glide effortlessly around the room, seemingly at ease conversing with anyone about anything. Then there are those who find it awkward making small talk with strangers.

I’ll break this blog into two parts, focusing first on classic networking mistakes, as outlined by Allison.

CLASSIC MISTAKE #1 – MISSING THE BOAT: Allison explained that too many people show up at an event with unrealistic expectations and if they don’t land a big deal, they feel that attending the event was time wasted.

“It takes six to eight times of meeting somebody casually before they even get who you are,” she suggested.

For starters, when you’re at a networking event, Allison says you must take responsibility for telling people: who you are; what you do; and what you have to offer. The goal is to make someone think of you when they are in need of something you can help them with.

Letting people know what it is you do is important, as there are two primary goals of networking, explained Allison: 1) To be sure that when your contacts have a need you can fill, that they think to call or recommend you first; and 2) that when you have a need, such as growing your business, you know who to call – and when you do, they want to answer the phone.

“The only way that’s going to happen is if people know who you are, what you do and what you have to offer,” she explained. “Once you’re known, you’ll be known for something – you need to determine if that’s a good or a bad thing. Be sure your contacts like you, trust you and they believe you are competent.”

CLASSIC MISTAKE #2 – PUTTING IT IN CRUISE CONTROL: Too often, according to Allison, people tend to cling to people they know when attending industry functions. She said companies will often spend $1,500 to send 10 salespeople to a function, and then they’ll sit together all night.

“That’s a very expensive water cooler conversation,” she pointed out.

She urged attendees to stray from their comfort zone and talk to new people while attending events. She made everyone at the Driving for Profit seminar take three minutes to introduce themselves to someone in the room they didn’t know.

“That’s what we come to these things to do,” she said, “yet when you walk into a room, the natural tendency is to go talk to the people you already know.”

“Each time you go to an event, make it a point…try to come out with two quality contacts you want to follow up with and meet again,” she urged.

CLASSIC MISTAKE #3 – FUMBLING THE FIVE FUNDAMENTALS: Even some very successful senior-level executives struggle with the five fundamentals of successful networking, according to Allison. She laid them out during her presentation.

Fundamental 1 - The handshake: Allison referred to the handshake as the “subconscious communication of your character.” She said to make eye contact while shaking hands. “Eyes are the window to the soul; give people a glance,” she said. “Make it a habit that when shaking hands, you’re looking them directly in the eye.”

Fundamental 2 – Remember their name: Help others out by reintroducing yourself when you meet them for the second time, suggested Allison, and make an effort to remember the names of others. She said we tend to forget names because we don’t pay attention when introduced. Allison suggested taking a mental snapshot of a person when they introduce themselves and then take a moment after the event to think about them and file away their name and face for future reference.

Fundamental 3 – The proper use of name tags: The name tag should be placed on the right-hand side of the chest, according to Allison, since that’s where the eye falls naturally. She referred to the name tag as a “cheat note” on your chest, and suggested displaying it prominently.

Fundamental 4 – Remember your business card: Too often at networking events, Allison said people forget to bring their business cards. When you receive a business card, read it carefully and keep it. Business cards are “the greatest marketing tool you have,” she said.

Fundamental 5 – Follow proper dining etiquette: Allison said finger-licking runs rampant at events where hors d'ouvres and meals are served. “Finger-licking is everywhere. You may not even know you’re a finger-licker,” she insisted.

And many times the first person to sit down at a table grabs the wrong drinking glass or napkin. She pointed out bread is always on the left and water on the right.

In Part 2, we’ll look at three top networking tips offered by Allison at the Driving for Profit seminar. To find out more about Allison, or to order her book, visit www.elevatebiz.ca.

Permalink | Comments (0)

As January 2010 draws near, fleet managers and owner/operators will have to decide between two competing technologies to meet EPA2010 emissions standards. By now, most will know that Navistar is going to ramp up exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) levels in order to become EPA2010-compliant, while all other manufacturers are employing the exhaust aftertreatment system known as Selective Catalytic Reduction(SCR).

Each solution has its advantages and each also presents some concerns.

This is Part 4 in a series of blogs that will address some concerns and/or myths about EPA2010 emissions standards and both of the solutions that will be presented to the market. These blogs will be comprised of information obtained through many interviews I’ve conducted on the subject and plenty of additional research.

If you’re a stakeholder in this debate, and wish to comment on any of the points below, feel free to post a comment. Some spirited comments were posted in response to Part 1 and hopefully those contributors will stick around and answer any questions you may have on the subject of 2010 emissions solutions.

In Part 4 of the series, we’ll look at the anticipated costs of diesel exhaust fluid (DEF), the extra ingredient required by SCR systems.

EPA2010 FACT: The cost of DEF is still uncertain

The expected price of diesel exhaust fluid (DEF) is a tricky topic, because like all commodities, its cost will be dictated by supply and demand. However, at this time, the supply and the demand are both yet to be determined.

Make no mistake, there will be plenty of suppliers stepping up to meet the needs of the industry by producing and distributing DEF. In recent weeks: Cummins Filtration announced it would be providing DEF to the trucking industry; Pilot Travel Centres reaffirmed its intent to sell DEF ‘at the pump’; and Terra Environmental Technologies announced a supply agreement with Brenntag North America.

Availability will not be a concern, but what about cost? In the third segment of this blog series, we looked at the potential fuel-savings touted by engine manufacturers using SCR. Much of the actual bottom line savings will hinge on the cost of DEF – and for that matter, diesel.

(It’s worth noting that since that post, Detroit Diesel unveiled its EPA2010 SCR package to media, and insisted its solution will deliver a 3% NET fuel savings, after taking into account the expected cost and consumption of DEF).

But back to price…what exactly is DEF going to cost?

“We can’t predict what prices will be for DEF or even diesel fuel,” admitted Mark Lampert, senior vice-president, sales for Daimler Trucks North America at the recent Technology and Maintenance Council meetings. “(But) DEF prices will not be the problem that one competitor will have you believe.”

That competitor, of course, is Navistar, which has circulated pictures of a jug of DEF it found near Frankfurt, Germany with a price tag equal to US$12/gallon. However, with suppliers and distributors eagerly entering the North American DEF market, it’s very unlikely that DEF will cost anywhere’s near that much here.

The best guesses at the TMC trade show, according to technical editor John G. Smith, were that DEF will cost between $5 and $6 per gallon, with bulk quantities costing less than that. However, he added “Of course, every price is a best guess. Nobody knows what diesel will cost in January either.”

Permalink | Comments (2)

As January 2010 draws near, fleet managers and owner/operators will have to decide between two competing technologies to meet EPA2010 emissions standards. By now, most will know that Navistar is going to ramp up exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) levels in order to become EPA2010-compliant, while all other manufacturers are employing the exhaust aftertreatment system known as Selective Catalytic Reduction(SCR).

Each solution has its advantages and each also presents some concerns.

This is Part 3 in a series of blogs that will address some concerns and/or myths about EPA2010 emissions standards and both of the solutions that will be presented to the market. These blogs will be comprised of information obtained through many interviews I’ve conducted on the subject and plenty of additional research.

If you’re a stakeholder in this debate, and wish to comment on any of the points below, feel free to post a comment. Some spirited comments were posted in response to Part 1 and hopefully those contributors will stick around and answer any questions you may have on the subject of 2010 emissions solutions. I should also note that, while it’s a bit like talking to myself, I added a comment to Part 2. Rather than end the post with a question, I felt it behooved me to ask that very question and I have posted the response. It may be worth taking a look.

In Part 3 of the series, we’ll explore how SCR and Navistar’s EGR approach measure up when it comes to fuel consumption.

EPA2010 FACT: SCR will deliver better fuel economy than EGR

I’m wading into murky waters with this post. I’ve labeled the claim that (Selective Catalytic Reduction) SCR will deliver better fuel mileage than a non-SCR approach as FACT – and it is. It’s one of the strongest value propositions behind SCR. But while even the Navistar camp concedes SCR will consume less diesel, it counters that a like amount of diesel exhaust fluid (DEF) will be required by trucks using SCR, essentially nullifying the cost savings.

Proponents of SCR say their EPA2010 solution delivers anywhere from 2-5% better fuel economy than a non-SCR alternative. A 2-5% fuel savings is no small thing. By Cummins’ estimation, if averaging 6 mpg, at 120,000 miles per year and $4/gallon diesel (it will surely return to that level eventually), every 1% of fuel savings is worth $800 per truck per year. So a 5% fuel savings can add about $4,000 per truck to the bottom line each year. That’s a figure that’s hard to ignore, especially when extrapolated over a fleet.

The fuel savings is mainly due to the fact SCR users can reduce EGR flow rates, recovering some of the fuel economy they lost when they first introduced EGR in 2002 and then boosted EGR rates in 2007. Reducing EGR levels will allow engine manufacturers using SCR to tune their engines for optimum fuel mileage, since they can produce as much NOx as they want in-cylinder, and eliminate it downstream in the SCR catalyst.

With (advanced/massive/mature – call it what you will) EGR, on the other hand, NOx is being reduced in-cylinder so Navistar does not have the luxury of dialing back EGR flow rates - in fact it will increase the amount of gas being recirculated back into the cylinder by about 10%.

SCR backers also point out that NOx plays an important role in the efficient regeneration of the diesel particulate filter (DPF). They say they will nearly eliminate active DPF re-gens (which of course, consume fuel) and have questioned whether an in-cylinder solution will allow for the passive regeneration of the particulate filter.

Navistar officials I’ve spoken with concede that SCR will deliver better fuel mileage than its own solution, if by ‘fuel’ you mean ‘diesel.’ This is where the issue gets a little cloudy. Navistar says that its engine and an SCR engine will consume about the same amount of ‘fluid’ as they travel down the road, when you take into account that diesel exhaust fluid (DEF) will be consumed at about a 2-3% ratio (vs. diesel).

So, while engines with SCR will use less diesel fuel, it’s possible that the consumption of DEF will offset any cost savings. When measuring operational costs, one must consider the cost of DEF. If it will cost less than diesel, it stands to reason that SCR will, in fact, deliver the lower cost of operation. On the other hand, if DEF costs considerably more than diesel, then the fuel economy benefits touted by the SCR camp may be for naught.

In the next installment, we’ll look at the anticipated cost of DEF and its impact on overall cost of operation.

Permalink | Comments (2)

As January 2010 draws near, fleet managers and owner/operators will have to decide between two competing technologies to meet EPA2010 emissions standards. By now, most will know that Navistar is going to ramp up exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) levels in order to become EPA2010-compliant, while all other manufacturers are employing the exhaust aftertreatment system known as Selective Catalytic Reduction(SCR).

Each solution has its advantages and each also presents some concerns.

This is Part 2 in a series of blogs that will address some concerns and/or myths about EPA2010 emissions standards and both of the solutions that will be presented to the market. These blogs will be comprised of information obtained through many interviews I’ve conducted on the subject and plenty of additional research.

If you’re a stakeholder in this debate, and wish to comment on any of the points below, feel free to post a comment. Some spirited comments were posted in response to Part 1 and hopefully those contributors will stick around and answer any questions you may have on the subject of 2010 emissions solutions.

In Part 2 of the series, we’ll dispel the myth that Navistar’s 2010 solution will not be compliant by January.

EPA2010 MYTH: Navistar’s solution will not be EPA-compliant by Jan. 1

Navistar has taken some heat, perhaps undeservedly, for its use of credits to become EPA2010-compliant. It’s true that the tailpipe NOx levels of 2010 International MaxxForce engines may not initially meet the EPA’s stringent requirements. However, the engine will still be ‘compliant’ because Navistar will cash in credits it obtained from the EPA for bettering its previous emissions thresholds.

Navistar earned credits for being cleaner than required during previous rounds of EPA emissions standards. It can now redeem those credits (at a discounted rate) with EPA in order to gradually ramp up to EPA2010 levels, beginning in January, 2010.

Some may suggest this to be cheating the system, but it is really not cheating at all. Navistar is capitalizing on a program the EPA established to reward engine manufacturers that exceeded earlier emissions requirements. There’s nothing underhanded about what the company is doing, and other engine makers have used credits in the past and may well do so again in the future.

When pressed by media on their use of credits during a recent conference call, Navistar reps seemed mildly annoyed that the subject kept popping up. They contend their use of credits has no impact whatsoever on their customers – which is where their priorities lay.

“We always had a plan to take advantage of (the credit program) as a way to phase into 2010 requirements,” Navistar officials explained during the aforementioned conference call.

Everything is being done above board, and to the EPA’s satisfaction, and that’s all customers are concerned about, Navistar contends.

Placing myself in the shoes of a customer, I can see no reason to be worried about Navistar’s use of credits. Provided, of course, that Navistar can maintain the fuel economy and performance of its engines beyond Jan. 1, 2010 as it continues to gradually roll back NOx emissions.

With SCR, what you see on Jan. 1, 2010 is pretty much what you’ll get. Navistar, however, will have further work to do to get down to EPA2010 NOx levels. Can they do so without impacting fuel economy and performance? There’s no reason to believe they can’t, but it’s a question worth asking.

Permalink | Comments (2)

As January 2010 draws near, fleet managers and owner/operators will have to decide between two competing technologies to meet EPA2010 emissions standards. By now, most will know that Navistar is going to ramp up exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) levels in order to become EPA2010-compliant, while all other manufacturers are employing the exhaust aftertreatment system known as Selective Catalytic Reduction(SCR).

Each solution has its advantages and each also presents some concerns. Both camps are ramping up their PR campaigns and will undoubtedly be disseminating some information in the coming months that will be challenged and debated. The PR war is already underway, and will only intensify in the weeks and months ahead. There’s a lot at stake here for all truck and engine manufacturers.

Over the next few weeks, I’ll post a series of blogs that will address some concerns and/or myths about EPA2010 emissions standards and both of the solutions that will be presented to the market. These blogs will be comprised of information obtained through many interviews I’ve conducted on the subject and plenty of additional research.

If you’re a stakeholder in this debate, and wish to comment on any of the points below, feel free to post a comment.

Today, I’ll start by addressing the concern that with only 344 days to go, there’s still no urea (DEF) infrastructure network in place.

EPA2010 MYTH: There’s not enough time to develop the urea distribution network required for SCR

Ever since SCR was first discussed as a potential solution for EPA2010 emissions standards, concerns were expressed about the ability to develop a comprehensive North America-wide distribution network for urea. Urea (now referred to as Diesel Exhaust Fluid – DEF) is the required additive for SCR systems. Housed in a separate tank, the fluid is injected in small doses into the exhaust stream. It then causes a chemical reaction in the SCR catalyst where NOx is broken down into harmless water and nitrogen.

SCR’s detractors initially voiced doubts that DEF would be widely available by 2010, citing the need for massive infrastructure investments. Those concerns may have been valid, if you were envisioning the need for a DEF pump at every truck stop and cardlock across North America. That’s not going to be the case by January 2010, but fortunately for SCR backers, that level of availability will not be required.

DEF will be consumed at the relatively slow rate of 2-3% compared to diesel, engine manufacturers claim. DEF tank sizes will range from about 13-20 gallons, so a truck will likely only require a DEF top-up every 4,000-6,000 miles.

To put it in perspective, a highway truck with a 13-gallon DEF tank averaging 6.5 mpg will be able to travel from New York to Los Angeles and then back to Denver before requiring a DEF top-up, according to Mack Trucks’ David McKenna.

So while you may not find a DEF pump at every filling station by January 2010, it’s hardly a cause for concern. There will be plenty of places along a 4,000-6,000 mile run to find DEF, including all truck and engine dealers that offer SCR engines, many truck stops and other DEF distributors.

The DEF distribution network has begun to take form, and most notably Pilot Travel Centers has committed to offering the fluid ‘at-the-pump’ and in a variety of other sizes. Undoubtedly, as the opportunity to profit from the sale of DEF draws closer, more truck stops will announce their intentions to carry the fluid. Many suppliers have already announced their intention to produce and distribute DEF. Drivers will be able to carry a spare tote jug of DEF along with them, to ensure they don’t run out of the fluid en-route.

As Michael Delaney, senior vice-president of marketing with Daimler Trucks North America points out, “One would have to work pretty hard to run out of DEF.”

Even the harshest critics of SCR seem to have backed off claims that DEF won’t be widely available by 2010 and have turned their attention to other factors, such as its price. But that’s the subject for another blog entry in this series.

Permalink | Comments (7)

According to this article in the Globe and Mail, XM Canada and Sirius Canada are in talks to follow the lead of their US equivalents and formally merge. This is long overdue.

I am a big fan of satellite radio. I had an XM subscription since the day it was first launched in Canada and was quickly hooked. I could no longer tolerate the steady stream of commercials that tainted regular terrestrial radio and I began turning everyone I knew onto satellite radio.

When I bought a new vehicle last summer, it came equipped with Sirius. I prefer the programming of XM (largely because of its superior sports lineup), but have warmed up to Sirius over the past few months. I’m now a subscriber to both services, with a portable XM unit and Sirius in the Jeep.

It frustrates me, however, that I can’t have the best of both worlds like subscribers south of the border have. I have to listen to those “Best of XM” commercials on my Sirius radio yet I don’t have the option of adding the package.

I’m hoping that a merger occurs in Canada – provided there’s some sort of price guarantee like there was in the US. And while I’m on the subject of satellite radio, allow me to vent another frustration. Why is it that Sirius has decided to add DJs to most of the music stations? Now, these channels feature too much talk – which is what I subscribed to satellite radio to avoid.

Why incur the overhead these DJs present, when it would be more cost-effective to simply post the playlist online? If I want to know what song I just heard, I’ll look it up. No wonder Sirius stock can be had for about 11 cents a share! The very thing that made satellite radio wonderful, is being abandoned.

Hopefully the Canadian providers of Sirius and XM get a deal done to provide more comprehensive programming and get back to basics – and save the talk for the talk stations.

Permalink | Comments (0)

Professional drivers are some of the most creative people. With seemingly endless hours spent in the cab, there's plenty of time to ponder new creations and maybe even some prose. This poem was submitted by Rose-Marie Lundy Berard of Whiteline Trucking. Her husband, Roger, runs team for the company, making a twice weekly run hauling tridem reefers between Ontario and Manitoba.

Following a recent run, Rose-Marie was inspired to write this Christmas poem. Enjoy!

The Dream Team

The Dream Team on 045
A Western Star, a 2005
The LED’s are shining bright
To light the path on a dark cold night
A run they both know so well
But can also be a trip from hell.
The switch was done in Parry Sound
Now they are Sault Sainte Marie bound
The XM is on but very low
Playing a song the driver knows
It must be Hank, Willie or Waylon
He says this is what keeps this star sailing
The RPM’s are holding well
The damn old Montreal River will easily tell
The moon has gone behind the cloud
He hopes that this long hill is plowed
I guess we’ll switch in the coldest town
They call it White River, we’re westerly bound
A Christmas tune comes across the air
It’s Tammy & George, a duet they were!
The axles are slid, the jaws are tight
The load is scaled and the weights just right
We look at the miles we try to add
The number is great, no accidents had
The years on the road have shown the toll
These two men have given heart and soul
The total adds up to 132
The number of years between the two
As the wheels keep turning
Moving on in the night
The lights of the ‘Peg
Will soon be in sight!
The jake comes on as they make that turn
The looks they get can be pretty stern
We’ve just come over the railroad tracks
But we know we will have to double back
The freight will be off and the tanks we will fill
In hopes that we will not be sitting still.
The Christmas lights are starting to appear
The drivers’ start thinking Christmas is so near
For their little lady, so patient and true
A special gift we will get for you!
These men are righteous and I know that
Because we had our late night chats
The road ahead can be lonely at times
And I know because I dispatch at Whiteline!

- By Rose-Marie Lundy-Berard

If that doesn't put you in the Christmas spirit, what will? Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to all our readers!

Permalink | Comments (0)

I’ve received a call from one truck driver and have heard anecdotal reports of other motorists being charged under Ontario’s impending cell phone law. The law, which will make it illegal to use cell phones and other devices while driving, was announced Oct. 28.

Fines of up to $500 will be levied by police, as part of the new law. However, this law still has not gone through the required legislative hurdles and it’s premature for police to be enforcing the rule.

I called the MTO’s communications department and received confirmation that the Bill is still before the House. Therefore, any tickets would likely be defeated in court. Of course it’s a hassle many drivers would rather not have to deal with. It should be noted, police do have the power to charge distracted drivers under other provisions of the Highway Traffic Act.

While Ontario’s cell phone law is not yet on the books, it may be a good idea to hang up early to avoid trouble altogether.

Permalink | Comments (12)

It’s been a wild and wacky week on Parliament Hill, culminating yesterday when Governor General Michaelle Jean agreed to prorogue Parliament until Jan. 26. In my estimation, in doing so she rightly defeated any chance the coalition has at forming a government.

That’s because for six weeks, MPs on both sides of the aisle will step outside of their bubble in Ottawa and return to their ridings where they’ll be dealt a hefty dose of reality from their constituents. Liberal and NDP MPs will learn, in no uncertain terms, that there’s absolutely no appetite among Canadians for a coalition government involving separatists.

Tory MPs, meanwhile, will also learn that the antics of leader Stephen Harper has left many conservative voters with a sour taste in their mouths. His partisan games may not have directly caused the formation of the coalition, but they nonetheless served as an accelerant.

Over the next few weeks, as Liberals return to their home ridings, they will learn that to truly serve the constituents who voted for them, they must abandon the coalition. Cracks are already beginning to appear after an embarrassing national address by their so-called leader, Stephane Dion. Dion demonstrated how ill-equipped he is to be PM when he and his cronies delivered a fuzzy and at times incoherent video to national TV networks Wednesday night – and delivered it late, to boot.

But at the same time, the Conservatives must realize that they are not blameless in all of this. I believe it would be best if Harper were to step aside and turn the reins over to Jim Prentice or another capable Tory. I wouldn’t have said that a week ago. But Harper’s televised address was also disappointing. It lacked passion and substance and there was no sign of what many of us wanted to see – a humbler Harper, maybe even an apologetic Harper.

The bad blood that exists between Harper and the opposition parties has caused irreparable harm. There’s not an ounce of trust on either side, and we’re dealing with an economic crisis that, like it or not, will require parties on both sides of the aisle to work together to some extent. That’s not likely to happen with a Harper-led government. Of course, Harper will not step aside. He’s too proud, maybe even too arrogant.

So what does it all mean? It means that not a whole lot will change when all is said and done. The coalition will erode over the coming weeks and the Liberal Party will continue to implode after another failed attempt to gain power under the leadership of a laughable loser. The Tories will retain their minority government position and will stand unified behind Harper, for better or for worse. When all is said and done, all that will have been accomplished by this coalition (besides providing us with some entertaining TV news clips) is to have stalled the political process for several weeks. Several weeks that should have been spent coming up with ways to tackle the economic crisis that confronts our country.

But there is a silver lining in all of this. The activities in Ottawa over the past couple of weeks have reignited Canadians’ interest in politics. It seems everyone has taken an interest in the events on Parliament Hill, and everyone has an opinion. When was the last time you could say that? Speaking of opinions, I’m interested in hearing yours. Feel free to post a comment in the space below.

Permalink | Comments (2)

The Stephen Harper Conservatives returned to power last month in convincing fashion, forming a stronger minority government than they previously held and trouncing the Liberals in the process. One campaign promise that undoubtedly won some votes in this industry was Harper’s promise to slash the federal excise tax on diesel in half – from four cents per litre to two.

However, one must wonder if that promise will ever come to fruition. The promised fuel tax hike is in jeopardy, not entirely because of the Conservatives’ own doing, but because of a shameful move by the just-defeated Liberals and NDPers to form a coalition and attempt to overthrow the government we just elected.

If the Liberal/NDP coalition should successfully overturn the Conservatives, it will be a dark day for Canada, especially if Stephane Dion is chosen to act as PM. (Bob Rae’s not a better option either – as Ontario Premier, the NDPer-turned-Liberal proved he can plunge an economy into recession even without the global pressures faced today).

Canadians made it clear on election day last month that neither the Liberals nor the NDP are the right choice to lead this country through the rough waters ahead. However, due to backdoor politicking, it appears Canada’s decision to re-elect a Conservative government may be for naught. It’s embarrassing really. What kind of message does that send to Canadians? That our vote really didn’t matter, after all?

An unelected Liberal/NDP coalition government would make a mockery of Canadian democracy. Harper himself must share some of the blame for the situation he now finds himself in. His decision to slash federal funding for political parties really shook up the hornet’s nest. (Learn to pick your battles, man!)

But despite his recent missteps, I still feel Harper and his team are best-suited to lead us through this recession. We may never find out if the Conservatives will come good on their promise to slash the excise tax on diesel. Finance Minister Jim Flaherty is slated to release the federal budget in January – let’s hope he has the chance.

Permalink | Comments (3)

There’s been a lot of talk lately on both sides of the border about whether or not we should bail out North American automakers. It’s a fuzzy issue, made clearer recently during a speech by auto analyst Dennis DesRosiers at the Ontario Trucking Association convention.

In a nutshell, he surmised that GM, Ford and Chrysler are likely toast if they don’t receive a government bail-out. (Ford's apparently in a slightly better position, since it has liquidity). He also said the root of the automakers’ problems are cyclical in nature. By offering creative financing and major incentives to buyers, the industry in the short-term postponed any downturn in new vehicle sales. But once that inevitable downturn did occur, it coincided with an unexpected credit crunch, delivering a double-whammy to the ‘Detroit 3,’ who at the same time have been losing market share to the likes of Honda and Toyota.

DesRosiers said GM, Ford and Chrysler have successfully trimmed the fat from their organizations and also reduced capacity. Now they’re in the process of re-aligning their product lines to bring them in tune with consumer demands. They need government help to enable them to weather the current storm, carry their strategy through to fruition and hopefully emerge stronger when car sales pick back up.

Should government let the Detroit 3 go broke? After hearing DesRosiers speak on the issue, it’s difficult not to want to give the US-based automakers one more chance. After all, it’s been reported that nearly three million jobs could be lost if GM, Ford and Chrysler go under. The US and Canadian economies cannot afford such a major blow at a time like this – or any other time for that matter. Furthermore, DesRosiers said Chapter 11 protection is not an option, as consumers would ultimately lose any faith they have left in the products offered by the Detroit 3. A Chapter 11 filing would be the death knell for either one of them.

But on the other hand, there are some ethical questions that still beg for answers. For one, how do you support the Detroit 3 and not Toyota and Honda, which are also struggling yet aren’t knocking on Washington’s door with their hands out? DesRosiers pointed out the so-called ‘new domestics’ have created over 40,000 jobs in Canada alone during the same time the Detroit 3 have shed over 55,000 jobs. Where’s the fairness in that?

Also, the unions – the CAW particularly – appear unwilling to make concessions. As DesRosiers said, there’s an impression that any rescue package would be a bail-out of the CAW and UAW – not the automakers themselves. Before I see my tax money handed over to GM, Ford and Chrysler, I want to see big-time concessions made by the unions.

Thirdly, executives at each of these companies have to demonstrate that they have a shred of common sense if they’re to be trusted to spend the bail-out money appropriately. It’s hard to have faith in them to do the right thing when they show up for bail-out talks in Washington aboard private jets. As DesRosiers said, that was such a major tactical error it is difficult to comprehend how these CEOs can be trusted to turn these massive ships around.

Bailing out GM, Ford and Chrysler will be a bitter pill to swallow. But the North American auto sector is a $2 trillion industry with seven million jobs directly connected to it. At a time like this, can we afford to let them fail?

Permalink | Comments (6)

According to a report in this morning’s Toronto Star, the province of Ontario is going to get tougher on young drivers. Kudos to the province for taking steps to curb the dangerous driving practices of today’s youth. There’s a startling sense of entitlement among many young drivers, who have somewhere along the way forgotten that driving is a privilege, not a right.

(Wow, what’s happening to me? This marks two consecutive blog entries applauding the provincial Liberals.)

According to the Star article, the new rules will include a zero-tolerance approach to speeding. Just one speeding ticket will result in a loss of driving privileges for young drivers. There’ll also be a total ban on alcohol consumption and only one teenaged passenger will be allowed to travel with new drivers. (Forget cell phones and GPS systems, what can be more distracting than a car full of teenagers?)

These are all great steps, which will hopefully go a long way towards re-establishing the ground rules for on-road behaviour. But once again, the question will be just how much teeth the new rules actually have? Unless there’s adequate on-road enforcement, the new legislation won’t make a difference.

Permalink | Comments (12)

I’ve been known to be critical of the Liberals – both provincially and federally – from time to time. And believe me, I’ll be critical of them again. But I’m also willing to give credit where credit is due, and Dalton McGuinty’s cash-strapped government deserves kudos for launching a $15 million incentive program for the purchase of hybrid and alternative fuel-powered commercial vehicles.

Such incentives are widely available in the US, and have helped edge hybrid vehicles closer to the mainstream. Without government incentives, very few fleets are going to shell out the extra $30,000-$40,000 a hybrid truck typically costs. The bean-counters are often too short-sighted to see the value that can be achieved long-term through the fuel and maintenance savings delivered by these types of vehicles. The government really does have a role to play in helping get the ball rolling and encouraging the adoption of environmentally-friendly commercial vehicles.

Thanks to the Ontario government’s grant program, announced yesterday, more fleets will have the opportunity to invest in environmentally-friendly vehicles and see for themselves just how much they save in fuel costs over time. I’m also pleased to see the program is retroactive to August, 2007. Early adopters should not miss out on the funding - companies that have already purchased hybrid or alternative fuel commercial vehicles should also be rewarded.

The details of the grant have yet to be released, but I have a feeling a lot of companies will line up for the funding when applications are accepted beginning at the end of November. The benefits of the incentives are two-fold. First, companies will see for themselves that there really is value in investing in ‘green’ commercial vehicles. Ideally the fuel savings will outweigh the purchase price premium and fleets will continue to purchase hybrid vehicles well into the future, even without government grants.

Secondly, the program will result in increased sales of hybrid vehicles, which will help drive down the purchase price as economies of scale make building hybrid vehicles more cost-effective.

I don’t think hybrid or alternative fuel-powered vehicles are the fix for all the industry’s challenges. But I do think they do have a place. In the right application, these vehicles can deliver substantial fuel savings for fleets and at the same time produce less emissions, which benefits us all. It’s been a long time coming, but the Ontario Liberals got it right with this program. Let’s hope some federal funding will follow.

Permalink | Comments (4)

With global financial institutions in meltdown, it’s getting awfully difficult to sell trucks. Reviewing the most recent quarterly report issued by Volvo AB revealed a startling figure.

In the third quarter of 2008, Volvo’s net order intake for all of Europe was 115 trucks. One hundred and fifteen! That is pretty much a 100% decline from the 41,970 trucks Volvo sold in Europe during the third quarter of 2007. Hopes that strong European demand for trucks would offset the sluggish North American market seem to have evaporated due to the global credit crisis. Simply put, customers can’t get the credit they need to buy new trucks.

In its report, Volvo explained that there were some 20,000 truck orders in the system. However, when the credit crisis reared its head, Volvo prudently met with customers to review their orders. During this process, nearly all orders were wiped from the books.

“The review resulted in that approximately the same number of orders that were received during the quarter was taken out of the order book,” Volvo AB said in its financial report.

Incidentally, North American orders totalled 7,578 for the third quarter of 08, about 1% higher than 07 levels over the same period.

The good news is that both in Europe and here in North America, trucks are still required to move the vast majority of freight. And today’s sophisticated fleet manager has a comprehensive understanding of lifecycle costs and the need to replace equipment on a timely basis. Let’s hope some normalcy returns to the global credit markets soon, so fleets can obtain the capital they need to fund those equipment purchases.

Permalink | Comments (0)

I was saddened earlier this year by the announced departure of Caterpillar from the post-2010 North American on-highway engine market. And likewise, I experienced a similar sadness yesterday when Daimler announced it was pulling the plug on the Sterling truck brand.

These two announcements will drastically change the North American truck and engine landscape forever. Lou did a good job analyzing Daimler’s strategic decision to quash the Sterling name plate in his blog yesterday.

But to me there’s a real human element that’s even more tragic than the demise of another North American name plate. I was fortunate to attend the unveiling of Sterling’s new sleeper – the NightShift - this summer in California. It marked a bold move back into the sleeper market, a segment Sterling abandoned years earlier. It also rounded out the most complete truck lineup that exists today, a complete line of Class 3 to 8 vehicles.

One of the greatest pleasures I derive from this job is attending new product launches. The enthusiasm that the engineers behind these developments show for their products is contagious. In many cases they’ve spent months, maybe even years, working on a single product – whether it be a new sleeper cab or a new tread design for a tire. There must be nothing more gratifying for these individuals than seeing their hard work come to fruition during a product roll-out.

I hope the NightShift finds a new home on another Daimler product. Closer to home, the plant closure at St. Thomas is another reminder that our manufacturing sector is dying. The plant closure will be a devastating blow to St. Thomas, and to the 2,000 or so people who work at the Sterling plant there. And then there are the dealers, who were also caught off-guard by yesterday’s announcement.

To me, the most disturbing statement issued by Daimler was this, attributed to president and CEO Chris Patterson: "Plans based on an expectation of brief, sharp market events driven by regulatory change, followed by periods of reasonable growth, are out-of-step with the emerging realities of the latter part of this decade. We've examined every part of our organization in light of the changed economic environment."

The projections we’ve heard of a recovery in two months, four months, six months – what have you, seem to have been replaced by a gloomier expectation of further long-term challenges. Let’s hope the remaining manufacturers can weather the storm and emerge from this slowdown healthy and whole.

Permalink | Comments (2)

Is it ever appropriate to call in and report a fellow truck driver? That’s the dilemma on-road editor Harry Rudolfs struggled with recently, after another trucker nearly ran him off the road.

He wrote about his account of events in this month’s issues of Truck News and Truck West. Here’s a summary:

Trying to keep my truck from dropping off the shoulder, all I could do was watch helplessly as the trailer's taillights diminished into the distance, my heart racing and my head steaming with anger.

“Why did you cut me off?” I asked. He replied with a sheepish smile and rolled up the window. Still fuming and shaking, I walked back to my truck after memorizing the licence plate.

To summarize, Harry decided to call the driver’s company and report the incident. Next day, he gets a call from the driver himself who blamed Harry for costing him his job!

“So I have to admit to having mixed feelings about this episode,” Harry writes. “I never did find out why he cut me off and an apology in broken English would have been enough. But I certainly didn't want to get him fired. And the owner should not have given out my phone number, but he clearly had a duty to investigate my complaint.”

Was he in the wrong to ‘drop the dime’ on another driver? Or was it the right response? Harry says he still isn’t sure, and would be interested in feedback. E-mail him at: hrudolfs@rogers.com or post your comments here.

Permalink | Comments (10)

As reported on Trucknews.com last week, the OTA is spearheading a road safety initiative that will urge motorists to call police to report reckless drivers. It’s a great idea, and should result in a lot of phone calls, based on my own personal observations on a daily basis.

The program’s spokesperson is Debbie Virgoe, wife of heroic truck driver, David Virgoe, who died when he steered his tractor-trailer off Hwy. 400 last year to avoid harming other motorists. On-hand for the photo-op were Virgoe, various representatives of the enforcement community, the Ministry of Transportation and the OTA.

The campaign involves applying a 12"x20"decal to tractor-trailers which displays the message: ‘Help Keep Our Workplace Safe – Report Aggressive Motorists, Call Police.’

While I’m proud the trucking industry is once again being proactive in its promotion of highway safety, the cynic in me wonders how effective this campaign will be. After all, we’ve been told the OPP lack the resources to control speeding trucks, hence the need for mandatory speed limiters which will mechanically limit all trucks in the province to 105 km/h.

How is it then, that the OPP is suddenly able to follow up on the hundreds, maybe even thousands of complaints about unsafe driving practices on our roads, that these posters will generate? Has their been a sudden influx of cash into the police force? Or will police resources be stretched too thin to follow up on complaints?

The OTA’s poster campaign is a noble concept, but whether or not this initiative has enough teeth to alter driver behaviour remains to be seen.

Organizers launched the OTA poster campaign at a press conference just off Hwy. 400 last week.

Permalink | Comments (4)

In Lou’s most recent blog entry as well as his column in the upcoming issue, he urges us not to dismiss the idea of a carbon tax such as the Green Shift policy touted by the federal Liberals. While it’s never advisable to call out your boss, Lou and I do occasionally have philosophical differences and this one is a biggie.

Call it what you want, ‘green plan’, ‘carbon tax’....whatever, the bottom line is that the Green Shift plan is nothing more than an thinly-veiled fuel tax that will force the trucking industry to shoulder an unfair portion of the load as the Liberals aim to financially punish polluters. Furthermore, the plan is fundamentally wrong, as it targets an industry that a) is already doing everything it can to reduce its fuel consumption, including: slowing down, reducing idling and using nearly smog-free engines; and b) drives this nation’s economy and in doing so, has no alternative but to consume fossil fuels in the process.

I don’t oppose a carbon tax per se. Show me one that reduces emissions without hampering the economy and I’ll consider it with an open mind. What I do oppose is a flawed PR-driven policy (and likely a failed election strategy) like Green Shift, that despite being ‘revenue-neutral’ will cost the trucking industry billions of dollars while driving up the costs of everything that travels by truck. It will also hurt small-time truckers who are already under enormous strain due to unprecedented fuel prices and a shaky economy. How can anyone within the trucking industry support such a plan?

Now that Stephen Harper has promised to slash the federal excise tax on diesel in half (from four cents per litre to two) if re-elected, I’ve crunched a few numbers that may help portray why the Liberal and Conservative policies are, in fact, “polar opposites.”

Green Shift: By Year 4 it will add 7 cents per litre to the cost of diesel. By the Liberals’ own admission, it will cost the average trucker an extra $1,700 per year. (My math suggest it'll be more than $4,000, for what it's worth).

Harper’s tax cut: By Year 4, it will reduce the federal excise tax on diesel from four cents per litre to two.

So by the fourth year, there is a 9 cent/litre swing between policies. Now let’s assume, using very conservative numbers, that you average 40L/100km (7 mpg) and travel 160,000 km (100,000 miles) per year. (I know, most of you work harder than that). In that case, you consume 64,000 litres of diesel per year. Assuming a 9 cent/litre difference between what the Conservatives are promising and what Green Shift will include, you’re looking at a $5,760 differential per truck, per year. That’s $5,760 that will either go into your pocket, under a Harper government, or up in smoke, under Green Shift.

(Yes, the Liberals now promise to invest all the money collected through Green Shift back into green initiatives and tax cuts, but how much do you expect to see as a fleet owner or owner/operator?)

The number is staggering, even more so if you’re a fleet. Extrapolate that number over 100 trucks...or 200...or 900. Bison Transport spends over $6.5 million per month on diesel - what will the difference amount to for them?

As I write in this month’s column, Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty recently refused to endorse the federal Liberals, instead urging Ontarians to “Vote Ontario.” I would like to paraphrase McGuinty, and urge truckers to “Vote Trucking.” But whatever you decide, just be sure to get out there and vote!

Permalink | Comments (2)

An organization has been set up to lobby government to crack down on reckless drivers and street racers (and I use the term ‘racers’ loosely).

Truck driver Michael MacDonald is an active member of the organization, The Heart Group (Help Eliminate All Road Tragedies), and he brought the group to my attention in a recent e-mail. The group points out that of 5,139 reckless driving charges in Ontario, only 33% actually resulted in convictions. The sentences were often light, usually involving house arrest – if any time at all - even when an innocent person was killed as a result of their actions.

The Web site, at www.heartgroup.ca is well-designed and quite informative. It includes information on individual cases (including the one that took the life of trucker David Virgoe) and includes a petition calling for harsher sentences of those convicted of reckless driving or street racing.

The organization is still in its infancy, and the petition only has 43 names to date. However, the group plans to spread the word about the Web site and collect as much support as possible. Hopefully, law-makers in Ontario and elsewhere in Canada will appreciate the pain these people (many of them have personally lost loved ones to reckless drivers) are suffering.

I think it’s a noble and worthwhile endeavor, even though I question the effectiveness of online petitions in general. Still, hopefully the group will increase awareness about what is a growing problem on our highways and urge our politicians to get serious about punishing drivers who endanger those of us who use our public roads responsibly.

For more information, visit www.heartgroup.ca .

Permalink | Comments (11)

It’s often been said that today’s trucker is nothing like the trucker of years gone by. If a 30-year driving veteran breaks down along the side of the highway, he’s likely to get out of the truck, figure out what the problem is, fix it and be on his way without complaint. The new driver is much more likely to stay in the cab, call dispatch, wait for help to arrive and then maybe even chew out the mechanic for good measure.

Yes, that may be a broad generalization and there are exceptions. However, it’s difficult to deny there’s a different mentality amongst younger workers, and it isn’t unique to trucking. The younger generation, as a whole, is more interested in maintaining a comfortable lifestyle than in working long hours and maximizing earning potential. It used to be folks lived to work. Now they work to live.

This trend has not gone unnoticed by Mark Seymour, president of Kriska. He noted during a recent Driving for Profit seminar (hosted by KRTS Transportation Specialists, NAL Insurance and sponsored by SelecTrucks), that maximizing asset utilization has become increasingly difficult, due to the mindset of today’s driver.

“You just can’t assume anymore than when you assign a driver to a truck, that utilization will be maximized,” Seymour observed. “With no disrespect intended to people who drive trucks, the older guard lived to drive. Today’s new generation driver is lifestyle-motivated. If they worked somewhere else five days a week making $40,000 and they come here and can make $40,000 in four days, they’re not interested in making $50,000, they’re interested in that day off.”

This was evidenced by an incentive program Kriska launched in an effort to improve its asset utilization. The company offered a penny-per-mile increase to drivers who ran 10,000 miles per month (legally, of course) rather than 9,500 miles. “It did nothing” for asset utilization, Seymour said. But it did serve as a good retention tool for the veteran drivers who took advantage of the program. Most of the younger drivers opted not to – they wanted that extra day at home.

“They decide how much money they need to make and then they work backwards,” Seymour said of the young guard. “God love’em.”

It’s an interesting quandary. With the current cost of equipment and slim margins, fleets need to keep the wheels turning as much as possible. Meanwhile, younger workers have little interest in working 14 hours a day, seven days a week. By and large, they simply don’t share the same work ethic as their seniors. I don’t know how this is going to shake out in the years to come. Trucking companies will need to find a way to balance the lifestyle requirements of the younger worker with the need to maximize productivity. Maybe Nintendo Wiis and iPods in every cab?

On another note, the above comments attributed to Mark Seymour were made, as noted, at a Driving for Profit seminar. It was the third such seminar in a four-part series held across Ontario this year. I attend a lot of these types of events, and I have to say that the Driving for Profit events are among the best in terms of value and content.

I wasn’t able to attend this edition of the series, however colleague Adam Ledlow videotaped it and I watched it in its entirety. Watch our WebTV program Transportation Matters for segments of the seminar in the weeks ahead and check out upcoming issues of Truck News and Truck West. Mark Seymour was surprisingly candid about a lot of topics, offering many practical tips that other fleets can put to good use.

Seymour and his sidekick, Len Armstrong of KPMG, have been added to the fourth installment of this series to be held Oct. 21 in Toronto. At $50, including lunch, it’s money well spent. If you wish to attend, you can register at www.drivingforprofit.com. And no, I don’t get any kickbacks for plugging this event. Well, maybe a free lunch.

Permalink | Comments (0)

You would hope, given the hardships currently facing the trucking industry, that those on the front lines would bond together and help each other get through. Instead, there are increasingly worrying reports of diesel thefts from coast-to-coast.

The B.C. Forest Safety Council issued a bulletin this summer, claiming that fuel thieves have been draining truckers’ tanks at a number of places, including: overnight truck stops; long-term parking lots; work sites where equipment is parked; and in trucking yards.

“Almost anywhere there’s a tank and an opportunity to tap into it,” the group surmised.

On the other coast, the APTA released a similar bulletin earlier this summer, warning of an increase in fuel thefts there as well.

“It is advised that you keep fuel cards and pin numbers separate as well as increase vigilance in your facilities," APTA chief Peter Nelson advised in a letter to members. "This is a nasty downside to the rise in fuel prices in that it has created a lucrative black market for diesel fuel."

While I’m sickened by the thought of truckers stealing from truckers, perhaps there’s something even more sinister at play. Maybe the fuel thefts are the work of organized criminals. Somehow that seems easier to stomach. Nonetheless, truckers are getting screwed and it’s even worse south of the border.

A report from the OOIDA publication Land Line suggests that truckers are having their APU covers and battery box lids taken off their trucks and sold for scrap metal. An APU cover that can net about $15 as scrap metal can cost a trucker a few hundred bucks to replace, the story says. Just where is it going to end?

All truckers can do is become extra vigilant during these times and take extra steps to protect themselves from being victimized. Here are a few tips from the B.C. Forest Safety Council on how to protect your fuel: Purchase a locking fuel cap; fill up in the morning rather than the night before; closely monitor the fuel gauge; report all thefts to the authorities so they’re aware there’s a problem; and secure the area your park when possible.

Permalink | Comments (1)

Navistar has pumped millions of dollars into an unorthodox marketing campaign for its retro-styled LoneStar, which is almost as unique as the truck itself. When the LoneStar was still a mere prototype, the company commissioned Academy Award-nominated director Brett Morgen to spend several weeks on the road with three American truckers and to capture their experiences in a 45-minute documentary.

“I completely fell in love with trucking and with these guys,” Morgen said of the experience during a press conference with the three stars prior to the premiere at the Great American Trucking Show last week.

The cast - three colourful, free-spirited, salt-of-the-earth truckers - enjoyed a rare moment in the spotlight at the press conference, before we were whisked into a packed theatre to enjoy the first public showing of the film. I’m not a movie critic, but I can tell you I was thoroughly impressed with the end result.

While the first few minutes of the film were blatantly commercial (and who can complain, when Navistar forked over $3 million to produce the film?), the LoneStar soon took a back seat to the real stars of the show, the three drivers: Tim Young, Steve Donaldson and Chris LeCount. Each of the characters brought something different to the table.

As Morgan explained before the premiere, Tim was the ‘family guy,’ Chris brought a genuine love of trucking and Steven was in ‘search of salvation.’ These are real truckers. Sometimes they speed, sometimes they work longer than they should and sometimes they just break down emotionally. The film captures all that. But it also digs deeper, and reveals what drives these guys, the likes of which form the backbone of the industry. Downtrodden and often unappreciated, they keep the industry – and the economy – moving.

By the end of the film, I was tempted to call in my resignation from Dallas and head straight down to the nearest International dealer. Why fly home when I could drive some of those same roads and enjoy some of the same sights featured in the film?

But that’s not to say the film glorifies the trucking industry while ignoring its many faults. The film poignantly captured the frustrations of each of the drivers – everything from the difficulty of getting a load, to the impact fuel prices are having on owner/operators, to the challenges of trying to adhere to impossible-to-meet delivery schedules.

However the incredible scenery shots as well as the camaraderie shared by the drivers on the road is a reminder of why truckers do what they do, something one of the truckers admitted in the film ‘nobody else wants to do.’

Each of the three stars has a compelling story to tell – stories that make even the most overtly commercial sections of the film easier to sit through. This is a film that everyone should see. It was developed for truckers, but it has crossover appeal as well and would be equally appreciated by people outside the industry.

The real shame is that, at this point, the film doesn’t have a broader audience. The DVD will be sold by International at www.internationaltrucks.com/shop and through Amazon beginning in October, but it isn’t scheduled to be broadcast on television and due to the commercial nature of the film, there’s no guarantee it ever will be. It would be a shame if this film doesn’t reach a wider audience.

I’m not going to reveal too much about the film, because where there’s a will there’s a way, and those of you who are interested in seeing it will order it online. A portion of the proceeds will go towards a program that helps find jobs in the trucking industry for returning US war veterans.

For a whole lot more info on Drive and Deliver, visit www.internationatrucks.com/film.

Chris LeCount, Tim Young and Steve Donaldson (L-R) stand before an International LoneStar in this promo shot.

Permalink | Comments (2)

Ontario’s mandatory yearly re-testing policy for A/Z drivers 65 years of age and older is one of the most asinine rules on the books. It punishes some of the industry’s most experienced and safest drivers for turning 65 and unfortunately it squeezes many of the best drivers from the industry. I routinely hear from able-bodied and able-minded senior drivers who have decided to hang up the keys solely because of this ridiculous policy, which exists only in Ontario.

The following, well-documented case from one such driver is sadly a common occurrence in Ontario:

John Dundass, a driver for Arnold Transport whose boss says “does a bang-up job,” recently turned 65 years of age. After navigating through a “maze” of computer and phone answering systems, he finally reached a human and was told he’d have to visit DriveTest to complete three separate tests. The first was a written test; the second was a road test and air brake test for which he’d need to provide a tractor-trailer; and the third was for a written and road test for buses (if he wished to maintain his B licence).

During his first visit on Apr. 15, John voluntary surrendered his bus licence to save himself having to rent a school bus for the road test. He says he was told by the attendant that by giving up his B licence for buses, he could renew his A licence without a road test. He found that claim suspicious, and asked for it in writing.

After passing the written truck and air brake tests, John made his way to the licensing office in Burlington. He filled out and paid for the necessary forms and went on his way. A few weeks later, he received a phone message telling him he needed to book an appointment for a road test.

He waded his way back through the “phone machine maze” and spent quite some time trying to get a human on the line. Finally, he was able to book an appointment for a road test. Arnold Bros. provided him with a tractor-trailer, including the tractor John normally operates.

He showed up for his road test June 26, did the air brake portion of the practical test and then the examiner told him the 07 “state-of-the-art” highway tractor was not adequate for the road test, as it had an automated transmission. John says he was sent home again.

Arnold Bros. agreed to provide him with a truck with an “old school transmission” and John returned to the DriveTest center once again to perform his road test. By now it was early July, he says. “This whole deal was getting stressful. Many drivers would give up by this point,” he wrote.

After 14 phone calls, John finally got through to a voice-mail system and left a message saying he wanted to book a road test. The voice-mail belonged to a supervisor named Steve, who returned his call and set up an appointment for a road test.

On July 11, John showed up for his road test with a highway tractor with manual transmission. He was forced to once again complete the practical air brake test. He passed it again, and passed his road test as well. By now, it had been a four month process.

“No commercial driver should be subjected to such a ridiculous procedure, taking days off the job,” he wrote. “Many drivers give up. Is that what the Minister wants?”

He adds that ironically, he was never asked to complete a doctor’s medical!

This type of incident is not completely isolated. I hear from many drivers who have undergone similar insulting and degrading experiences. And for what? Because they’ve turned 65 years of age. Sixty-five isn’t all that old anymore and I’d gladly ride alongside a veteran driver with decades of experience than a neophyte.

The good news is that lobbying by the OTA, PMTC and OBAC seems to finally be garnering the attention of decision-makers at Queen’s Park. There have been some encouraging signs lately, with the Ontario Transport Department promising to at least revisit its re-resting requirements for senior drivers. A change can’t come soon enough.

John, and many other professional drivers like him, have been discriminated against due to their age. In an industry that claims to be starved for qualified drivers, does it make sense to be turning away some of the best we’ve got? Kudos to John for sticking with it through the entire ordeal. Shame on Ontario’s Ministry of Transportation for continuing to enforce this nonsensical law.

Permalink | Comments (7)

Over the last few months, the 2010 heavy-duty engine landscape has taken on a vastly different look. First, you have Caterpillar announcing it will not build an EPA2010-compliant on-highway engine for the North American market (yet it will partner with Navistar to build a truck).

Now, you have Cummins changing plans mid-flight and choosing to join the Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) camp, which already includes Daimler, Volvo Group and Paccar. This leaves Navistar as the lone SCR holdout – and after extensively criticizing the complexity and uncertainties surrounding SCR, it’s not likely Navistar will make the switch anytime soon.

When the Cummins announcement hit my Inbox first thing Wednesday morning, my initial reaction was surprise. Cummins has been making significant inroads in market share, both in the mid-range and heavy-duty market segments. I figured for them to change course at this point in the game, they must have encountered big-time problems in developing their in-cylinder ‘enhanced EGR’ solution.

However, in a conference call with the media later in the day, Cummins engineers stated this was not the case.

“That product was all set to launch in January, 2010,” said Steve Charlton, vice-president of heavy-duty engineering with Cummins. “The program was performing well, the product was performing well and we were hitting all our targets.”

Cummins decision to abandon its in-cylinder solution was about pursuing optimum fuel economy – it was not due to any technological impossibilities that it encountered along the way.

That bodes well for Navistar, and it also bodes well for customers who want to have an alternative to SCR available to them in 2010. However, the folks at Navistar must be a bit unnerved by the Cummins announcement. The rewards of going it alone could be great – but so too are the risks (look no further than Caterpillar’s ultimate withdrawal from the market after being the only company to really carve its own path in 2002).

Clearly, Cummins shift to SCR has placed a lot of momentum on SCR’s side. However, if there’s a company that isn’t afraid to take a chance, it’s Navistar. Look at the company’s latest product introduction – the unique and incomparable International LoneStar. The truck is a radical departure from anything else on the road today and it seems to have been greeted by the industry with much enthusiasm. Will the same be said about the non-SCR MaxxForce engine in 2010? Only time will tell.

Navistar proved with the introduction of the International LoneStar that it's not afraid to be different.

Permalink | Comments (1)

It never ceases to amaze me. Every year when we solicit entries for the Truck News Owner/Operator of the Year award, we are presented with a full field of deserving candidates. Choosing a winner is never easy, but when the choice has finally been made, I get to enjoy one of the most rewarding parts of this job – notifying the winner.

Every year, I secretly hope we made the right decision. And every year, as we get to know the winner, our decision is reaffirmed as the correct one. This year was no exception. Marty Gardner, a five-truck owner contracted to FedEx Ground, covered all the bases of our selection criteria.

He was heroic, having helped save an accident victim’s life after being one of the first to come upon the scene. He was safe, boasting a 22-year accident-free driving career consisting of millions of miles, and along with members of his team setting a new record in the process. He was smart, at a time when owner/operators are struggling to survive, Marty is expanding the size of his successful company. And he was a great ambassador to the industry, actively promoting how to share the road with big trucks and participating in show’n’shines and truck driving championships.

Upon spending some time with Marty late last week, it became clear he was also remarkably humble. He credited his wife Lisa with his success. Not only does she care for their four kids, she commutes from Belle River, Ont. to Detroit every day where she works at Detroit Diesel. After a long workday, the inevitable border delays, and after fulfilling her motherly obligations, Lisa still has time to manage the books and take care of the company’s administrative tasks during the evenings, allowing Marty to focus on driving.

We’ll have a full report on Marty and the award in the September issues of Truck News and Truck West. We should also acknowledge that behind every one of our annual winners is a supporting carrier. That’s been one constant every year I’ve been involved in helping select a winner – every year our Owner/Operator of the Year raves about the carrier he hauls for and the support he receives. It’s refreshing to hear these carriers exist, since many of the calls I receive here at Truck News are of the negative variety.

That carrier support was evidenced by the presence of both Jack Brown, senior manager linehaul, FedEx Ground Canada, and all the way from FedEx Ground headquarters in Pittsburgh, John Payne, vice-president, linehaul. We thank them both for being a part of the celebration and also, the sponsors who make it possible: Freightliner, Markel Insurance and Goodyear. (Supporting sponsors include OBAC and Natural Resources Canada). Congrats to Marty Gardner, the 15th annual Owner/Operator of the Year – and a very deserving one at that!

Permalink | Comments (1)

As second quarter financial statements continue to trickle in from publicly-traded trucking companies, I can’t help but scan them in search of a glimmer of hope that an industry rebound is just around the corner. Here in Canada, Vitrans filed its Q2 earnings report yesterday, showing a decrease in net income but remaining profitable and posting record revenue. In the US, the heavy hitters of the industry have been filing their reports as well, offering mixed messages in regards to what’s in store in the months ahead. Here are a few snippets that offer a bit of insight as to how the big players south of the border are faring and how they see things shaping up:

“For the second half of 2008, we expect freight demand to continue to improve somewhat but to remain less than robust. We also expect industry-wide equipment capacity to remain flat or decrease as poorly capitalized and poorly operated trucking companies shrink their fleets or fail in a difficult environment.''

- Marten Transport, Chairman and CEO Randolph L. Marten

“In 2007 and early 2008 we were dealing with a market that had excess capacity, which resulted in downward pressure on price. Due to increased fuel prices and low freight demand certain large carriers permanently reduced the size of their company iron fleets and many small carriers and single-owner operators have exited the market place, causing somewhat of a reversal in the capacity and pricing environment. Capacity tightened in the second quarter and created pricing power...I believe that tight-capacity trends will generally continue and result in a higher cost of purchased transportation for brokerage capacity. However, it will also result in generally a stronger pricing environment. I anticipate the weakness experienced in the automotive sector and in certain other accounts to continue into the back half of the year. However, that weakness should be offset, totally, by strength in other accounts.”

- Landstar Systems financial statement

“With respect to pricing and rates, the overall rate market has shifted from a rate decrease market to a rate stable market. If freight demand improves in the third quarter, the potential exists to begin obtaining necessary rate increases in the second half of 2008.

- Werner Enterprises financial statement

“The Company anticipates beginning a tractor fleet upgrade in the third quarter. The upgrade is expected to include the purchase of approximately 1,600 International ProStar tractors. Delivery of tractors is scheduled to begin during the third quarter of 2008 and will continue through 2009. The Company will also take delivery of 400 2009 Wabash trailers during the second half of 2008.”

- Heartland Express financial statement

“Conditions in the truckload industry have been challenging, characterized by suppressed freight volumes due to the slowing U.S. economy and record diesel fuel costs. This difficult operating environment appears to have caused an escalating exodus of truckload capacity from the marketplace. Our internal efforts, coupled with diminishing industry capacity, have resulted in a stabilization of our pricing and tractor utilization.”

- Clifton R. Beckham, President and CEO of the USA Truck

Permalink | Comments (0)

Well, it’s finally happened. After two and a half years of dogged determination, the Ontario Trucking Association (OTA) has ushered its speed limiter policy through to fruition. It went through the legislative process unamended and is pretty much on the books exactly as originally drafted up by OTA.

Now, what? Everyone has their own opinions on what this law will mean to truckers in Ontario. Some say safer roads and cleaner air. Others say highway carnage and a mass exodus of drivers from the industry. I stand somewhere in the middle, and have already made my thoughts known. In a nutshell, I think the proposed benefits are greatly overstated and yet I don’t subscribe to the doomsday theories that are out there and that I hear about every day.

In the end, professional drivers are going to have to accept and adapt – that’s all there is to it. It’s not going to be the end of the world. Having said that, the way this law came to be, has left me with a sour taste. The one-day public hearing was a farce, with practically no advanced notice provide to stakeholders. It was clear from the get-go that this government was simply going through the motions, with no real intent of making any changes to the proposed legislation.

Conservative MPP Frank Klees, who I think would agree with me on that point, made the following comments in the Legislature during final debate: “I received an e-mail that, quite frankly, concerned me as a member of this Legislature and as a former minister...I'd like to you listen to this, Speaker, because you will be interested, as will any other member of this Legislature, to know the arrogance with which some stakeholders approach this place: ‘As for the amendments, we have none, and in fact I would go further and say that we would be very strongly opposed to any amendment. This is our bill. Every period, every comma, every semicolon was put there by us, and we would be very, very unhappy were it to be amended in any way’."

I find it disturbing that any lobby group – any organization – was able to write its own legislation and is chummy enough with our government that they could seemingly will it through the legislative process untouched. I find that startling.

But to its credit, the OTA (I should point out Klees did not say which stakeholder sent him the aforementioned e-mail) was bent on making this happen, and they saw it through right til the end. They pushed for this with a united voice that showed no signs of cracking – at least publicly - at any time over the last two and a half years. They got dozens of strong-headed fleet managers to agree on an issue (that alone is amazing) and showed no chinks in their armour at any time in their pursuit of making this law. But in the process, what has come to the surface is the great divide that exists between the carrier community and its drivers. The ongoing debate on this blog and the flood of e-mails and phone calls we’ve received here at Truck News attest to that. Wounds have been created, which may take some time to heal.

Time will tell how this all shakes out.

And on that note, I’m off for a couple weeks. I’m getting married in the Dominican Republic and will be back in early July.

Permalink | Comments (4)

Neil Young may not be rockin’ the free world as hard as he once did, but he’s still trying to make a difference. However the legendary rocker is using technology rather than music to change the world this time around.

He has teamed up with some bright young scientists to convert his Lincoln Continental into a vehicle that can run on alternative engine sources (likely electricity), ideally getting 100 miles to the gallon (if any fuel is required at all - details are still sketchy).

“Our goal is to inspire a generation by creating a clean automobile propulsion technology that serves the needs of the 21st Century and delivers performance that is a reflection of the driver's spirit,” reads the Web site, www.lincvolt.com. “By creating this new power technology we hope to reduce the demand for petro-fuels enough to eliminate the need for war over energy supplies, thereby enhancing the security of the USA and other nations throughout the world.”

The car has been entered into The Automotive X Prize, which will pit various technologies against each other in 2009 and 2010 during races across the US. Hopefully, the competition will result in various solutions which produce no emissions, use little – if any – fuel and have the potential to be mass-marketed. In a recent blog I wrote that the current fuel crisis will also produce opportunities - opportunities for bright young minds to develop solutions that will lessen our dependence on fossil fuels. This effort, and the Automotive X Prize in general, is a great step towards that goal.

Hopefully, technologies that are developed can be transferred to the trucking industry as well. While the current cost of diesel has this industry against the ropes and on wobbly legs, if the current crisis is the catalyst that spawns the creation of new alternatives to foreign oil, this may well be one of the greatest blessings in disguise we could have asked for.

Permalink | Comments (0)

This is the continuation of my blog report from the public hearings on speed limiters, held at Queen’s Park June 5.
We pick it up with the folks from OOIDA.

10:20 a.m. – Terry Button, OOIDA. First, let me say OOIDA should be commended for coming up to Canada to present their members’ position. This is a powerful lobby group with 162,000 members. However, both presenters (I’ll get to that in a sec) had trouble making their presentation in the 10 minutes allotted, which caused clarity to suffer a bit and left no time for questions. Written submissions could be equally effective after the hearing. I got the sense that the MPPs on the committee were gaining the most useful information during the Q&A sessions that followed each presentation. Nevertheless, both OOIDA presenters made their position very obvious. Button, who runs trucks from New York State into Ontario, saved his strongest comments for the end: “We believe your good intentions are being taken advantage of,” he told the committee. “If you pass this, we will not sit idly by.” He said he has already discussed the issue with his local representatives and he’s convinced there are NAFTA trade implications. He saved the best for last, but again in my opinion it would have been more effective if there was time for follow-up questions.

10:30 a.m. – Tom Weakley, director of operations, OOIDA Foundation. Foundation? Clever way to get two speakers from the same organization onto the docket! Well, they did travel all the way up from the states – I think they deserved more than 10 minutes. Again, Weakley just had too much ground to cover in just 10 minutes and there was no time for follow-up questions. But he presented some great numbers I hadn’t heard before. Like this: It’ll take an extra five to seven minutes to check the speed limiter during every MTO inspection. That could total 43,000 hours of additional delays each year. Yikes. While the OOIDA reps may have been a bit rushed, they did leave the committee with some useful information sheets.

RECESS TIME! Just when things are getting good. A four-hour recess – not enough time to get back to work and accomplish anything, but enough time to take up my entire day. Oh well, I catch part of a matinee Jays game on TV.

2:30 p.m. – Dr. Barry Prentice, University of Manitoba, transportation guru. Prentice warned against speed limiters for a couple of reasons. For one, he said the safety enhancements will not exist because of the creation of wider speed differentials. He also questioned the environmental savings, since cars would be forced to speed up and slow down more frequently to avoid truck traffic, negating any greenhouse gas emission savings from trucks. He cited some stats that contradicted earlier stats from OTA members. He also cited research which the committee seems eager to take a closer look at. It seemed like Prentice, with his impressive accolades and transportation knowledge, gave the committee some things to think about.

2:40 p.m. – Dorothy Sanderson, professional driver. Kudos to Dorothy, the only trucker who ventured down to Queen’s Park to have her say. She argued vehemently against Bill 41. It was refreshing to see a trucker take to the mic. She even garnered an applause from the NDP members – albeit, it was after slamming Transport Minister Jim Bradley.

2:50 p.m. – Ray Gompf, Canadian Owner/Operators Co-op. The premise of his speech was that engines don’t necessarily emit less when they’re running slower. Lower RPMs mean an engine has to work harder, producing more emissions. He said owner/ops can’t afford to re-spec’ their trucks and said at the very least, existing trucks should be grandfathered.

3:00 p.m. – Jeff Bryan, Jeff Bryan Transport. Bryan held up well on the hot seat during questioning. He raises a good point: If Bill 41’s going to hurt the pocketbooks of fleets and/or owner/operators, why is it that the loudest proponents of the bill, which already govern their trucks, are amongst the most successful and safest fleets? “The policy will improve the image of our industry and it will improve safety on our roads.”

3:10 p.m. – Joanne Ritchie, OBAC. This is where things took a turn for the peculiar. Nowhere to be seen, Joanne called in on her cell phone from the 10 Acre Truck Stop in Belleville. She bemoaned the short notice provided for the hearing and said she’d been up all night preparing her presentation. On her drive in from Ottawa, fatigue caught up with her and she had to pull over to rest. Now, I don’t know if it was a clever ploy aimed at hammering home the point that the notice given for the hearing was inadequate? (The way they rushed this hearing really was a joke – honestly, how many truckers could be expected to attend?) Regardless, her call – and her inability to make the hearing - made an impression. The committee agreed that if she could not make it in, then it stood to reason that most truckers would also have difficulty appearing. They agreed, almost certainly as a result of this call, to extend the deadline for written comments to June 10. They also agreed to accept Ritchie’s presentation at a later time.

And on that odd note, it was a wrap. The MPPs agonized over the fact they had been presented with two vastly different opinions on the subject over the course of the day. They decided to take more time to solicit feedback from stakeholders. For those of you who sent in faxes and e-mails, I can confirm they were distributed to the committee members. You can keep doing so til June 10. See the Headline News item for details. It may make a difference, regardless of where you stand on the issue. The Opposition MPPs in particular seem willing to explore this issue in more detail before proceeding. That’s our democracy in action and it was fun to watch.

Permalink | Comments (8)

Just back from the public hearings on Bill 41 at Queen’s Park. It was a fascinating look at the democratic process in motion and I’m pleased to have been there to witness it. I’m surprised it didn’t attract more attention from the media. The following is a short wrap on the events that unfolded, on a speaker-by-speaker basis. Each speaker was given 10 minutes for their presentation and questions. Ten minutes is hardly enough time to scratch the surface of such a complex issue, but at least everyone who attended or called in was treated the same. Couldn’t make it? Don’t worry, here’s a rundown as I saw it:

9:10 a.m. – Brian Taylor, president of Liberty Linehaul. Not surprisingly, Brian was in favour of the legislation. He had the respect of the committee, having driven some million miles himself. “I feel embarrassed it took fuel prices to motivate this,” he said. He also noted while there’s been driver resistance within his own fleet, owner/operators generally end up thanking him several months later when they see how much less fuel they burn at 105 km/h. Almost immediately, MPP Frank Klees establishes himself as the agitator, questioning Taylor on the need to speed up to avoid collisions in some instances. “I don’t think driving the vehicle faster helps you avoid accidents,” Taylor replied.

9:20 a.m. – Brian Patterson, Ontario Safety League. We all know that the OSL has been behind this initiative since the OTA first announced its policy nearly three years ago. Patterson said Bill 41 is “excellent legislation for this province – it will save lives.” He urged the committee to consider increasing the fine for non-compliance above the currently proposed $250. He added motor coaches should also have to comply with the law, an idea that was warmly received by MPPs on the committee.

9:30 a.m. – Robert Clarke, president, Truck Manufacturers Association. They talked briefly about some of the technical issues and the ability to make the system tamper-resistant. Some time was spent discussing the ability of old trucks to comply, which is a moot point since the law won’t cover trucks built before the mid-90s when speed limiters became standard.

9:40 a.m. – Robert Tremblay, Insurance Bureau of Canada. Naturally, he was all for Bill 41. When asked if it would result in reduced insurance premiums for carriers – he was predictably non-committal, noting the bureau does not get involved in the business practices of its members, the actual insurers.

9:50 a.m. – Dave Osiecki, vice-president safety, security and operations with the American Trucking Associations (and friends). Osiecki commended the Ontario government for showing leadership and explained the differences between ATA’s speed limiter policy and the OTA’s. 1) ATA wants the law to apply to new trucks only while the Ontario law would affect all trucks. 2) ATA wants the speed limiter set by the OEM, not technicians or dealers. And 3) ATA wants its speed limiters hard-coded so they cannot be increased by the truck owner. Osiecki said he hopes one day the US will adopt its own speed limiter law and that it can be harmonized with Ontario’s.

10 a.m. – David Bradley, president, Ontario Trucking Association. I’ve seen Bradley speak countless times, but never have I seen him show so much passion. He must smell the finish line by now. He made a great case for speed limiters and distributed a slick information kit. They’re not messing around. At this point in the proceedings, it seems the momentum is all on the side of the speed limiter proponents.

10:10 a.m. – Doug Switzer, vice-president, Canadian Trucking Alliance and Debbie Virgoe, widow of heroic trucker David Virgoe who died while reckless drivers forced him to make an evasive maneuver last year. Switzer backed the OTA position and turned the table over to Debbie. She once told me that she didn’t believe in the OTA’s position on speed limiters, but she’s entitled to change her mind. She has made highway safety her mission in life since the death of her husband and it would seem natural that she would want the speeds of all vehicles controlled.

Things heat up as OOIDA takes to the microphone. See part 2 of this blog for the details.

Permalink | Comments (0)

There have been many compelling arguments made both for and against Ontario’s controversial legislation that, if passed, would mechanically limit truck speeds to 105 km/h. We’ve heard them all here at Truck News. Some of them have been absurd (that the Ontario government are communists and that truckers will take up arms before allowing their trucks to be governed). Others make a lot of sense – like this one:

Doug Monahan is one of those owner/operators who meticulously tracks his fuel mileage. He spec’d his latest truck with fuel economy in mind. It has a small, 450-hp Mercedes-Benz engine which allows him to average 7.73 mpg even without an aerodynamic tractor. He gets 8.7 mpg on flat ground and about 7.3 mpg through the hills.

Doug hauls into the US where he encounters a lot of these hills, especially through Virginia. While he averages 95 km/h here in Canada, he says he needs the extra juice to get over the hills without burning up too much fuel in the process. He generally approaches the bottom of the hill at 75 mph, which allows him to increase his fuel mileage by half a mile per gallon when all is tallied on the other side, he claims. He says he needs to keep the smaller engine wound up to maximize his fuel mileage in the hills. He has experimented by running his usual 95 km/h through the hills in the US and he says he saw his fuel economy suffer significantly.

“That’s money right out of my pocket,” he insists.

He claims that his smaller engine will put out more greenhouse gases if he’s limited to 105 even through the hills in the US. That's because it will have to work so much harder to get up the hill if he can't build up speed at the bottom. Now, Monahan is a reasonable guy and he knows that slowing down saves fuel. That’s why he spec’d a smaller engine. However, he said his fuel savings will lost if he has to run at 105 through the hills. And he’s not happy about it. He feels the proposed law should apply only to new trucks, since he would have spec’d his truck differently had he known about the proposed law at the time.

He makes a good point. When new regulations are hoisted upon the automotive industry, existing vehicles are usually grandfathered. He’d like to see the Ontario government follow that lead in this case as well.

“Then the owner/operators and the company know what they’re getting into and they can order the truck accordingly,” he points out.

George Desjardins, an owner/operator with 30 years experience, agrees that his fuel economy will suffer in the hills if his truck is governed at 105.

“In the perfect world these pro-speed limiters live in, there mustn’t be any hills,” he wrote to Truck News. “The world I live in there are, and when you are loaded with a gross weight of 130,000 lbs, you must drop gears to climb hills, even little ones. This causes the engine to rev up even though the truck is losing speed. If you can’t increase your speed a little prior to the hill, you will be in a lower gear and running with a higher RPM that much longer, thus spewing greenhouse gases into the air that much longer.”

He adds: “Being that at the present time I can speed up prior to climbing a hill, I can in a lot of cases stay in high gear and not contribute to this problem as much.”

Desjardins spent extra money on a big engine and now feels this legislation will, in his words, “castrate it.”

It’s not easy to determine to what extent fuel mileage may be compromised in hilly regions with the proposed law, if at all. But we mustn’t underestimate the implications the proposed speed limiter law will have on how fleets and owner/ops spec’ their equipment. Perhaps the law would be more readily received if current trucks were exempted from the rule?

Permalink | Comments (4)

Yesterday I attended Markel’s Let’s Talk seminar on profitability, which provided one of those rare opportunities to hear shippers and carriers voice their concerns under the same roof. Representing shippers during a panel discussion were Allan Kelly, director of logistics with food company Casco and Neil McKenna, vice-president of transportation with Canadian Tire.

They spoke candidly about what a carrier must do to gain a piece of their business.

“It is difficult to crack Canadian Tire’s supply chain as a regular carrier,” admitted McKenna. His company uses about 20-30 carriers as well as its own private fleet. Most carriers who haul for a desirable shipper such as Canadian Tires have gone to great lengths to understand - and keep - their business, he noted.

Kelly said companies that hope to woo some freight from a top tier shipper should first research that shipper’s requirements. He said a fleet won’t get very far into a discussion if they haven’t done their homework and demonstrate an understanding of the shipper’s products and their handling characteristics.

Kelly also said “We’re looking for more sophistication” from carriers and he suggested they arrive at the table with statistics, such as on-time delivery percentages and lead-time requirements. He also prefers dealing with carriers that keep him informed about what’s happening in the trucking industry.

In Canadian Tire’s case, McKenna said it’s best not to try to pull the wool over their eyes. Since the company operates its own trucks, he pointed out “We know the cost to move our freight. We know the cost of equipment, fuel and labour.”

As an aside, it was interesting to note that Kelly said his company is diverting more of its product from rail to road. He recently switched a London-Chicago lane from rail to truck because as the railroads continue to increase rates, the savings are no longer worthwhile. And of course, rail still can’t touch trucking’s superior service. He urged other shippers who use short-line railways to give trucking a closer look.

My first reaction was that it was frightening that there’s a trucking company out there that can make a London-Chicago run for the same price as a railway. But in listening to Kelly speak further, it was clear he’s not one of those shippers who would make a modal switch or carrier selection based on the lowest bid. He made it clear he’s not interested in contributing to a carrier’s demise by insisting they haul his product at or below cost.

With north-south freight volumes drying up, it’s encouraging to hear the railways may be pricing themselves out of some of this business.

And speaking of quality shippers, here’s a tip from MacKinnon Transport’s Ray Haight which could serve as a useful tool for other fleets. His company surveyed all its drivers to determine their three favourite shippers to haul for as well as their three least favourite. The top three were rewarded with a plaque and a big ol’ thank-you. The bottom three received a visit from MacKinnon Transport execs, aimed at getting to the bottom of driver treatment issues and resolving them. Talk about looking out for your drivers. No wonder this company recently won a driver retention award.

Future issues of Truck News and Motortruck Fleet Executive will contain further coverage of this interesting event.

Permalink | Comments (0)

The Ontario government has once again suggested it will consider banning handheld cell phones while driving. In fact, it has hinted any legislation will encompass not just phones – but also the use of other gadgets that cause driver distraction as well, such as portable GPS systems.

However, I have to wonder if such a rule would really improve road safety? Laws banning the use of handheld cell phones while driving are already on the books in Newfoundland, Nova Scotia and Quebec. In Nova Scotia and Quebec, the bans are still too recent to determine whether they have positively impacted road safety. In Newfoundland, however, there seems to have been a modest improvement since the ban was implemented in 2002.

Between 2003 and 2005, statistics show the number of collisions dropped 8% in Newfoundland. That’s a pretty impressive figure, but let’s not forget that overall road safety has also improved in many other provinces in recent years – even without a cell phone ban. Just how much of that 8% improvement can be traced back to the cell phone ban is subject for debate.

I get as annoyed as anyone when I see a motorist gabbing on the phone, which is almost always accompanied by unsignaled lane changes and other careless behaviour. But if such a ban is put into place in Ontario, I can’t help but envision dozens of cars pulling onto the shoulders of the 400-series highways each kilometre so drivers can place or receive that urgent phone call. (After all, we can’t expect such important discussions as what to pick up for dinner to be postponed, can we?)

Having cars routinely pulling over to the side of the road, and then sitting there while traffic whizzes past at over 120 km/h before having to get back up to speed and safely merge back onto the highway would seem to me to pose a far greater safety risk than had the driver simply placed the call while at speed. If Ontario proceeds with the ban, I hope it also takes this into consideration and includes some accompanying restrictions which would prevent cars from simply pulling onto the shoulders of high-speed highways to make or receive calls.

But then that would create an enforcement wrinkle wouldn’t it? ‘No officer, I was just calling a tow truck because my engine light came on – yeah, that’s it! But it's off now, so I'll be on my way.’

Permalink | Comments (7)

If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. Sage old advice that should always be taken into consideration, especially when dealing with unknown vendors or associates. It’s unfortunate to hear about a fuel tax scam that’s been preying on Canadian trucking companies. You can read the full story here.

As if fleets don’t have enough to worry about these days, they’ve also got to be aware that there are scoundrels out there looking to take advantage of their desperation. Who can blame them for leaping at the chance to cash in on a seemingly legitimate fuel tax refund?

Sadly, at least two fleets have shelled out tens of thousands of dollars as a result of the scam and even their lawyer says it’s unlikely they’ll be able to recover that money. In this country, it’s too easy for anyone to throw a shingle out, misrepresent themselves as a legitimate business and then close shop and run after they’ve duped honest companies into falling for their scheme.

The latest fuel tax scam should serve as a warning to all trucking companies. Be sure to do your homework when dealing with new associates, such as accountants. There are some great accounting services out there that know the trucking industry inside out. If approached by a company that’s offering pie in the sky rebates, it’s well worth the time and money to have their promises validated by a reputable accounting firm that knows the business as well as a lawyer. In this case, any lawyer worth their salt would have seen through the scheme and realized the Canadian trucking company was not entitled to the rebate.

For now all we can hope is that the perpetrators of this latest scam are caught, forced to pay up, and punished to the full extent of the law.

Permalink | Comments (2)

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF) has launched its tenth annual Gas Tax Honesty Campaign, aimed at reminding us all how much we are taxed at the pump – like we need a reminder! The federation is warning that the threat of a national carbon tax (floated recently by federal Opposition leader Stephane Dion) will force prices even higher than they are today.

The CTF points out the price of gas has risen 17 cents/litre since this time last year, and taxes account for about 28% of the cost of gas. In Ontario, that number is even higher, with taxes accounting for 31% of the cost of gas.

In total, Ottawa will collect about $5 billion in gas and diesel taxes this year, with another $1.1 billion raised through the GST portion of the fuel taxes, according to a release by the CTF. Of that, only 37% will be reinvested back into national highway infrastructure. That number will increase to 52% next year.

It’s a huge jump from the 7% of fuel tax revenue that was being reinvested back into infrastructure by the feds just four years ago. But there’s still room for improvement. The CTF is calling for 100% of fuel tax collected to be spent on infrastructure. It’s a lofty target, but one that needs to be achieved if we hope to keep our goods flowing across the border and from coast-to-coast.

At the recent Transpo 2008 summit, David McFadden, chair of the National Energy, Infrastructure and Industry Group with Gowling, Lafleur, Henderson LLP, made some sobering points. He pointed out Canadian manufacturers are experiencing a 6% cost increase just due to delays at the border.

"Think about that for a moment. That's just from delays at the border and at a time when our manufacturers are being hammered," McFadden said. "It's quite clear there are big costs imposed on our economy because of delays and congestion."

He also pointed out the last significant upgrade to Ontario’s transportation network was the ETR407 toll road, which was completed in the late 90s. That was the first substantial infrastructure upgrade in the province since the 1950s.

"All major infrastructure projects are in the discussion stage. There are no contracts. It's likely Ontario's population will go up by another million before anything gets done...We have a real serious issue in Ontario. We are just not keeping up," McFadden said.

Those are some startling facts. Canada’s infrastructure needs a facelift and the most logical way to fund it is to divert 100% of fuel taxes towards building new roads and bridges, improving efficiencies at border crossings and alleviating congestion.

Permalink | Comments (0)

Whether it be local dump truck drivers, long-haul owner/operators or soccer moms – everyone’s been griping about the cost of fuel lately. And for good reason, it’s costing all of us more money – at the pumps and now even in the stores. But scratch beneath the surface and I think there’s even more reason for concern when taking a look at the big picture and the larger impact the cost of fuel is having on our economy.

Looking at the issue from the perspective of a consumer, there are two causes for concern. For one, the cost of fuel is heightening transportation costs for the goods we consume and is already driving up store-shelf prices. Signs are popping up in store windows justifying cost increases and attributing them to increased transportation costs. It was only a matter of time before this started happening and now it has begun.

Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, a higher percentage of our disposable income is being diverted towards the purchase of gasoline, which means at the end of the month, there’s less left over for non-essential purchases, such as dinners out, a night at the movies or household items. In North America, it’s this type of spending that drives our economy. With gas prices surging by 50% or more, we are effectively removing millions – maybe even billions - of dollars of consumer spending and directing it towards the cost of gas. That money is literally going up in smoke. I think this is very disconcerting and often overlooked when considering the true impact of rising fuel prices.

I haven’t been able to dig up a Canadian equivalent, but consider this: According to an Oil Price Information Service study, the percentage of income the average American now spends on gas has doubled since 2002 (from 1.9% to 3.8%). That report was released late last year - it has likely increased even more in early 2008.

Removing 1.9% of consumer spending from the economy is going to have a major impact. Less consumer spending = less demand for trucking services. It also means less business for store-owners, restaurants and other entertainment providers. Maybe I’m over-simplifying the issue – I’m not an economist. In fact, some economists argue that directing a higher percentage of income on gas doesn’t necessarily mean a reduction in consumer spending. But I question their logic. It costs me about $20 more today than it did two years ago to fuel up my reasonably fuel-efficient Corolla every time I pull into the gas station. That’s $20 that doesn’t go to Cineplex, or Boston Pizza or Canadian Tire – or a personal savings account for that matter.

I reside in a middle-class neighbourhood (I also fear the once seemingly all-encompassing middle-class is evaporating and leaving in its place a widening gulf between the ‘haves’ and the ‘have-nots’ – but that’s a subject for another blog). My personal observations suggest that people are reeling in unnecessary spending (driving less is rarely an option, at least for those of us in the ’burbs). The alternative is to tap into credit sources and home equity and that could prove to be even more disastrous long-term.

If the cost of gas doesn’t soon subside, I predict we’ll begin to see store closures and more job losses in the months ahead. So what’s the solution? That’s the multi-billion dollar question. I don’t think there’s an immediate fix. But in the short-term, I think we need to find environmentally-sensitive ways to tap into North America’s vast supply of oil. That should be enough to tide us over until we make further gains towards developing vehicles which can be operated electrically or via other sources of power.

It’s a lot to ask of auto manufacturers – to develop cost-competitive vehicles which don’t require fossil fuels to operate. However, I look to our industry for inspiration. In 2002, 2007 and again in 2010, truck engine manufacturers have had seemingly impossible challenges placed before them by the EPA. Each time, they have risen to the occasion. Hopefully auto makers can be equally successful in their pursuit of a solution that will lessen our dependence on fossil fuels for personal transportation.

Permalink | Comments (4)

As I write this, hundreds of dump truck operators are planning rolling protests throughout the GTA. They plan to slow down traffic on well-travelled routes to bring attention to their concerns: stagnant rates; dangerous working conditions; and escalating costs.

While I can certainly empathize with their plight, members of the Ontario Dump Truck Association are making a terrible mistake.

According to the drivers, they are routinely overloaded and given no opportunity to resist, as they are not allowed to exit their cab while being loaded. Those who do protest are banned from the work site, dump truck operators say. They are worked long hours at rates that haven’t changed in five years, despite surging fuel costs. They say they’re subjected to “inhumane” working conditions, according to an article in the Toronto Star. However, all these issues are business issues, which need to be resolved with their employers.

They will not find the motoring public to be very sympathetic if they choose to cause major traffic disruptions. These drivers are already walking a very fine line with the public, which has villainized them in recent months following some high-profile accidents involving unsafe dump trucks.

If you really want to get the public’s support, don’t cause them to be late for work, or their doctor’s appointment, or getting home to their family. What does this accomplish? If you really want to get them on-board, then it’s important to educate them through other means. Let them know that the practices of the companies you’re working for are putting them and their families at risk. There are ways to raise awareness without inconveniencing thousands of people who aren’t to blame for your problems.

And in the meantime, take these issues up with your employers. I would suspect there have been attempts to do this already, but I find it unlikely that all avenues have been pursued. There’s strength in numbers, and this group seems to have some pretty impressive numbers. The Star reported more than 400 trucks congregated in a Mississauga parking lot on Wednesday to talk strategy. If all of those trucks remained parked for a day, or a week, or a month, how long would it take before the companies that rely on their services have to revisit some of their policies? (And think of the fuel you’d save, not having to motor slowly along the 400-series highways).

I’m very hopeful this planned protest is called off. Not because I fear being inconvenienced myself, but because I think dump truck operators will do their cause irreparable harm if they follow through with it. It is a cause worth fighting for, but the battle plan is flawed.

Permalink | Comments (2)

The Alberta Motor Transport Association (AMTA) must have been mildly disappointed last week when their keynote speaker and provincial Transport Minister showed no interest in following the leads of Ontario and Quebec and introducing legislation to mechanically limit truck speeds.

Speaking at the AMTA’s annual convention in Banff, Transport Minister Luke Ouellette told the gathering "I know there are economic and environmental reasons for considering mandatory speed limiters, but I also know it would be very difficult to enforce."

The AMTA, like its sister organizations across Canada and its parent group, the Canadian Trucking Alliance, supports the mandatory use of speed limiters. But if ever there was a province that would stand in the way of national harmonization, it’s Alberta. Alberta has always prided itself on doing things its own way – it’s part of the province’s charm - but it can also prove frustrating when national harmonization is sought by the trucking industry.

A case in point is the so-called ‘national’ hours-of-service regulations, which still have not been adopted in Alberta. On this subject, Ouellette said the province is continuing to seek input from stakeholders. Well, the province had years to seek input from stakeholders – this is a process that should have concluded long ago.

While many of our readers will find Ouellette’s comments on speed limiters and hours-of-service refreshing, the fact remains that harmonization of regulations across Canada would benefit the industry at large.

Maybe it’s a pipe dream, but it would be nice if the Transport Ministers of each province would take the time to sit down together and reach a consensus on at least the most fundamental regulations that govern our industry.

Permalink | Comments (0)

I stopped by my local Tim Horton’s the other day and noticed my coffee had increased in price from $1.56 to $1.65. A sign in the window said the price increase was due to increased operating costs. It didn’t specify transportation, but it didn’t have to.

More and more companies are inching up the prices of their goods to help offset increasing transportation costs. In her monthly column ‘Voice of the Owner/Operator’ appearing in the May issues of Truck News and Truck West, OBAC executive director Joanne Ritchie asks the question: ‘What’s happening to all the surcharge money paid out by shippers?’

She reasons that if the cost of goods on stores shelves is increasing, then someone’s getting paid. Unfortunately, owner/operators still regularly complain that they’re not receiving all of, or in some cases even part of, the fuel surcharge being levied by their carriers.

Like Joanne, I hear from these guys all the time, wanting to know what their rights are. Beyond working for a carrier that will pass on the fuel surcharge to owner/operators – I don’t have a helluva lot of advice. I’ve also heard from owner/operators that are doing very well, thank you. Those are the ones who are rightly being paid the fuel surcharge collected by the carrier they are leased to. In some cases, the fuel surcharge they collect accounts for a higher amount than their actual mileage rate. Without the fuel surcharges, they’d be toast.

Diesel prices continue to surge, outpacing even the increase in gasoline prices that everyone’s been bemoaning lately. Today’s Toronto Star has an interesting article on the subject. In the article, Spencer Knipping, a petroleum analyst with Ontario’s Ministry of Energy says: "The diesel story is simply amazing. It reflects the fact that diesel demand has been growing more strongly than gasoline demand worldwide, and that there's a somewhat more limited refining capacity for it."

The article goes on to blame, among other things, an increase in the popularity of diesel-powered passenger vehicles. It seems that cost-conscious consumers are buying diesel-powered personal vehicles to shave down their own fuel costs. With a limited diesel refining capacity, the old supply and the demand equation is driving the cost of diesel up exponentially. Over the past year, diesel prices have shot up 30% while gas prices have experienced a more modest increase of 10%.

I’m no economist, but I do fear that unrelenting fuel prices may be the catalyst that pushes our economy into further decline. More consumer spending is being diverted towards the cost of energy, which leaves less for dinners out, clothing, entertainment, etc. It’s that consumer spending that really drives our economy. I don’t see any immediate, or even long-term, fix for this dilemma. Fortunately, there are a whole lot of people that are smarter than me working on it. Let’s hope they find a viable, long-term solution to escalating fuel prices before our economy reaches its breaking point.

Permalink | Comments (0)

With the next round of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) emission standards for heavy-duty engines on the horizon, the battle lines have clearly been drawn. EPA2010 emissions standards call for further reductions in NOx, and there are two vastly different approaches to getting there.

Volvo Group, Daimler Trucks North America and Paccar have announced they will meet 2010 emissions standards through the use of selective catalytic reduction (SCR), a technology that’s already widely used in Europe. On the other hand, Navistar (International) and Cummins will instead focus on meeting the targets by expanding the use of their current exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) strategies. (Cummins will use SCR on its mid-range engine line).

So which technology will ultimately win out? That remains to be seen. Both sides have made compelling arguments as to why their decision is the right one. The main arguments emanating from the EGR camp are that: SCR requires additional components and is overly-complex; urea may not be widely available by 2010; and SCR is unproven in North America.

Meanwhile, companies that have chosen SCR counter that: SCR is a proven technology; there were no urea availability issues in Europe; and SCR is the only way to meet EPA2010 emissions standards without sacrificing fuel economy. In fact, proponents of SCR insist they will deliver a significant fuel economy improvement over today’s engines.

So in a nutshell, there you have it. There’s obviously a lot more to this issue and there will be major educational campaigns launched by both sides over the course of the next couple of years. The stakes for engine manufacturers are enormous; each manufacturer will be investing millions into developing their 2010 solution.

The stakes for fleets are high as well. If one technology proves to be significantly better than the other, fleets that are early adopters may worry that they pitched their tent in the wrong camp.

My not-so-bold prediction is this: Both solutions will work. They’ll both meet the EPA requirements and the usual fears of reliability, performance or infrastructure issues will prove to be unwarranted. With each previous round of EPA emissions standards, the engine manufacturers have proven they are amazingly resilient - and capable. So the bottom line is that fleets and owner/operators will have a choice – a difficult choice – to make.

Now is a good time to begin preparing to make that choice, by reading up on both technologies and asking questions of your suppliers and dealers. There’s likely to be two viable solutions for the 2010 emissions standards, your best bet is to do your homework and try to determine which solution will best suit your own unique requirements. It’s never too early to start.

Permalink | Comments (0)

So here’s another twist to the speed limiter issue which may not have received due consideration when the Ontario Trucking Association (OTA) was developing the proposal.

According to a Ministry of Transportation official, it’s likely that violations of the speed limiter law (once it comes to be), will go against a carrier’s CVOR rating.

“If the proposed legislation is passed, it is likely violations will count against a carrier’s CVOR rating,” I was recently told by an MTO official. (For the full story, see the May issues of Truck News and Truck West, available next week).

It’s no secret that the muscle behind the proposed legislation has been the OTA, which represents the Ontario carrier community. The real proponents of the proposal have been some of Ontario’s biggest carriers – in many cases, the best-run companies the trucking industry has to offer. Most of these carriers already employ speed control and have developed in-depth safety programs.

These carriers value their hard-earned CVOR ratings, and I would venture to guess that the carriers in favour of speed limiter legislation collectively boast some of the best CVOR ratings in the industry. But once the new law is adopted, they run the risk of seeing those CVOR ratings go down the toilet if their owner/operators refuse to play by the new rules.

I’m not by any means suggesting that owner/operators will set out to sabotage their employers’ CVOR ratings by refusing to comply with the rule, once it is passed. Not only would it be illegal and unethical, but it would also come at a huge personal cost, as O/Os would be slapped with fines as for non-compliance.

However, I do feel that many carriers may unwittingly incur damage to their valued CVOR rating once this rule becomes law, an unintended consequence of hoisting an unpopular new legislation on an unwelcoming driver pool. Despite the MTO’s promise of an educational enforcement period during which no fines will be levied against violators, I have a hunch there will be plenty of penalties doled out once the MTO cracks its whip. There will undoubtedly be a segment of the population that tries to tamper with the settings, and they will surely test the abilities (and patience) of some of Ontario’s finest inspection officers. In the process, some will get busted. And in the process, their employers’ CVORs will take a hit.

It will be interesting to see how carriers enforce the new law within their own operations. It’s simple enough to govern company equipment, but ensuring compliance amongst their owner/operators may prove more of a challenge. For owner/operators and carriers, the cost of non-compliance will be high. But one could argue that it’s the carriers that face the biggest risk - especially those with an unblemished CVOR rating at stake.

Permalink | Comments (18)

For weeks now, I’ve been wondering if anybody reads this blog. I posted an entry on speed limiters, and that’s usually guaranteed to get a reaction out of our readers. But nothing but crickets responded.

This morning, I received an e-mail from a visitor to the site who asked why his comments hadn’t been posted. That got me digging, and I soon realized that most reader comments were being diverted to a “Junk” folder aimed at capturing ‘spam.’

So I apologize if you have been patiently waiting to see your comments posted. I have gone through the Junk folder and released the legitimate comments. I’ll keep an eye on this folder regularly from now on and ensure that your comments are posted as soon as possible. In the meantime, feel free to peruse some of the older entries to see what other visitors to the site have had to say.

Permalink | Comments (2)

As expected, the Ontario government finally tabled legislation that would require all trucks operating in the province to be mechanically limited to 105 km/h. The writing has been on the wall since the Ontario Trucking Association (OTA) first introduced the policy back in 2005. Now, it’s appears the proposal will become a reality.

The policy has gained momentum ever since the OTA announced it in 05, and comments from the MTO’s Chris Brant in the current issue of Truck News suggested a formal endorsement from the provincial government was near. “We are not going to wait forever,” Brant told our correspondent, Carroll McCormick. Indeed.

Yesterday the legislation was formally announced by the Ontario Liberals. They hope to have the law on the books by 2009 with an educational enforcement period allowing drivers to come to terms with the new rule.

Between now and then, and undoubtedly for some time after, we’ll be deluged with complaints about the law from drivers and owner/operators who view it as an invasion of their rights and a misguided attempt to level the playing field between small and large carriers (most of which already govern their trucks).

I’ve heard all the arguments for and against speed limiters, and I don’t fully subscribe to either school of thought. The doomsday scenario that the proposed law will create more accidents, force veteran drivers to leave the industry en masse and deter carriers domiciled in other jurisdictions from crossing into Ontario seems far-fetched and unrealistic. Drivers and carriers have overcome more significant hurdles than this. I don’t think Ontario’s proposed speed limiter law is going to mean the end of the industry as we know it.

On the other hand, I think the OTA’s touted fuel economy, environmental and safety benefits are over-stated. For one, governing trucks at 105 will only really affect how trucks are driven on the major highways where traffic usually flows at speeds well above 100 km/h. Driving habits on secondary highways and in urban areas won’t be improved just because a truck is governed at 105. I think that some fleets will achieve fuel savings and, by extension, there will be some corresponding environmental benefits – but not to the extent the OTA and the Ministry are suggesting. As for this rule’s impact on safety, only time will tell.

So now that I’ve ruffled feathers in both camps, it’s time to take a formal position on the issue. In doing so, I must ask the question: Is a speed limiter rule really necessary? And in my opinion, it is not. My daily commute is over 100 km and I spend a lot more time than that travelling Ontario’s highways. Anecdotally, I will tell you that speeding trucks are not a major concern in Ontario. I do encounter them on occasion – and probably will still encounter them on occasion once this legislation becomes law. But to introduced such broad-based legislation to control the speed of a handful of trucks seems like overkill. I would prefer to see incentives offered to carriers and owner/operators that voluntarily activate their governors or adhere to a speed control and fuel management program on their own. (And yes, fuel savings should be incentive enough).

While I don’t agree that Ontario’s speed limiter legislation (if passed) will have widespread repercussions for the industry, I do question whether the intended benefits of the law will ever be achieved. If they are, then I will concede it was a gutsy and worthwhile endeavor on the part of OTA. If not, then I must question whether the time and resources spent on bringing this law to fruition was well-spent. A thorough and impartial analysis of the law’s consequences won’t be available until the rule has been on the books for several years. Until then, let the debate continue.

Permalink | Comments (27)

I just returned from the National Truck Equipment Associations’ Work Truck Show in Hotlanta, Ga. (The city failed to live up to that nickname during my stay, by the way – I even noticed a few snowflakes on Wednesday morning).

Hybrid trucks and alternative fuels dominated discussions at the event. OEMs were surprisingly candid about the costs of hybrid vehicles. Most agreed the up-charge is about US$40,000-$45,000 for Eaton’s hybrid system; tack on an extra US$15,000 if you require an electronic PTO.

With the Canadian and US dollars near par, you can count on the cost being about the same on this side of the border. The major difference, however, is that federal, state and even local tax credits and grants are available in the US, which in some cases can combine to cover nearly 100% of the cost increase.

Rachel Beckhardt, project analysis, corporate partners with Environmental Defense, spoke to the audience about such incentives. In some cases, she reported, there is more money available than there are companies looking to take advantage of them.

In New Hampshire, for instance, there sits a seven-figure pool of incentive money and yet not one trucking company from there has reached out its plate for a piece of the pie, Beckhardt pointed out. What an interesting conundrum.

I would bet that there are a lot of trucking companies here in Canada that would welcome the opportunity to offset some of the up-charge that hybrid vehicles currently carry. Instead, in the absence of incentives, most fleets north of the 49th are sitting on the sidelines and waiting for higher volume orders in the US to drive down production costs. Certainly, not all fleets are guilty of this. Canada has its early adopters as well, especially amongst the courier ranks.

But even with fuel savings of 30% or more and idle-time reductions of as much as 80% in some applications, it takes an awful long time to recover that $40,000 up-front investment. The government has been shelling out incentives for passenger vehicle hybrids, isn’t it time to consider extending these to include commercial vehicles?

Permalink | Comments (1)

While environmental groups laud B.C. for becoming the first North American jurisdiction to announce a full-fledged “carbon” tax, the trucking industry must feel like it will be shouldering an unfair share of the burden. If approved by the legislature, diesel prices will rise by 2.2 cents/litre by this summer and 8.27 cents/litre by 2012.

We all know how difficult it is for trucking companies to pass on the increased cost of fuel at the best of times. Now they must try to do so while competing companies from other jurisdictions can avoid filling up in B.C. altogether and pay substantially less for fuel. This will put B.C.-based carriers at a competitive disadvantage.

The province is promising the new tax will be “revenue-neutral,” with funds re-invested into individuals and businesses that reduce their reliance on fossil fuels. It’s being touted as a carrot-and-stick approach, but who can blame the trucking industry for wondering “Where’s our carrot?”

After all, there’s no recognition of the fact the trucking industry today is already operating remarkably clean equipment. The EPA07 engines are nearly smog-free. By 2010 they will be even cleaner. The trucking industry was “going green” even before the province of B.C. began debating the merits of a carbon tax.

The province’s carbon tax falls short of a cap-and-trade system, which would allow companies that reduce their emissions to then sell carbon credits to other companies that cannot reduce their pollution to agreed-upon levels. While the trucking industry has generally opposed a cap-and-trade system, at least it would provide the proverbial carrot for fleets that are able to demonstrate a marked reduction in fuel consumption. Most of the best-run truck fleets are doing this already. If a fleet operating only the latest environmentally-friendly equipment could turn around and sell credits to, let’s say, an oil and gas producer, it may actually benefit our industry.

There was mention in the province’s news release of funding biodiesel production facilities. One may speculate that fleets that adopt the use of biodiesel may be rewarded under the program. But the potential flaws of adopting alternative fuels have been well-documented. Biodiesel remains a viable option for fleets that are comfortable with its performance and benefits – but should the industry have alternative fuels forced down its throat? Particularly when there are some fairly sensible arguments out there that downplay their environmental benefits? We mustn’t forget that today’s diesel fuel at 15 PPM sulfur is not as dirty as it once was.

There’s also mention in the release of a $2,000 credit towards the purchase of fuel-efficient vehicles. No word on whether trucks will qualify, but they certainly should. The CTA has been pushing for incentives for early adopters of what it’s calling the enviroTruck – a EPA07 engine-equipped truck spec’d for optimum fuel economy. Hopefully this program is broad enough to include incentives toward the purchase of latest generation trucks and engines – even hybrids. Otherwise, it looks like the trucking industry will shell out millions in additional taxes without receiving a fair return. And if that’s the case, let’s just call a spade a spade and a fuel tax a fuel tax.

Permalink | Comments (1)

The CTA is forging ahead with its attempt to have stability systems made standard on all new Class 8 trucks sold in Canada. Frankly, I think it's a policy that has a lot of merit.

But I hope the CTA isn't spending too much time and resources on this initiative - it probably won't have to. I was at the Heavy-Duty Aftermarket Week festivities in Las Vegas a couple weeks ago and NHTSA associate administrator for rule-making Stephen Kratzke hinted the organization is already well on its way to coming up with stability system requirements of its own.

Apparently, NHTSA administrator Nicole Nason is a huge fan of stability systems. She helped usher in the American requirement for the technology on light-duty vehicles, and then asked her underlings 'What about trucks?' Right away, testing began on anti-rollover technology for heavy-duty vehicles and that testing is still under way today. It's almost certain NHTSA will adopt a requirement for anti-rollover systems on heavy-duty vehicles and it will likely be in place within a few years.

Fleets and owner/operators really shouldn't fear this technology. The bottom line is, it works very well and it has the potential to save lives and reduce accident-related costs. Most of the concerns I hear from drivers center around two issues, and I'd like to address both of them here:

First is the added complexity these systems add to the vehicle. I think many owner/operators and drivers fear the word "sensor", and really, who can blame them? More sensors means a higher probability of failure, no? Well, I've posed this question to the manufacturers. As you likely know, there are two types of stability systems out there (excluding trailer stability systems). You have roll-stability, which is effective at mitigating most rollover situations. Roll-stability systems use the existing ABS wheel sensors - there are very few additional components. Meritor WABCO’s Mark Melletat, says the company’s roll stability system “doesn’t involve a lot of extra components. You take your ABS ECU and you build upon it.” He adds there’s very little in the way of additional componentry and that existing ABS sensor failures are rare.

Then you have electronic stability systems, which are much more advanced and are better at coping with factors such as slippery road conditions and jack-knife scenarios. Electronic stability systems are more complex - they require additional sensors that measure such things as yaw and steer-angle. It's worth noting, Kratzke said that so far NHTSA testing seems to indicate roll stability systems alone may well be enough to meet the agency's requirements.

At any rate, sensor failure is likely not a valid reason to shy away from roll-stability systems. Melletat points out his company has more than 50,000 units on the road, and ABS sensor failures are basically a non-issue.

Now for the second myth I often hear about stability systems; that drivers will be more careless knowing the system is there to bail them out. I dismiss this argument out of hand. No professional driver is going to take a corner just a little bit faster than normal because he's got a fandangling new anti-rollover system on his truck. Not even a bad driver is going to take that risk. It's counter-intuitive.

What it does do, is provide a little extra room for error for the good driver who makes a mistake or suffers a lapse in judgement. We've all done it at one time or another - taken a corner a little too fast or misjudged an angle. Some of us do it more than others. You may never require an intervention from the system, but if you do, you'll be glad it was there. Trucking can be an unforgiving profession. Here's an opportunity to increase your margin of error for those rare times you do make a mistake. Don't tell me drivers are going to take corners a little faster just because they can. I don't buy it.

Obviously, I'm a big fan of this technology. I'm a big fan of safety technology in general - provided it does what it says it will do and doesn’t create additional risks. I'm also cognizant that profit margins are thin in this business and increased costs are not easily passed on to customers. But in the grand scheme of things, this technology is not overly-expensive. Roll stability systems run about $700-$800. Full electronic stability systems are a little more than double that. Should they become standard, economies of scale will drive the price down further.

As Fred Andersky, electronics manager with Bendix recently told me, "It's like insurance. You hope you never need it but if you do, you're glad you have it." It's insurance at a pretty cheap price. If it gives you peace of mind, who can complain about that?

Permalink | Comments (0)

Between them, they make buying decisions for more than 100,000 vehicles: Sid Gooch, FedEx Express; Kevin Tomlinson, South Shore Transport; Steve Duley, Schneider National; and Carl Lyth, Pepsi Americas. So it stands to reason, that any parts supplier or distributor would do well to learn a few things about what drives the buying decisions of each of those executives.

To think they make purchasing decisions based on price would be naïve. In fact, Schneider’s Duley said during a panel discussion at the recent Heavy-Duty Aftermarket Week that price ranked third in that company’s list of considerations, behind ‘Part meets criteria’ and ‘Service performance.’ “We never buy anything purely on price,” Duley said. Schneider alone accounts for US$45 million a year in parts purchases. Duley admitted it’s not easy to convince Schneider to switch suppliers – 90% of the parts the company buys are under contract and 60% of the parts are bought directly from the OEM.

FedEx Express’s Gooch said his company looks for the lowest cost of ownership, whether they can get the part on-time and at a competitive price. The company spends $84 million in parts each year, more than $100 million if you include tires and lubes. It tries to keep its parts inventory low, so timely and reliable delivery is crucial, said Gooch.

Lyth said “cost is the key to open the door” at Pepsi America, but it’s not the only factor when choosing where to source parts. “Quality and support are the final determining factors,” he said. “Not all suppliers do a good job serving our smaller locations.” Lyth said longevity is very important to his company, since their tractors undergo length life-cycles.

Representing the smaller fleet segment, Tomlinson said South Shore Transport demands parts within a day, since most of its trucks return home nightly. He admitted price is a factor, but quality is more important and price will be haggled over later.

The fleets were unanimous in voicing their preference for name brand parts versus will-fit or offshore alternatives. But that’s not to say they won’t approach new products with an open mind. When dealing with an unfamiliar supplier, Duley said Schneider does its due diligence, first qualifying the part itself, then taking a good look at who supplies that part and conducting interviews with suppliers and references. The company may also visit the production facilities of that supplier to determine its capabilities and ensure it can meet demand “Then if they meet our needs, we’ll talk price and if the quality is there, we’ll make the move,” he explained.

Lyth said his company will consider using products it’s not familiar with only if other reputable fleets are using it. “I nose around bigger fleets and I pay attention to what they’re doing,” he said. “I don’t like to lead the parade – you get hit by all the bugs.”

Gooch said FedEx uses only name brand parts for nearly everything, but will experiment with parts such as wiper blades, where safety will not be compromised. “The big thing for us is availability and how we order,” he said. “The vendor has to be able to keep up.”

As for the smaller fleet, Tomlinson said “We’re all brand stuff. I have nothing that is not a branded product.”

Panel moderator, Bruce Plaxton of BGP Marketing, said there are two types of parts purchases: Predictive (filters, coolant, lube, brake shoes, etc.) and Non-Predictive (seats, clutches, fenders, etc). “The more predictive it is, the more price-sensitive it is,” he explained. Typically, he said “The larger the fleet, the sharper the pencil…The larger the fleet, the greater likelihood there is that management understands to the penny, the cost of downtime.”

With non-predictive purchases, availability is often the key factor, Plaxton explained. “The firm with the part on the shelf will capture that business.”

Permalink | Comments (1)

If you’re a parts distributor, you’ve likely been there. Across the desk sits a smooth-talking salesman who’s got a slick PowerPoint presentation showcasing a new product that’s going to revolutionize the industry. Maybe it’s a friction product, with stopping distance and durability that rivals the most well-known name brands. So what if it’s made in China? So what if it comes in a white box with no recognizable logo attached to it? So what if you’ve never heard of this guy or the company he’s representing before? It works well (so he says), and better yet it’s cheap! Real cheap. How can you say no?

As a distributor or parts shop, carrying unproven, Brand X products exposes you to huge doses of liability, particularly in the US or even if that product is going to end up in the US. Sarah Bruno, a lawyer with Arent Fox, recently told delegates at Heavy-Duty Aftermarket Week that parts shops and distributors are responsible for the quality of the goods they peddle, despite the fact they likely had no part in the manufacturing of said product.

Since most problematic white-box or ‘will-fit’ parts coming into the market are imported by off-shore companies that have no assets in the US, if something goes wrong, plaintiff lawyers will usually turn their buggy, dollar sign-filled eyes on the company that sold the part in question. And according to Bruno, claiming ignorance is not a defence. She said distributors can be found liable even if they had no knowledge the part posed a risk.

So what’s a distributor to do? Let’s face it, there are valid reasons for carrying will-fit parts. The Bendix’s and ArvinMeritors’ of the world don’t ink distribution deals with every shop that comes along. And if your customer requires a common part and the only manufacturer willing to supply you with that part is not one of the big names, you owe it to your customers to carry an alternative or you risk losing their business altogether.

Bruno said it’s essential you do your due diligence before agreeing to distribute parts for a new supplier. That could get expensive. Travelling to China to visit their production facility may seem excessive, but as Arent Fox lawyer Tony Lupo said: “If you’re not going over to check out their quality, you can’t really be sure. If you’re sued, the first thing a plaintiff lawyer is going to ask is ‘What have you done to check the specifications of this product?’”

Bruno advised parts distributors to put contractual safeguards in place when agreeing to carry parts from a new supplier. At the very least, that should include indemnity clauses that protect the distributor from blame should something go wrong, she said.

With the influx of new off-shore parts into the North American marketplace, Lupo said it’s inevitable that a sup-par part will eventually cause a tragedy and when the lawyers get involved, the distributor will likely get caught in the crosshairs.

“It’s only a matter of time before something happens,” he said. “How much risk do you want to take? If we sell inferior products and that causes a tragic accident, we can’t hide behind the idea that this isn’t our problem.”

Permalink | Comments (0)

Recently, a reader e-mailed us some pictures of a new truck sporting the International logo, which appeared to have been photographed during a covert operation the likes of which you’d expect to see in a James Bond flick. The low-resolution images appeared to have been snapped with a cell-phone camera, and the truck itself looked like something out of a futuristic (or maybe retro?) Hollywood flick.

Having spent a few days with representatives from International Truck and Engine here in Las Vegas, I can confirm the photos are real. The truck is real. It’s called the LoneStar and will be officially unveiled in a few weeks at the Chicago Auto Show. Beyond that, I can’t report much more at the moment. Partially because International is fairly tight-lipped about their new product and I don’t know a whole lot more about it. And also because of my fear of reprisal from the company, which incidentally, has invested a substantial sum of money into the new rig and really isn’t too happy with the fact pictures of their newest baby were leaked on the Internet in the first place. So, you’ll have to look elsewhere to see the pics – I won’t post them here.

Being a bit of a cynic by nature, I initially thought the pictures may have been intentionally leaked by International itself. Having spoken with some of the people who worked on the project, I no longer think that’s the case. The story goes as such: The LoneStar prototypes were sent to the US West Coast where some promotional video was to be shot. Believe it or not, the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco was even shut down for a few hours to accommodate the video shoot. When the trucks were put to bed that evening, the local dealer allegedly neglected to properly tuck them in and cover them up for the night. Someone with a cell-phone camera happened by. The next thing you know, thousands of e-mails depicting the new truck were being circulated. The cat was out of the bag.

Based on the scant information I have been able to gather about the new truck, as well as my own observations (limited at this point to the pictures making the rounds on the Web and a short teaser video shown by International), you’re going to love it or hate it. It’s a radical departure from the traditional truck ‘look’ that dominates the North American market place. International has dared to be different with the design of the LoneStar, and not everyone is going to like it. But I think those who do like it, will like it a lot. And give International some credit for rolling the dice and providing fleets and owner/operators with an alternative to the norm.

I wasn’t able to extract any information from the International reps I spoke with this week about fuel economy, aerodynamics or performance characteristics. Based on a short teaser video the company showed us, the interior will be one of the truck’s strongest selling points. If you want a condominium-style living room instead of a just a bedroom back there, I think you’ll be pleased with what you’ll find. But having said all that, the truck will be as big a surprise to me as it will be to you. Editorial director Lou Smyrlis will be on-hand at the launch and will be posting a report on Trucknews.com as soon as the information becomes available for publication. Thankfully, we have something major to look forward to in early February – a sure cure for the February blahs.

Permalink | Comments (0)

I’m in sunny Las Vegas for Heavy-Duty Aftermarket Week, and if you’re in the parts and service business, you really should be here too. My head is beginning to hurt due to all the numbers being bandied about (honestly, it’s the numbers) from industry-leading forecasters and researchers.

The heavy-duty aftermarket is on the brink of a transformation and if you want to cash in on future growth opportunities, you first have to know what’s coming down the pipeline. There were no shortage of experts on-hand at this week’s event to share their insights, and while they’re primarily based on US data, they’re equally relevant in Canada. I will post several entries in my blog to bring you up to speed on what’s being discussed here in Sin City.

The heavy-duty aftermarket is a $15.6 billion industry in the US (all figures discussed in this blog entry are in US dollars, not that it matters much anymore). Stu MacKay, of MacKay and Company, and co-hort (vice-president, officially) David Fulghum, project that industry will grow to $20.3 billion by 2016. That’s a substantial growth, but the analysts predicted some players will benefit more substantially than others.

Comparing data from 1989 to that of 2006 showed independent garages have managed to increase their share of the pie from 5% to 13%. That came largely at the expense of Heavy-Duty Distributors and Product Specialists (HDD/PS) which saw their portion fall from 34% in 1989 to just 26% in 2006. Truck dealers increased their share from 38% to 43%, according to data, which is gathered from tens of thousands of surveys distributed throughout the industry.

Fulghum said the trend shows the importance of good service. Independent garages, by providing reliable service, have taken their traditional ‘wrench-turning’ duties and leveraged that to increase their share of the parts business, Fulghum noted.

Impressively, independent garages have also been able to maintain profit margins on parts (30.2%) comparable to the margins enjoyed by heavy-duty distributors (32.3%).

“Independent garages have more than doubled their businesses and at the same time have raised prices on parts,” Fulghum explained. “It shows the value of good service. They are making more money on parts, which is being driven by turning a wrench.”

On the service side, it’s worth noting that in 1997, 410 million hours of service was required on the US truck population. In 2007, that rose to 484 million hours due to the growing truck market, but the hours of service per truck was down 19%. Seventy-five per cent of service is done by the truck owner, be they a fleet or owner/operator, Fulghum said. But outsourcing is increasing and in many cases, independent garages are capturing that business, according to MacKay and Company’s data. A big part of the reason could be labour rates – independent garages averaged $66.15 per hour in 2006 compared to the average dealer rate of $80.36 per hour.

MacKay said parts and service providers have opportunities for growth ahead of them. He noted the average age of the Class 8 truck in the US is increasing and will continue to do so due in part to the higher purchase price. He said his company is predicting the aftermarket will see “meaningful growth for each of the next five years.”

Sixty-seven per cent of distributors and 71% of suppliers said in a survey they expected business to be up in 2008, despite the slowing economy. But while independent garages appear poised to continue gaining momentum, they will face new challenges in the future, noted MacKay. He pointed out there’s increased vertical integration among OEMs, which could favour dealers, which he suggested could be getting 49% of the aftermarket business by 2016. Already, 67% of Freightliner and Sterling trucks have proprietary engines under the hood and 63% of Volvos. International sits at 22% but that’s poised to increase with the impending introduction of their own big bore engine. The trend, said MacKay, “will give dealers a bigger edge than they have today.”

I’ll be sharing more information from Heavy-Duty Aftermarket Week in future blog entries.

Permalink | Comments (0)

It’s that time of year again, the first significant snow fall has created havoc on Ontario roads and already the local new stations have begun complaining about snow and ice blowing off the roofs of trailers. It’s an age-old problem and one without a simple solution – at least not one that I’m aware of.

Due to the nature of the trucking industry, it’s nearly impossible to prevent snow and ice from accumulating on the roofs of trailers. Short of parking indoors every night – and we all know that’s not a realistic option for most truckers – what’s a guy to do?

The Workers Compensation Board doesn’t want drivers climbing up onto their trailers to clear the roof of snow and ice. That’s a recipe for a workplace accident if there ever was one.

Some companies have developed snow removal programs. Our on-road editor, Harry Rudolfs, tells me Purolator hires a crew that shows up with ropes, ladder and shovels and clears off the trailers before they hit the road. But in Purolator’s case, most of its trailers report to the terminal on a daily basis. That’s not the case for most long-haul fleets.

Apparently, there are some scales in Nova Scotia that installed snow removal devices last year. I’m told they work like a giant scraper to clear trailer roofs. A neat idea, but I’ve yet to see them in person so I couldn’t tell you how effective they are. I’d love to hear from anyone who has used these systems. Do they perform as-advertised?

Heated trailer roofs? Now there’s an idea. But I imagine it would be cost-prohibitive to implement and there are likely some engineering challenges as well. That’s all I’ve got, folks. Maybe you have a solution of your own you’d be willing to share? If so, I’d love to hear about it.

Permalink | Comments (9)

Two years after it stunned the industry by announcing its much ballyhooed position on the mandatory use of speed limiters, the Ontario Trucking Association (OTA) was at it again during this year’s convention. This time, the association was endorsing the mandatory use of anti-rollover technology. And this time, the group’s position is likely to be far less contentious.

Fleets and owner/operators are still divided on the issue of the mandatory use of speed limiters. Almost immediately after announcing the association’s policy, Truck News was flooded with e-mails, phone calls and letters opposing the plan. This time around, there has been no such outcry in response to the association’s position on anti-rollover devices such as electronic stability control systems. And why would there be?

Anyone who has had the chance to test the technology would have difficulty arguing these systems do not reduce the risk of truck rollovers. And considering rollovers are a leading cause of truck driver fatalities, it behooves us as an industry to take advantage of existing technology that can mitigate these incidents.

Volvo has taken a lead in this area, making its Volvo Enhanced Stability Technology (VEST) standard on all its Class 8 trucks. It’s a non-deletable option in fact – you get it on new Volvo trucks whether you like it or not. Now the OTA is calling on other manufacturers to follow suit. The only argument that I can muster up against this policy, is that it could potentially drive up the costs of new trucks. Who needs that, when stringent new emissions standards and complicated new engine technologies have already accomplished this in recent years?

But in speaking with Frank Bio, marketing manager with Volvo Trucks North America, there are economies of scale at play that minimize the potential cost increases. When Volvo made VEST standard, the company kept costs in check due to its larger volume purchases and improved efficiencies on assembly lines. So provided the mandatory installation of anti-rollover devices on trucks does not come at a significant cost to customers, I feel this is a policy worth supporting.

Permalink | Comments (0)

“Don’t cause a crash, just bash your dash.”

That’s the tag-line for a new product developed by a Vancouver company aimed at combating road rage. The Dash Basher is a polyurethane foam-constructed club that drivers are encouraged to carry with them in their cars.

When confronted with a stressful situation, such as an inconsiderate driver, drivers can grab their Dash Basher and wail away on the dash or steering wheel to their heart’s content. The makers of the Dash Basher say their product will reduce road rage and stress among drivers.

"Don't cause a crash, just bash your dash! No one wants physical confrontation with fellow motorists, even of they are driving like an idiot," said Dean McMaster, sales manager for manufacturer D&H Industries.

The company’s Web site is www.dashbasher.com. I can see it now. Hundreds of drivers stuck in rush hour traffic banging away on their vehicle’s dashboard in unison. Well, I guess it beats some of the alternatives, such as engaging in fisticuffs or ramming into other vehicles.

Permalink | Comments (0)

At the American Trucking Associations (ATA) annual management conference in Orlando this morning, the American Transportation Research Institute (ARTI) released the results of an annual survey exploring the most critical issues facing the industry.

More than 5,000 trucking industry executives across the US were surveyed as part of the research. This year, unlike in the two past years, HoS topped their list of concerns. The driver shortage ranked #2. Also cracking the Top 10 list was: fuel issues; congestion; government regulations; tolls and highway funding; tort reform and legal issues; truck driver training; environmental issues; and on-board truck technology.

The full report can be viewed on the ATRI Web site at www.atri-online.org. It’s worth the read, because not only does the survey reveal the most pressing concerns for trucking industry executives, but also some potential solutions.

For example, the survey suggests the following plan of attack for addressing the driver shortage: research the relationship between driver compensation and driver retention; expand image campaigns to attract an expanded pool of applicants; and redesign new entrant driver training program to increase driver satisfaction/retention.

While the driver shortage ranked second on the list of Top 10 critical issues, it was ranked first by 32% of respondents. That’s a higher percentage than HoS (22%), but a puzzling ratings system relegated the issue to second spot. Nonetheless, it’s a report worth reading. ATA has announced it give serious consideration to the survey when deciding which issues it should be most aggressively pursuing.

Perhaps most surprising was how low environmental issues ranked among fleet managers. Only 1.1% said they ranked the environment the number one issue facing the industry. Three per cent ranked it the second most important issue and 5.1% placed it third. For an industry that’s doing as much as it is to help the environment, it’s curious that the issue is barely a blip on the collective radar screens of the industry’s decision-makers.

Permalink | Comments (0)

Before anyone seemed overly concerned about the state of our planet, Volvo Group made the environment one of its core values back in 1972. Global emissions standards have pushed the company to develop truck engines that are virtually smog-free. However, the company is taking that one step further and attempting to create a truck that can be built, operated and then disposed of with no impact on the environment. It’s a lofty goal, but one the company is aggressively working towards achieving.

Look no further than Volvo Group’s Ghent, Belgium truck plant. The company is aiming to make it the world’s first CO2-free truck plant, and it’s making strides in the right direction. Using wind and solar power combined with bio-electricity, Volvo Group has already achieved a 23% energy reduction at the plant. Its current target is a 50% reduction in C02 emissions and if it wasn’t for a steady increase in production volume, the company would be close to its target today.

Patrick Collignon, managing director of Volvo Trucks Belgium, discussed the company’s progress at the recent European Transport Forum. He admitted he was initially a “non-believer” when Volvo approached him about the project. The target seemed too ambitious, he said, but with the progress that’s already been made he is now convinced it’s an achievable goal. Collignon said Volvo truck plants around the world will be following suit in the years to come and he pointed out Volvo’s New River Valley plant in the US is already experimenting with wind turbines and solar panels.

It still has a long way to go before becoming a completely CO2-free plant, but it’s encouraging to see how much progress is being made at Ghent. CO2 has been largely ignored as truck makers have been focusing their attention on tackling particulate matter and NOx emissions. But it’s very likely that CO2, which is a contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, will be the next substance targeted by the EPA. CO2-free trucks are already in operation today. Volvo showcased seven different types of CO2-free trucks at the Forum and more information on the technology will be in the November issues of Truck News and Truck West. All that’s preventing the widespread use of CO2-free trucks is the availability of bio-fuels, the company insists.

Reducing CO2 emissions while constructing the trucks, and then eventually disposing of them, will most likely pose an even greater challenge to vehicle manufacturers. But the groundwork is already being laid out and Volvo Group deserves a nod of approval for being proactive in this regard.

Permalink | Comments (0)

I recently had the opportunity to attend the European Transport Forum in Brussels, Belgium which explored, among other things, cargo theft prevention practices in Europe. Based on the tone of the discussion, the Europeans seem confident they are well ahead of us North Americans when it comes to implementing anti-theft policies. However, they still admit to having room for improvement. Here’s a quick snapshot of what was discussed:

As it is here at home, cargo theft is a major concern for the European trucking industry. To be more precise, it’s a 8.2 billion Euro problem for the industry. Hanss Persson, manager transport services with Volvo Technology, urged forum delegates to tackle four key challenges: Creating a more reliable statistical database to track cargo theft; harmonize security efforts through various European jurisdictions; develop a European program focusing on theft that incorporates shippers, insurers, carriers and security companies; and to breach the gap between terror security and cargo theft.

Jason Breakwell took the opportunity to raise awareness of the Transported Asset Protection Association. The (http://tapaemea.com/public/) is aimed at exchanging intelligence and best practices in an effort to reduce cargo theft and improve vehicle security. In Europe, TAPA has more than 200 members and shippers are increasingly demanding their carriers are involved in the program. Breakwell said the greatest risk of a cargo loss is while it’s on the road. Road transport is seen as the weakest link in the supply chain, he said.

Also addressing the forum was Magnus Ovilius, head of Preparedness and Crisis Management with the European Union. Ovilius struck some fear into delegates with reports on the advancements being made by cargo thieves and terrorists. “I may sound paranoid but they pay me to be paranoid,” he quipped. He said security measures must be “affordable, sustainable and reliable.” Ovilius discussed technological requirements for helping improve vehicle and cargo security. He said new technology must be: Inter-operable between European Union member countries; easily upgradeable; and data must be protected to avoid privacy invasions. He encouraged carriers to employ GPS tracking capabilities.

Permalink | Comments (0)

This morning, I arrived at the office thankful to see I still have a desk here. For the last two weeks I’ve been travelling – both near and afar – in the pursuit of articles for our November issues of Truck News and Truck West. As is often the case when I’m away from the office for extended periods of time, I began to feel some anxiety about just what would await me upon my return. Fortunately, within a couple hours I’ve been able to catch up on voice mails and regular ol’ snail mail. Thanks to the magic of VPN networks, I’ve been monitoring e-mail the entire time.

So what have I been up to? First was a trip to Brussels, Belgium with Volvo Group. I was fortunate to be included among a small group of trade press editors who had the chance to see, first-hand, seven different truck configurations designed to operate on a variety of bio-fuels. Each of the trucks is completely CO2-free. In fact, Volvo has gone one better and has started producing trucks at its Ghent, Belgium factory with a CO2-free approach, using wind and solar energy to power the plant. It’s quite the accomplishment, one the company plans to mirror at other factories, including those in North America. The ultimate vision is a truck that is produced, operated and then recycled without any CO2 emissions released into the environment. It’s an ambitious target and one that the company is relentlessly pursuing. I’ll have a full report from Brussels in the November issue.

Next up was a trip to Nashville where the Technology and Maintenance Council’s fall meetings are taking place. Cummins took advantage of the opportunity to outline its plans to meet the 2010 emissions standards. I think I can safely say, most of us there in attendance were surprised to hear company officials claim they can meet EPA2010 standards without the use of a NOx aftertreatment system such as SCR. It’s been widely believed that SCR would be required to meet the NOx emissions standards in store for the industry in 2010. Again, a full report of just how Cummins plans to accomplish this will be available in the next issue.

Finally, it was back-to-back-to-back trips to the Doubletree Hotel here in Toronto for two important conferences. The Canadian Recruiting and Retention Conference hosted by Over the Road magazine was held there Tuesday and Wednesday. Attendance was down from past years, but the organizers did an excellent job keeping the material fresh and relevant. Yesterday, Markel Insurance held its latest Let’s Talk seminar, discussing the best results for claims and losses as well as how to develop a claims protocol.

Now, I would like to hop up on my soap box and take a moment to emphasize the importance of continuous learning for managers, dispatchers and drivers in the trucking industry. The three days of seminars I attended this week featured an abundance of useful tips, tools and networking opportunities for attendees. Yes, there are a lot of these events and yes, they can be time-consuming and costly. But the information shared at these types of events can easily justify the expense and time away for the office for any sized trucking operation. For those of you who didn’t attend, you can read about them in upcoming issues of Truck News and Truck West. But admittedly, the whole story cannot be told in 800 to 1,000 words. For that experience you need to be there in person.

Permalink | Comments (0)

Mark Richards, a professional driver based in Windsor, says he’s being punished by the MTO for simply doing the right thing. The trucker admits that last year he was signed on with a rather unscrupulous carrier. He says the company was one of those fly-by-night operations you hear horror stories about, its owner well-known to Ministry of Labour officials who say he made a habit of starting up new trucking companies and then shutting them down, leaving a string of unpaid debts in his wake.

Having had his fill of endangering his life and the lives of others while driving unroadworthy equipment, Richards pulled into a MTO inspection station last July and asked for a voluntary inspection to be conducted on his company-owned truck. The results were predictable: An oil leak, a brake system leak, excessive tire wear, dead light bulbs…you name it.

However, despite the fact Richard took the truck in and had it inspected voluntarily, he insists his abstract is now blemished by the MTO’s findings, hindering his ability to find work with a more reputable carrier.

“I hate the government for what it’s doing to me,” a frustrated Richards told me on the phone. “They’re affecting my life and all I’m trying to do is my job.”

Richards has come to accept the fact he’s stuck with a scarred driver’s abstract for the next five years. But what really irks him is that he’s still owed several thousand dollars – and he says the owner has since launched yet another trucking company.

It’s amazing that people can get away with stunts like this. Richards says the Ministry of Labour has been sympathetic towards his plight, but they still have not been able to help him recover unpaid wages. And the MTO has refused to wipe his record clean. The moral of the story: Be careful who you work for. There are still some rogue operators out there. And doing the right thing doesn’t always pay, but at least you can sleep well at night.

Permalink | Comments (0)

Over the past few years I’ve been telling anyone who would listen about the environmental leaps and bounds being made by the trucking industry. I am always quick to point out that it takes 60 2007 trucks to create the emissions of just one truck built in 1988.

I point out that the insides of smokestacks on new trucks are in some cases corroding because there’s no soot buildup to protect the steel. I tell them about the ‘hanky test’ I performed on several new trucks and how I wouldn’t hesitate to use the same handkerchief I held over the smokestack to wipe my hands with after lunch. I tell them that before long, trucks in some urban centers will be churning out cleaner air than they take in!

It’s a remarkable achievement, and it’s still ongoing with another generation of heavy-duty engine technology slated to hit the market in 2010. This is something the industry should take great pride in, and it should be doing more to educate the public about its environmental accomplishments.

For whatever reason, it seems people who aren’t connected to the industry still perceive trucks as major polluters that are solely to blame for the smog-filled air that hangs like a sickening cloud over the GTA every time there’s a heat wave.

I believe part of the reason the public is either: a) uninformed, or b) uninterested in this great story we have to tell, is that there’s still too much evidence to the contrary. There are still far too many trucks puffing big clouds of black smoke into the air, and I cringe every time I see it happen. It belittles everything the industry has done to clean up its image. The biggest perpetrators of this are older model dump trucks – it’s amazing how many of these trucks built in the 70s and 80s are still in service.

B.C. and California have proposed requiring older model trucks to be retrofitted with emissions-reducing devices such as diesel oxidation catalysts. The cost to the owners of older equipment would be substantial – but so would the environmental benefits. Sixty tonnes of particulate matter can be removed from B.C.’s air each year as a result of that province’s proposal, according to government officials.

I was initially surprised to see the B.C. Trucking Association endorsed the provincial proposal to limit the emissions of older trucks. But on further thought, I can concur with their position. The rest of the industry, most notably the over-the-road sector, has incurred enormous costs to invest in new, environmentally-friendly equipment. Why should companies that continue operating older technology get a free pass? I say: Make the polluters pay!

Let’s rid our roadways of these smoke-belching machines of yesteryear and kill the lingering perception that big trucks are big polluters.

Permalink | Comments (0)

The tragic collapse of a Minneapolis bridge this week has demonstrated the need for immediate upgrades to North American infrastructure. The deadly collapse comes just weeks after Transports Quebec announced oversized loads will no longer be allowed to cross 135 bridges in that province.

And just yesterday, officials in Montreal announced a well-travelled bridge in that city is now off-limits to all truck traffic. For years, the trucking industry, through its various associations, has been appealing to government to inject cash into our aging infrastructure. For the most part, those pleas have fallen on deaf ears.

You can blame the public for that. Spending money on roads and bridges generally isn’t as sexy to voters as money spent on health care and education. But the neglect of our roads and bridges is beginning to catch up with us – and with devastating consequences.

Witness the collapse of the bridge in Minnesota where they’re still picking bodies out of the water. And last year’s collapse of an overpass in Laval, Que. that left five people dead. Despite the best engineering efforts of bridge designers, it’s inevitable that all things fail over time. Much of our infrastructure is already more than 50 years old – some of it much older. The Brooklyn Bridge, for instance, was built in the late 1800s and it is crossed by 130,000 vehicles per day. No structure has an infinite lifespan, especially if it’s not properly maintained. Yet we react in shock when a bridge fails and motorists are sent plummeting to their deaths.

Hopefully, the recent bridge catastrophes will serve as a wake-up call to government. Studies have suggested Canada needs to invest $100 billion into its existing infrastructure to bring it up to par. It’s time for all levels of government to open those purse strings.

Permalink | Comments (0)

The June 29 version of the Environmental Registry confirmed Ontario Regulation 280/07, a law that prevents companies from burning waste oil for heat as of June 1, 2009.

Truck News has been covering this story in recent months and the coverage has sparked much criticism of the provincial government. This initiative appears to be politically-motivated and the province has provided no scientific evidence that the use of waste oil heaters has a negative impact on the environment.

In fact, in many jurisdictions, waste oil heaters are encouraged as an environmentally responsible use of waste oil. Nonetheless, the province has gone ahead with this nonsensical law, with little regard to concerns voiced by industry.

Consider this, during a comment period, the ministry received a total of 560 comments; 117 in support; 441 not in support; and two neutral. Overwhelmingly, those who contacted the ministry were opposed to the ban.

Here are some of the common themes addressed during the public comment period:

 The proposed regulation does not have any data (e.g., exceeding allowable emissions from space heaters, evidence of detrimental effects to the environment) or any other scientific information to support the government’s decision to ban the burning of used oil in space heaters. The government has not studied the issue in enough detail to make this decision.

 The proposed ban does not include northern Ontario. If there is a risk to human health from the burning of used oil, the ban should extend to the entire province.

 The overall emissions from the collection of used oil across the province, including the re-refining of oil, would far exceed that of the emissions from used oil space heaters. Spills are more likely to occur and damage the environment.

 Used oil pick-up cost will increase if the proposal is put in place and may be illegally dumped to avoid the charges.

 There will be a loss of revenue to small business owners since their heating cost will increase significantly. Also, a significant investment has been made to purchase and install the used oil space heating equipment. Businesses will close due to the incremental operating cost associated with heating a facility.

 The ministry did not actively go out and consult with manufacturers, distributors and owners of space heater before announcing the draft regulation to the public.

 Burning used oil in space heaters can burn as clean as and more efficient than some household oil burning furnaces. Replacement fuel will be less environmentally friendly as the total CO2 emissions associated with its production and transportation will be higher than that of burning used oil in space heaters:
a. Natural gas is not readily available
b. Wood is extremely inefficient.

Despite all these valid arguments, the ministry has gone ahead with the ban. Something to think about with a provincial election looming.

Permalink | Comments (5)

It’s no secret that professional drivers are generally not the fittest of folks. Of course there are exceptions to the rule, but it’s not easy to stay in shape when you spend long hours behind the wheel and the most convenient meal options are the truck stop buffets.

It’s not much easier as a truck journalist, I often contend. The job involves a fair bit of travel, some long days and many meals on the road. My own fitness regime involves long stretches of inactivity followed by months of intense training. When active, boxing is my activity of choice; I have a deep appreciation for both the physical and mental aspects of the ‘sweet science.’

Regardless of the type of work you do, it’s important to maintain some degree of physical activity. Thankfully, many fleets are making it easier for their drivers to do just that. Some are installing gyms in their terminals. Others are providing incentives for weight loss and subsidizing physical activities. Doing so is a win-win situation. The carriers help lower their WSIB- and WCB-related claims costs and drivers enjoy the benefits of a healthy lifestyle. There’s no denying that when you’re physically active you feel better, have more energy and also are likely to extend your life expectancy.

Carriers I’ve spoken to that have launched an employee health program all say they have noticed an overall improvement in morale and productivity. It’s an excellent investment for employers.

As a driver, if you can find 30 minutes a day to exercise, you’ll undoubtedly feel a lot better. It could be something as simple as going for a walk or it could be a more rigorous workout. Gym equipment such as exercise mats, hand weights, skipping ropes etc. occupy very little cab space and can be used just about anywhere. The biggest challenge is finding the time and then getting into a routine.

Permalink | Comments (0)

They say bad things happen in three but we’re beyond three and still counting when it comes to recent truck crashes on major GTA highways caused by four-wheelers.

Yesterday a cement truck rolled over on Hwy. 427, closing the well-travelled road for most of the afternoon. The driver remains in hospital with life-threatening injuries. Media reports say a Volkswagen Jetta driver caused the accident by trying to change lanes where there was no room to do so.

That marks the second time in a week that Hwy. 27 was closed in one direction following an accident. Just days earlier, a gravel truck rolled over when a man in a BMW reportedly lost control and ran into the truck.

On the 401 near Salem in Ajax, a man is lucky to be survived after he lost control of his SUV while speeding in the middle of the night. His vehicle reportedly crossed three lanes and smashed into the back of a tractor-trailer, erupting into flames. The eastbound lanes were still closed the next morning when I drove to work and I saw the remnants of the Hyundai Tuscon – a hunk of twisted black metal was all that remained.

We all know by now of the accident on Hwy. 400 that claimed the life of trucker David Virgoe. He was hailed as a hero for taking evasive actions which saved the lives of drivers in oncoming vehicles.

Despite these well-publicized accidents, four-wheelers continue to drive way too fast and with reckless abandon. I have yet to see a stepped up police presence on our highways. Let’s hope drivers begin to understand that speeding and weaving in and out of traffic is not worth the risk. Until these drivers come to realize there will be consequences for their actions, however, no change is likely to take place. In the meantime, remember to wear your seatbelt and be careful out there.

Permalink | Comments (0)

Ontario Transport Minister Donna Cansfield has unexpectedly announced (amid very little fanfare during a long weekend) that the province is going ahead with an OTA proposal to require the use of speed limiters on heavy-duty trucks operating within the province.

You know all about the proposal by now – all trucks running within Ontario will have to be governed at 105 km/h under the new law. The Canadian Trucking Alliance hopes Ontario will pave the way for other provinces to follow suit, creating a national standard.

Only time will tell, but it appears the initiative will gain steam with Ontario’s commitment. While the writing has been on the wall for some time, what was most puzzling about the announcement was the timing. While the province’s citizens are up in arms about a rash of recent street racing crashes and fatalities (one involving a heroic truck driver who crashed to avoid other vehicles) the government announced it would limit truck speeds.

I spend a lot of time on the GTA’s 400-series highways and I don’t see a lot of 18-wheelers racing each other or speeding excessively. I do, however, see plenty of evidence that young drivers are engaging in increasingly dangerous driving habits including, but not limited to, racing.

There are plenty of steps the province and its enforcement agencies could take to tackle the problem of street racing head-on: Step up the police presence on the province’s highways. Re-introduce photo radar. Introduce educational programs. Enforce speed laws from the sky, as other jurisdictions have begun to do. Increase minimum penalties for offenders.

Targeting truck speeds does nothing to address the dangers of speeding four-wheelers. In fairness to the province and the OTA, the speed limiter proposal was never intended to address four-wheeler driving habits. It was designed to reduce emissions, improve overall highway safety and – let’s not kid ourselves – level the competitive playing field among carriers.

But given the fact street racing has been such a hot topic in the mainstream media lately, why not introduce tough new laws that affect all vehicles equally – not just trucks? When the trucking industry was suffering bad press resulting from a series of wheel separations in the early 90s, the province didn’t announce a major enforcement campaign against speeding cars. It targeted the offenders – heavy-duty truck operators. It came down hard on violators and the industry is better for it.

Want to send a message? Limit the speeds of all vehicles. There’s no need for a passenger car to be travelling over 130 km/h. Slow’em all down. Now that would make this speed-limiter pill a lot easier to swallow for professional drivers.

Permalink | Comments (0)

A reader submitted these photos as a reminder to always be prepared for everything while out on the road. These pictures were taken near Terrace, B.C. The driver apparently rounded a corner in the highway and was greeted with a large fallen boulder in his path.

Fortunately, he wasn’t driving too fast and wasn’t seriously injured. The truck was a write-off, however, as you can clearly see from the pictures.

“They had to drill three holes in the rock/boulder to break it up enough for them to be able to move it,” the reader said in his e-mail.

Serves as a good reminder to always expect the unexpected out there.

Permalink | Comments (0)

A growing legion of motorists are taking notice of their fuel economy and altering their driving styles to maximize mileage. However, the American Trucking Associations’ has voiced concern that the practice of ‘Hypermiling’ is posing risks to truckers and other drivers.

Hypermiling refers to “making skillful changes to the way you drive” according to one Washington Post article on the subject. Unfortunately, a commonly-used tactic involves closely following or ‘drafting’ tractor-trailers, much like NASCAR drivers do amongst each other on superspeedways.

A number of Web sites on hypermiling have popped up and the ATA is working to have their references to drafting removed. The risks of tailgating tractor-trailers are obvious, and far outweigh any fuel savings.

Some sites also suggest shutting down a hybrid vehicle while coasting to a stop in traffic. Sounds great, except that you lose control of certain vehicle functions when the vehicle is turned off. It’s great to see the general public is beginning to understand the benefits of fuel-efficient driving styles. Truckers have been employing fuel-efficient driving techniques for many years but I guess it takes a buzzword like ‘hypermiling’ to bring it into the mainstream. Hopefully motorists will use common sense and realize there’s a fine line between driving for maximum fuel mileage and risking your life and the lives of others.

After all, that hybrid driver may find himself underneath your rig if he spends too much time watching the fuel MPG readout and not enough time anticipating the traffic flow ahead.

Permalink | Comments (1)

It’s sometimes surprising which topics elicit the most passionate responses from readers. Take for instance the cover story on the June issue of Truck News (Up in Smoke) about the impending ban of waste oil space heaters in Southern Ontario. While truck shop owners are among the largest user groups of the technology, I wasn’t expecting the plethora of responses that story triggered.

I have received many strongly-worded an opinionated phone calls and e-mails since the latest issue hit the street. All but one have expressed outrage at the government decision to ban the space heaters – a move that appears to be politically-motivated. Even a waste oil hauler - a guy who stands to benefit from the ban - called to say he disagrees with it.

Of particular interest was an e-mail from Lloyd Clare, the guy who was responsible for permitting the use of 600-plus waste oil space heaters in Ontario. Along with a colleague, he wrote the book on waste oil heaters (the appendix on used oil in the CSA B1329 oil burner code, more specifically) and says they pose no risk to the environment. He agreed with individuals quoted in the article that the province’s ban is politically-motivated and driven by the re-refining industry.

“Used oil furnaces put out less VOCs than natural gas and burn cleaner than #2 furnaces in terms of carbon emissions because of the superior atomization method. They put out less emissions than a new automobile going down the 401 and about half the ash of a wood fireplace. In general, 12 to 20 times more furnaces can be installed in a building than is required to heat it and still meet emissions standards. The point here is, and I know what I am talking about, this is not an environmental issue - this is corruption of the highest order,” he wrote. You can read his entire letter in the July issue of Truck News, along with some other reader responses.

Unfortunately, it appears attempts to derail the ban may prove unsuccessful. The OTA has been lobbying against the ban and appealing to the MOE to, at the very least, extend a grandfather clause on existing space heaters. But an OTA official told me yesterday that even though there’s plenty of scientific evidence that the space heaters pose no risk to the environment, the province is bound and bent on proceeding with the ban. It boils down to the fact the province feels that recycling oil through a re-refiner is fundamentally more prudent than allowing users to burn the oil themselves for heat. If that’s the case, then no amount of scientific evidence presented by opponents of the ban is likely to change the MOE’s mind on this matter. They’ve dug in their heels. Made up their mind. Science be damned.

For what it’s worth, you can let the MOE know how you feel about the impending ban by calling Minister Laurel Broten’s office at 416-314-6790.

Permalink | Comments (1)

Last year around this time Toronto City Councillor Michael Walker began touting one of the most asinine policies to ever emanate from City Hall when he proposed a rule that would ban downtown deliveries during the morning and afternoon rush hours.

"We're having constant gridlock downtown and trucks that are sitting in the road idling, create backups of cars and other trucks on the major streets," Walker said, adding any delivery trucks in the downtown core between 7-10 a.m. and 3-6 p.m. would be towed under his plan.

Business organizations (including the Ontario Trucking Association) were quick to throw water on the fire, pointing out the obvious flaws with Walker’s proposal. But it appears Councillor Walker is back at it, attempting to once again ban trucks from downtown during rush hour, despite the fact a city committee quashed the same proposal last year. He wants the city to conduct a pilot project to see how a downtown truck ban during rush hour would pan out.

"Those vehicles contribute a lot to gridlock and do a lot of idling, and both of those contribute significantly to smog and to global warming," Walker told local media yesterday. "It's not a solution on its own but it's a piece of the puzzle. These trucks are queuing up to get into the garages, but they could do it at night."

One of the major flaws with Walker’s proposal is that many businesses don’t have staff available to receive shipments after hours. Adding the necessary staff would be extremely costly for small businesses. While Walker admits that’s an issue, he brushed it off saying “If we’re not prepared to make that type of investment…we’ve got a problem.”

As OTA chief David Bradley pointed out in a letter to the city last year, trucking companies don’t determine pickup and delivery times. Those schedules are established by downtown businesses – many of which are simply not adequately staffed to ship or receive goods at night.

The impact of Walker’s proposal on small business is obvious. The cost of extra staffing will be resisted strongly by small business owners. But what of the extra costs to trucking companies themselves? Making the same number of deliveries in a smaller window of time will not be feasible. Instead, companies will be forced to hire more drivers and add additional trucks. Efficiency will be hindered substantially and shipping costs will escalate as a result – again costing small businesses. Perhaps Walker (whose ward does not fall into the area his proposed ban would entail) should redirect his efforts towards reducing car traffic from downtown streets.

After all, as Bradley pointed out, there are no freight rail lines running into the Eaton Center. But you can take a subway there.

Permalink | Comments (0)

It appears native groups in various parts of Canada are determined to bring attention to land disputes by creating widespread “economic disruptions.” Freight trains were blocked last month near Deseronto and now native groups in Manitoba are vowing to block rail lines again during a day of protest on June 29.

A video has surfaced on YouTube that describes in detail how to trigger the red emergency lights that warn conductors to immediately stop the train. In the video, which is under police investigation, the anonymous creators of the step-by-step guide say: “By halting the freight and passenger rail service, we who support indigenous struggles for dignity and fairness will show governments that indigenous people are not alone. When Justice Fails, Stop the Rails.”

One can only hope that cooler heads prevail this summer. Even a short disruption of rail service can impact the entire supply chain and cost the Canadian economy millions of dollars. And who’s to say protestors won’t expand their blockades to impact other transportation arteries as well? These groups have stated their goal is “economic disruption” and they’re well aware that this can be easily achieved by attacking the vulnerable transportation system. As has been witnessed in past confrontations with native groups, a forceful response will likely elicit violence and further actions.

Native groups appear to be increasingly frustrated with a lack of government action on land claim issues. Hopefully governments of all levels are proactive in finding solutions to these issues before these protests get out of hand. And hopefully the native groups involved are willing to bring to the table a level-headed approach to negotiating reasonable settlements. When our economy is deliberately sabotaged - as was the case during the recent rail blockade in Deseronto - we all lose.

Permalink | Comments (0)

It must be spring, because I’m getting more and more e-mails from road users voicing their disgust in an all too common practice out on the road. Of course I’m talking about drivers who relieve themselves into juice bottles, windshield washer jugs or any other container that happens to be lying around the cab and then haphazardly dispose of them in the ditch.

I’ve used this blog to complain about littering before – and this is even worse. Believe it or not, there are some Good Samaritans out there who volunteer their time to clean our ditches – God Bless’em. They shouldn’t have to worry that the half-full bottle of apple juice they’ve just picked up may not contain apple juice at all!

It saddens me that the state of the industry is such that a driver can’t take the time to pull over at a rest stop or restaurant a few times a day to use the facilities. And I know that the availability of rest areas and washroom facilities isn’t always up to par in some parts of the country.

But still, to urinate in containers and throw them into the ditch is a disrespectful and unsanitary thing to do. If you really can’t take five minutes to pull over, then at least dispose of the evidence in a more acceptable manner. I don’t meant to sound preachy, and I do empathize with your situation when you’re out there on the road just trying to make a buck, but understand that this practice gives all of us associated with this industry a bad rap.

Permalink | Comments (0)

I recently came across an article from the Associated Press about a new program in Kansas that puts cops in the cabs of trucks to enforce traffic laws. You can read about it here.

What a great idea. Basically, police officers ride along with truck drivers and report offences to other cops who are patrolling the road ahead by car. The Highway Patrol trooper in the truck radios details of infractions ahead to his co-horts, who then pull over the offending vehicle and hand a citation or warning to the driver. Within the first few days of the program, 53 citations and 67 warnings were dished out to four-wheelers – many of whom were caught driving in an unsafe manner around big rigs.

The trucking industry has donated the trucks and drivers for the program free of charge.

"We get feedback from our drivers consistently that there are increasing numbers of excessive speed, road rage, and reckless driving," Maynard Skarka of Yellow Transportation, the trucking company that partnered with the patrol in the first week of a seven-week campaign told the Associated Press. "We believe that we get a return on the commitment that we make here because accidents are very expensive; (the problem) not only endangers lives, but costs a lot of money."

I would like to see this program adopted here in Canada. Too often, four-wheelers drive recklessly around trucks because they don’t expect a cop to be riding shotgun and they simply don’t understand the stopping distances required by tractor-trailers. Not only could a program like this punish the worst offenders but it would also serve as a useful educational tool.

Permalink | Comments (0)

Driving along Hwy. 401 on the weekend, I couldn’t help but shake my head as I passed by literally thousands of pieces of trash along the highway. The ditches are covered in debris tossed aside by inconsiderate motorists who treat the highway like their own personal landfill.

It’s completely disgraceful, and while littering is a year-round problem, never is it as obvious as in the spring when the snow finally melts away uncovering a season’s accumulation of trash. Coffee cups, windshield washer jugs, shopping bags – they’re everywhere along the province’s roads, especially in the GTA.

My girlfriend and I commented on the sad situation as we drove along in shame, embarrassed that visitors from other countries would witness this disgrace. Now, I’m not the tidiest guy, and the interior of my car is a bit of a disaster area as well. But I would never even consider tossing some of the empty coffee cups or water bottles that clutter the floor of my car out the window.

I think it’s time that litter bugs should be reported. If you see someone throwing trash out their vehicle, you should be able to call a number and report the offender. Then, the licence plate should be traced and the owner of the car sentenced to some ‘ditch time’ where they have to clean up after others who are as inconsiderate as themselves. Wasn’t you behind the wheel? Well, be careful who you lend your car to then.

Okay, that may not be the most practical solution, but short of re-introducing chain gangs to clean our ditches, there aren’t a whole lot of options. Something has to be done because we are at risk of losing our reputation of being a ‘clean’ country.

Permalink | Comments (0)

In a surprising move, the US trucking industry has actually said it would welcome higher fuel taxes. The caveat being, the money would have to be set aside for infrastructure funding. And we’re not talking bicycle paths here, which sadly has been where some of the current fuel tax revenue generated in the US has been directed.

American Trucking Associations president Bill Graves recently told the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission, that the industry prefers fuel taxes as a source of funding for the nation’s highways. It opposes slapping tolls on existing highways.

“We are prepared to pay,” he said. “We do favour fuel tax as a method of payment. And we believe in a program that is tied to system use. The sense now is that given the right plan, there could be some great things accomplished.”

It’s an interesting view, and one that certainly won’t be shared by many motor carriers. Canadian carriers operating in the US will also have to pay if they fuel up south of the border. But those companies will also benefit if roads are kept in better condition and congestion is alleviated.

The federal fuel tax on diesel in the US is 24.4 cents per gallon and it hasn’t been increased since 1993.

Grave’s position echoes comments made by FedEx Freight CEO Doug Duncan made at last year’s Ontario Trucking Association convention. He too said the US government should hike fuel taxes and allot that money specifically to highway funding. Perhaps these comments signal a changing philosophy in the trucking industry, or according to ATA economist Bob Costello, a ‘maturing.’

Costello was at Bizcon 11 (Bridgestone Firestone’s annual dealer conference) earlier this week. He said inadequate infrastructure costs the US trucking industry $7.8 billion per year and the industry has come to terms with the fact it will have to help shoulder the costs of bringing that infrastructure up to par. He said the industry’s voluntary tax increase is one of several signs the industry has come of age in recent years.

Truckers may not like the idea of shelling out even more at the pumps than they already do. But if it means spending less time in traffic or having to fix fewer parts that were broken due to bumpy roads, perhaps it’s a small price to pay.

Permalink | Comments (0)

I spent a good half-hour in traffic this morning as the express lanes of the 401 were closed due to reports of a ‘jumper’ who apparently leapt to his death into traffic around 6 a.m. just past the DVP.

For me, it was a minor inconvenience. For the drivers not far ahead of me on the highway, this will sadly be a life-altering experience. A few years back the City of Toronto constructed a fence along the Bloor Viaduct to prevent people from committing suicide by jumping into the bushes below. I recall reading someone leapt off the bridge there once every 21 days or so. It may have seemed like a simple solution at the time, but where there’s a will, there’s always a way. It seems to me there have been more high-profile instances of people jumping off highway overpasses into traffic since the fence was built.

Suicide is always a tragic event – even more so when innocent people are unwittingly involved. I have spoken to several professional drivers whose trucks were used as a ‘suicide tool.’ In one case, a young man drove his sports car head-on into a transport truck travelling in California. The truck driver’s life was forever altered – he had to give up long-distance trucking altogether. He told me the only thing that provided him with some solace is that police found a suicide note from the young man who drove into his truck. Yet, he still wonders what he could have done differently.

The lives of those drivers that witnessed, or were involved in, this morning’s event on the 401, will also be forever altered. This is something they will likely never fully recover from. What can be done to avoid this from happening again? Quite honestly, I don’t know. Obviously, I wouldn’t suggest police tear down the fence on the Bloor Viaduct or provide suicide-friendly areas at which people could end their lives. And if you build fences along all overpasses (which simply isn’t feasible), you still cannot stop pedestrians from leaping out into oncoming traffic from alongside the road. As I said before, where there’s a will, there’s a way.

I suppose all we can do is hope that these incidents don’t happen any more frequently than they already do and hope the real victims of this incident – those who witnessed it or were involved in it (a truck was reportedly involved) – find the support they need to move on with their own lives.

Permalink | Comments (0)

Well, it’s that time of year again. The time of year when industry suppliers and those who write about them converge in Louisville, Ky. for three jam-packed days of new product announcements.

It’s the Mid-America Trucking Show, and as journalists, we spend more time attending press conferences than taking in the Show’n’Shine or walking the show floor. Not that I’m complaining, it’s always interesting to see what new technological marvels industry suppliers have dreamt up. Most significant new products are unveiled at Mid-America and it’s nice to be among the first to get to see them.

Trucknews.com has a team of editors at the Mid-America Trucking Show and we’ve already started filing reports from the various press conferences. We will continue to do through the remainder of the week. You can check trucknews.com regularly for the most up-to-date coverage of the show. Mid-America-related stories are labeled 'MATS Report:'

The May issue of Truck News and Truck West will also feature many stories from Mid-America so if you couldn’t make it here in person, don’t worry – we’ve got you covered.

Permalink | Comments (0)

There’s a lot of concern south of the border about a recently-announced pilot project that will give 100 Mexican carriers the green light to operate inside the US. Like Canadian carriers, they will be forbidden from delivering loads from one point to another within the US. However, for the first time since 1982, they’ll be able to deliver loads beyond 20 miles of the US/Mexico border and they will be able to pick up loads for return to Mexico. Currently, they have to drop their trailers within 20 miles of the border for pickup by US carriers.

There’s no limit on how many trucks the 100 carriers that participate can operate in the US.

The Americans don’t like it one bit. At least a growing number of vocal Americans don’t like the idea one bit. The Owner-Operators Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA), the Teamsters and other labour groups have spoken out emphatically against the plan.

"President Bush is willing to risk our national security by giving unfettered access to America's transportation infrastructure to foreign companies and their government sponsors," Teamsters leader, James Hoffa recently said. "They are playing a game of Russian roulette on America's highways."

Those are some strong words. Are they justified? Under the pilot project, Mexican carriers that operate in the US will be subjected to inspections by American officers and they will be audited by US agencies. They will have to adhere to the same rules as US and Canadian truckers adhere to while operating in the US. I imagine they’ll be on a pretty tight leash. I’ve heard enough horror stories from Canadian drivers about being singled out at US inspection stations - I can only imagine what the Mexicans will be in for.

For those of you who frequent the US, are you concerned about sharing the road with Mexican trucks and truckers? Or is the ‘Say No to Mexico’ crusade simply a case of protectionism - or worse yet, xenophobia?

Permalink | Comments (1)

I never thought I’d see the day satellite radio rivals XM and Sirius agreed to merge as one. From a business perspective, the proposed merger makes a lot of sense. Double your subscription base and eliminate the need for half your satellites while slashing redundant stations – it’s a recipe for success and will undoubtedly save the company a lot of dough.

But what will it mean for the consumer – particularly the Canadian consumer? For starters, there are issues regarding hardware. I have an XM receiver, and it was built specifically for XM service. There is no compatibility between XM and Sirius radios and that’s the way these systems were designed. Will customers have to buy a new, generic receiver to access the new revised XM/Sirius service? There’ll be a lot of unhappy customers if this is the case – not the least of which are the OEMs who have existing deals with one provider or the other.

Then there’s the issue of Canadian content. The CRTC requires both XM Canada and Sirius Canada to broadcast a certain amount of Canadian content. But these two Canadian entities are not part of the proposed merger. Will Canadian customers have their own service? It seems unlikely a XM/Sirius super-satellite service in the US would comply with CanCon requirements.

Finally, how will this deal affect pricing? With no competition in the marketplace, it’s difficult to imagine pricing will decrease or stay the same. I’m only speculating, but I foresee a tiered pricing system much like you have with cable television, where you pay the base rate and then customize your package by purchasing other channels individually or as packages.

There’s still a whole lot to be worked out logistically before this deal gets done, but as a customer (like many of you, who spend so much time on the road) I do have my concerns. I’ve become dependent on satellite radio to get me through the daily commute and I hope when all is said and done, consumers like us don’t get screwed over.

Permalink | Comments (3)

A reader recently submitted a question regarding a strange occurrence at Hwy. 400 and the Anne. St. overpass in Barrie, Ont. Since we, at trucknews.com didn’t have the answer, we thought we’d call upon the power of the Internet and see if one of our faithful readers could help solve this mystery:

Good morning,
I have a question, to which I have not been able to find an answer, and would like to pose it to you and your team. I’m not involved in the trucking industry in any way, but have been wondering about this one for some time now.

Thanks for your time,
John

If you have an answer to John’s question, we’d love to hear about it here.

Permalink | Comments (1)

Global warming is here and it’s real. That’s the message expected to be delivered by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which has been convening in Paris, France this week. Representatives from more than 100 countries are involved in the meetings, which examine scientific research gathered over the past six years. More than 2,500 scientists have contributed to the research. The final report is expected to be released tomorrow.

Global warming is always good fodder for debate. For every person who insists global warming is for real, there’s another person who counters that swings in global temperatures are nothing new – that they’ve been occurring for centuries. Personally, I’ve always straddled the fence on this one. However, it appears we’re at a breakthrough. Word out of Paris is that the much-anticipated document being finalized by the intergovernmental panel will make it obvious global warming is a reality.

The report is said to contain evidence that climate change is being caused by humans burning fossil fuels, and global temperatures could rise between 2.5 F and 10.4 F by the year 2100. Now, I don’t plan on being around in 2100, but if what this group says is true, then I am extremely concerned about the future of our planet and those who will occupy it in the not-too-distant future.

If the panel’s grim predictions are true, 200 to 600 million people could face food shortages and seven million will have to retreat from areas that face coastal flooding within this century. Between 1.1 and 2.3 BILLION people will suffer from water shortages if global warming is not reversed, the panel is expected to reveal. I’m no Greenpeacer, but I find these predictions startling and a little bit depressing! I now know what side of the fence I’m going to plant my feet on.

Those of us in the transportation industry can seek some comfort in the fact we have already taken steps to reduce our environmental footprint by reducing heavy-duty truck emissions and exploring new technologies that further reduce our energy consumption. Hopefully, our efforts to date will have a noticeable impact on the environment and will be mirrored by other industries that haven’t been quite so proactive.

Permalink | Comments (0)

It appears OPP Commissioner Julian Fantino has no sense of humour. According to reports in Toronto-area media this morning, Fantino is reigning in the affable Sgt. Cam Woolley –the longstanding face of the OPP in the media and a frequent source in Truck News articles.

In a letter to citizens, Fantino said the OPP is taking a new approach to enforcing highway safety: "No more long weekend blitzes, no flavour-of-the-day enforcement, no more humorous stories about those who compromise public safety. Rather, every day, 24-7, OPP officers will be deployed in an all-out effort to put an end to the senseless carnage.”

I, for one, will miss Woolley’s colourful anecdotes from the road. I would tune into local TV reports following each long weekend enforcement blitz, anxious to hear about the guy that was pulled over for shaving while talking on his cell phone and eating a bowl of cereal all while travelling 180 km/h on the 401. I know I’m not the only one who enjoyed this guilty pleasure.

Fantino said the change in direction doesn’t specifically target Woolley (who will now spend more time enforcing the laws and less time talking to the media). However, I think Fantino’s no-nonsense approach will backfire for a couple of reasons.

Firstly, Woolley’s amusing reports on safety blitzes brought the issue of highway safety to the forefront. People who otherwise would have little interest in reading a newspaper article citing statistics about the latest enforcement blitz would tune in to hear Woolley talk about the worst of the worst offenders. His entertaining first-hand reports helped spread the message of road safety to a wider audience.

Secondly, trying to get a straightforward response from the police on any issue can be a daunting task. I know this from my experience as a newspaper reporter and also working for Truck News. Woolley, however, could always be depended on for a BS-free response and he’s one of the few law enforcement officers who always promptly returns phone calls to the media.

Finally, what’s wrong with having a quasi-celebrity of sorts out there representing the OPP? Police officers in general are too often perceived as the ‘bad guys.’ Woolley is instantly recognizable in Ontario and love him or hate him, he puts a face to the OPP. Having dealt with Sgt. Woolley personally, I have gained a better appreciation for the work he and his fellow officers do on a daily basis.

For those of you who enjoyed Sgt. Woolley’s reports, here is a small sampling of some of his memorable comments, courtesy of the Toronto Star: http://www.thestar.com/Article/172790. Enjoy them while you can because it appears we’re headed back to the same ol’ boring police rhetoric most other jurisdictions are accustomed to.

Permalink | Comments (1)

It was refreshing to hear about an MTO truck blitz focused on small commercial trucks yesterday. Too often, small commercial vehicles are overlooked when it comes to enforcing truck safety – and they are frequently the worst violators.

It seems anyone can buy a rickety old cube van and start hauling goods on our highways, with little regard to safety. Of course, I’m not saying all medium-duty operations should be painted with the same brush. Many local P&D companies heed the same attention to detail as the most reputable long-haul fleets. And of course, some long-haul tractor-trailer operators are as guilty of neglecting maintenance practices as the local landscaper with his 1977 cube van.

But the trucks that scare me the most out there are generally not the Class 8 tractors with 53-foot trailers behind them. It’s the 16-ft cube vans owned by Mom and Pop drycleaning shops with some yahoo with a G licence behind the wheel. These are the trucks that seem to have the most problems with wheel-separations and many of their owners seem to forget that basic maintenance is still a requirement on these vehicles.

Yet they can fly right on past the inspection stations and their drivers require no additional training beyond that of an everyday motorist. It’s nice to see these vehicles getting some attention from the truck cops. They’ve slipped through the cracks for far too long.

Permalink | Comments (0)

I was driving along the 401, minding my own business the other day when I nearly got caught up in what NASCAR announcers like to call “The Big One.” It really made me realize how quickly a wreck can occur at highway speeds when drivers aren’t paying attention.

In this case, traffic was fairly light and moving at a good clip. I was driving my Corolla in the middle lane travelling about 110 km/h (I know – slightly above the posted limit, but it’s often safer to travel with the flow of traffic). Most cars were whizzing by in the ‘fast lane’, which was by far the busiest lane on the highway.

I noticed that up ahead, there were brake lights appearing in the fast lane. A valuable skill I learned while getting my A/Z licence was the ability to anticipate the behaviour of traffic by watching what’s going on well ahead of my own bumper. Not surprisingly, few of the cars beside me in the fast lane noticed this until it was much too late. In no time at all, several cars locked up their brakes. Tires squealed, smoke filled the air and cars swerved desperately in an attempt to avoid colliding with the vehicles in front of them.

Some swerved to the shoulder on the left, but to my dismay, a couple of them veered into my lane. It took some evasive driving on my part to avoid a major pileup. I resisted the urge to swerve into the lane on my right, as it happened so quickly that I wasn’t entirely sure there wasn’t another vehicle there. Nonetheless, for a few seconds, there were three cars occupying two lanes with nary an inch between us.

Four-wheelers who don’t pay attention to what they’re doing are a real menace on our highways. This is not groundbreaking news, but when I found myself nearly a victim of their carelessness, it really ticked me off. I see more and more four-wheelers with cell phones glued to their ears and DVDs playing in their minivans. I know I’m preaching to the choir with this posting, as most professional drivers know enough to focus their attention on the task at hand – driving!

But even if you’re paying attention to what you’re doing and driving in a safe and courteous manner, there are no guarantees the guy beside you is doing the same.

Permalink | Comments (0)

Truckers are often villainized in the mainstream news (see my previous blog entry about a column in the St. Catharines Standard for a prime example), so it’s nice when I get a call about a trucker who went out of his or her way to lend a helping hand.

I received one such call this morning. A lady named Alice called from Scarborough to recount an incident that happened between Christmas and New Years Eve a year ago. When travelling to Orillia with her grandchildren, her car ran out of gas. The gas gauge indicated there was plenty of gas left, but it had become stuck, leaving her stranded and worried for the safety of her grandchildren and herself.

Along came a big Dodge diesel pickup truck and out hopped a friendly long-distance trucker to see if she needed help. When they determined the car had run out of gas, he drove the stranded motorists to the nearest gas station (which wasn’t very near at all, Alice says) and then drove them back and put the gas into the car for them.

Alice recalls he was very friendly and when she offered him some money for the gas, he refused to accept it, instead asking her to extend the same courtesy to someone else if the occasion should arise. Alice didn’t get the driver’s name or company he hauls for, but even a year later she remembers his kindness. This simple gesture on his part helped her realize truckers don’t all fall into the stereotype that many would have you believe.

Anyways, if you’re out there, and you know who you are, then Alice would like to extend a belated ‘Thanks.’

Permalink | Comments (0)

One thing that has to be said about Canada’s minority Conservative government, is that it’s not tip-toeing around the issues. While many suspected a minority government would shy away from any controversial issues, Stephen Harper and his Cabinet have made several bold moves during their short reign.

So it makes perfect sense to try to resurrect some old issues that the former government repeatedly refused to address. One such issue that will impact most of you, is an attempt to restore the 80% meal deduction limit for Canadian truckers.

The 80% deduction limit was reduced to 50% in 1994, and that’s where it has remained. This while US truckers have been gradually inched upwards, back towards that 80% limit. The 1994 reduction was aimed at big-spenders in suits and ties who would wine and dine key clients at posh restaurants. Sadly, it was the truckers – those who spend most of their time away from home and have little choice but to eat out while on the road – who were once again caught in the middle.

Here’s an example that shows the impact of the 50% deduction limit: A driver on the road five days a week for 50 weeks of the year with an annual gross income of $50,000 is going to spend $12,750 on meals using the CRA’s receipt-free rate. At the current 50% deductibility rate, the driver will be taxed on $42,125 of taxable income. Using the proposed 80% rate, the driver will be taxed on just $38,300, resulting in a difference of $1,343.

So, if the industry’s lobby groups (in this case the Canadian Trucking Alliance, OBAC and the Teamsters union) are successful in their bid to have the 80% limit restored, it’ll save you an average of over $100 per month. More importantly, it will put you back in line with your US counterparts, who can already claim nearly 80% and will be able to claim the full 80% by 2008.

It’s nice to see OBAC and the CTA working together on this issue. O/Os and carriers don’t have to be constant adversaries, there are many issues they can work on together for the common good. Now, it’s up to you to do your part. Fill out the ‘postcard’ at our Web site (www.trucknews.com/brownbag) and send it in. There’s strength in numbers and here’s our chance to be heard. I sent mine in this morning.

Permalink | Comments (0)

The Christmas season is one of my favourite times of the year and this year has been no exception. Once the hustle and bustle of Christmas shopping was behind us, it was nice to settle down with family and enjoy good company over some Christmas cocktails.

However, each time a transport truck rumbles by on the highway near my house, I am reminded of those of you who cannot be home with your families during this festive season. The store shelves are stocked and the groceries are fresh, thanks to your important contributions. Sadly, too few will take the time to thank a trucker for making sure that’s the case.

So, from my family and I, I thank you all for the work you do around the year. Hopefully, you will be able to make it home for at least part of the Christmas holidays, if not the entire season. The highway can be a lonely place, especially during the holidays. Here’s hoping you find some holiday cheer along the way and get home to your families soon.

Permalink | Comments (0)

The old saying ‘There’s no such thing as bad press’ doesn’t necessarily ring true in the trucking industry. This is an industry that has a bad rap – and for the most part, undeservingly so. Negative stories about the trucking industry appear regularly in mainstream newspapers, and unfortunately many of them are not warranted.

A reader (thanks, Aaron Sweet!) recently forwarded me a column published in the St. Catharines Standard. I was shocked to read the scathing attack on our industry.

Written by Roy Scott, the column blasted truck drivers, categorizing them along with ‘inebriated drivers.’ He suggested law enforcement begin targeting “the jockeys that race these mammoth machines.”

“Regular travel throughout the Golden Horseshoe will provide any driver with ample opportunity to witness the insanity on our major arteries,” he blasted. He went onto say he’s dodged “garbage, stones, metal and large sheets of ice flying from these rigs.” And he also claimed he routinely has to weave through large chunks of rubber from exploded truck tires.

The author must have pretty bad luck. I spend over two hours per day commuting on major highways and only once in my life have I had to dodge anything coming from a transport truck (a tie-down strap that broke off in front of me). At the time that happened, I refused to paint the entire industry with the same brush due to an isolated incident, and I still do today.

“On dark, rainy nights, we’ve all experienced oversized trucks flying past at breakneck speed when we can barely see the pavement. In good weather, it’s worse,” Scott wrote.

When the weather’s bad, I find myself looking for a transport truck to tuck in behind, knowing the professional driver behind the wheel will help guide me to safety through fog, rain or snow. Driving through Saskatchewan on a foggy October morning last fall, a Bison Transport driver helped me carve through particularly dense fog at a safe and reasonable speed.

“They own the road. Trucks follow so closely, it's not safe to make a lane change, or they cut you off making improper lane changes. Then you're blind to anything ahead of you as they have just created a wall on wheels,” Scott wrote. “In the recent past, I have been cut off numerous times, at least twice causing me to swerve to the left to avoid a collision. Fortunately, my diversion did not cause one, but these narrow escapes cause enormous stress.”

The tirade went on and on and on. Perhaps I should just shrug off such drivel and accept the fact Johnny Four-Wheeler will never come to accept the fact truck drivers are, for the most part, the safest drivers on the highway and the drivers of our economy. But I take these attacks personally, and never get sick of throwing the following stats out there: Accidents involving heavy-duty trucks have decreased over 20% in the past 10 years (despite a steady increase in truck traffic); Only 2% of highway crashes involve tractor-trailers – and of those, the truck driver is at fault less than 20% of the time.

But unfortunately, sometimes the facts get in the way of a good story. I thought about responding directly to the author of the article, but was unable to locate his e-mail address. I once e-mailed the editor of the Calgary Sun after that paper published an equally unfounded column berating truckers and the industry in general. To her credit, the editor ran my response in the next day’s paper, along with the comment ‘Thanks for offering a different perspective.’ Not only that, but she took me up on an offer to spend a few hours in a truck to see what you folks have to go through on a daily basis.

My buddy Ron Singer of Ron Singer Truck Lines took her out in his Western Star gravel truck for an afternoon and she stepped out of that truck with a new appreciation for professional drivers. It’s often been said that all motorists should be required to spend some time in a transport truck before they get their licence. Maybe that holds true for journalists as well.

Permalink | Comments (0)

Since its inception, Truck News has been a trusted source of information for all-things trucking. The publication has broken many big stories throughout the years and has helped truckers learn about and understand changes that affect them.

I've pored through 25 years of back issues and assembled this list of the 25 most significant news stories to be covered by Truck News. It's nearly impossible to compile a list of this nature that everyone agrees on, so take the rankings with a grain of salt.

Not everyone will agree on where each of the following news stories should fit in, but enjoy the stroll through memory lane and if you feel compelled to discuss any of these events in more detail, feel free to add your two cents!

Continue reading "The top 25 stories in 25 years" »

Permalink | Comments (0)

Imagine being able to haul loads from point-to-point in the US, reducing empty miles and improving your vehicle utilization. If a trio of forward-thinking transportation professionals have their way, the practice of cabotage will be permitted – at least on a small scale trial basis for starters.

Bob Dolyniuk, general manager of the Manitoba Trucking Association, Barry Prentice, professor at the University of Manitoba Transportation Institute and Richard Beilock, professor at the University of Florida, jointly developed the idea after a casual discussion at a conference nearly two years ago. The further they explored the benefits of allowing cabotage within Canada and the US, the more excited they grew about the idea.

“It started as an offhand idea, but the more I thought about it, the more I realized it was both feasible and probably the best way to nudge North America toward the kind of system it must eventually have,” Beilock recently told Truck News. He feels North America will eventually have no choice but to embrace cabotage, if it wishes to remain competitive globally, and Prentice agrees.

“It seems incongruous to me that we have the free movement of goods but not in the trade of transportation services that are necessary to complete our continental exchanges,” Prentice says. “If North America wishes to maintain its competitiveness with Europe, then we have to accept free trade of transportation services.”

A more detailed article on the subject will appear in the November issues of Truck News and Truck West. But if you want to read the proposal itself, and even comment on it, visit the trucknews.com main page and select the link that read Open Prairies Proposal in the Special Supplements section (on the right hand side of the page, below the blog).

The Call for Papers link allows you to comment on the proposal and it’s hoped a healthy debate may result. Here’s your chance to have your say.

Permalink | Comments (0)

It seems truck hijackings are happening more and more frequently these days. It’s a scary thought, especially since the thieves seem to be getting more brazen. And they’re so organized that they often get away with their crimes.

Recently, Donald Woods was found dead in his truck in Pickering. He was last seen at the 10-Acre Truck Stop in Belleville late on Wednesday, June 21. It’s believed he left Belleville early on June 22. He was hauling a refrigerated trailer full of chicken. Chicken! It appears he lost his life over a load of chicken.

Is there anything these thieves won’t steal? I have spoken with several drivers at truck shows who have expressed an increased level of concern for their safety. Many know or have worked with a driver who has found himself staring down the barrel of a gun and ordered into the sleeper cab while his load is pillaged.

What can be done about it? These thieves aren’t your typical thug – they can disengage a GPS tracking system in seconds and be on their way. A crackdown on this type of cargo theft is needed before more drivers are killed. Hopefully, when arrests in this case and others are made, the judge will toss the book at them. It should be treated no less severely than a home invasion.

If you have any information about Donald Woods, contact the Durham Regional Police Homicide Unit at 905-579-1520. Detective David Henderson at ext. 5326 or Det. Mitch Martin at ext. 5405 would like to hear from you.

If you can’t help out in that case, please feel free to share your thoughts on the increasing risk of cargo theft and truck hijackings here. I know it’s something that would be on the back of my mind at all times given recent events. Be careful out there.

Permalink | Comments (0)

Trucking can be a thankless job. The independent nature of trucking means that often nobody is there to witness the little things you do on a daily basis to get your loads where they’re headed on time in a safe and efficient manner.

When the load doesn’t make it on time – often for reasons beyond your control – that’s when you hear about it. Throw into the mix the many tasks that come with owning your own truck and it’s a wonder any loads get delivered. Maintaining your own rig, doing the necessary bookkeeping and running the business is a full-time job unto itself.

That’s why it’s a pleasure to be able to recognize one outstanding owner/operator each year through our annual Owner/Operator of the Year Award. We’ve been doing it for 13 years now and I’ve been fortunate enough to be involved in the process for six of them.

It’s always a pleasure to pore through the entries and it’s comforting to know there are some truly remarkable owner/operators out there. Guys and gals who not only find the time to drive day in and day out while managing their own business, but also contribute to their community and help out when called upon at the scene of an accident. Who says truckers are no longer the knights of the highway? They should read through the nominations we receive each year.

I only wish we could award more than one owner/operator per year, as there are many deserving candidates. We’ll be making this year’s presentation Friday night (July 21) at the Fergus Truck Show at about 8:30 p.m. on the main stage. I hope many of you can make it out to help us recognize one of the industry’s finest owner/operators.

Permalink | Comments (0)

Anti-smoking activist Heather Crowe died on Monday without ever having smoked a cigarette. You may recognize her from the TV commercial where she spoke of her battle with lung cancer – a disease she was stricken with after working in a smoky restaurant for nearly 40 years.

Meanwhile, next week Ontario will essentially become a smoke-free province – in public places at least. The Smoke-Free Ontario Act promises to “ban smoking in all enclosed public places and workplaces as of May 31, 2006, including restaurants, bars, schools, private clubs, sports arenas, entertainment venues, work vehicles and offices.”

Which brings us to trucking. Since your truck is your workplace, will the smoking ban extend to the cab of your truck?

What if you’re an owner/operator? In that case your cab is essentially your home away from home – shouldn’t you be allowed to light up in the privacy of your own cab? Will it depend on whether you’re on- or off-duty? Whether the wheels are rolling or not rolling? It appears the answers to these questions are shrouded in a cloud of smoke.

While the province of Ontario has reported in the media that its anti-smoking law should supercede any federal mandates, the Ontario Trucking Association has argued that the federal rules (which exempt vehicles) should be enforced.

I can imagine how we’ll find out the final answer. You’ll be driving along the 401, minding your own business when one of Ontario’s finest will flash his lights and pull you over. Panic will strike as you wonder if your load has somehow come loose? But nope, the officer will instead hand you a hefty ticket for driving along with the window down with a cirgarette butt dangling from your fingers.

Just what this industry needs – more regulation! Of course, there are times when smoking in trucks should be forbidden. If you’re a company driver and share your vehicle with others, for instance. No amount of air freshener will remove the smell of smoke from the upholstery and non-smokers shouldn’t have to deal with that while on the job. It’s also not unreasonable for a company to enforce a strict no-smoking policy in all its own trucks – after all, who can blame them from wanting to protect the interior from burn marks and smokestains?

As far as the owner/operator is concerned, however, I hope they don’t get burned by this new rule. Stopping on the side of the road several times a day to have a cigarette is not only inefficient – it’s downright dangerous. While the intentions of the Smoke-Free Ontario Act are admirable, I’m of the opinion longhaul truckers should be exempt from this rule.

And this is coming from a non-smoker.

Permalink | Comments (5)

Trucknews.com and Shell Canada Products are offering visitors to the blog a free Shell ROTELLA SuperRigs 2006 Calendar.

While it may already be March, this calendar is a true collector’s item. It features some of the snazziest work trucks from across North America. The images will truly blow you away. The trucks featured in the calendar were participants in the ROTELLA SuperRigs competition, held at the 75 Chrome Shop in Wildwood, Fla. The calendar features 14 stunning photographs of the trucks, which were shot on location in the Sunshine State.

While the calendar is highly sought after - even with a retail price of $10.95 - Shell Canada Products has made a number of these calendars available for free to visitors to the Trucknews.com blog!

If you would like to receive one, be one of the first 150 people to send your mailing address to me at jmenzies@trucknews.com. Please enter ‘Calendar Offer’ in the subject line. We’ll take care of the rest and Shell will send you this collector’s item.

Permalink | Comments (7)

I just returned from a couple days in Houghton, Michigan where I had the chance to drive some trucks on hard-packed snow and ice. Driving on snow and ice may not sound like a lot of fun to most of you – but this was a controlled environment and the worst I could do was stick it into a snow bank (which happened, by the way, but fortunately not while I was behind the wheel).

The purpose of the trip was to test first-hand Bendix’s ABS-6 with ESP (an electronic stability system).

I have some experience with electronic stability systems, but this was the first time I had the chance to drive ESP-equipped vehicles myself. Sliding sideways at 35 mph in a mixer truck is not an enjoyable feeling. However, with the ESP system activated, I was able to maintain control of the vehicle when pulling the exact same maneuver. Technology is a wonderful thing!

You have to admire the engineers who work on systems like this. Those involved in cold-weather testing spend weeks at a time working outside in remote regions where the temperature is well below freezing. The weather in Houghton certainly made Toronto feel balmy in comparison.

A full report about the experience will be in the April issues of Truck News and Truck West.

Permalink | Comments (2)

Well, the weather in Florida is gradually becoming more Florida-like and I think we’ve finally hit the 70s. The news here has also gotten hotter. Two significant announcements have come out of TMC thus far.

Firstly, Volvo announced it will cost about US$7,500 more for a Class 8 tractor in 2007. I had the chance to sit down with Mack president and CEO Paul Vikner yesterday morning and he agreed that the number Volvo threw out there is reasonable. It’s important to remember that it’s not only the cost of the engine that is reflected in that increased purchase price, but also the changes that must be made to the chassis to accommodate the new engines. The good news is – the engines should be fuel-neutral. Of course, much of that depends on application, and more information about that will be available in the April issue of Truck News.

The other major news announced at TMC is that the American Trucking Associations is launching its own speed limiter campaign – one that would see truck speeds mechanically limited to 109 km/h (68 mph) right across the U.S.

There were plenty of critics – myself included – that suggested U.S. carriers would never comply with the OTA’s plan to mechanically limit truck speeds in Ontario. Now, with the ATA launching a similar initiative, things are about to get very interesting.

Having said that, a report down here in the U.S. suggests that American carriers serving Ontario are concerned about the OTA’s proposal to limit truck speeds.

Bill Joyce, president of the New York State Motor Truck Association, told Transport Topics that U.S carriers serving Ontario “will have to pay a repair shop to have the (governor) microchip recalibrated to comply with the rule and have the chip recalibrated again when they cross back into the United States so they can drive the allowed speed limit on roads here.”

I’m not sure that’s true, as I saw a Cummins rep demonstrate how to adjust the governor first-hand and it was a pretty simple process. It took less time than it would take to order a coffee and all he needed was a handheld palm-pilot. But I’m confused as to why the ATA and OTA wouldn’t come up with a common proposal and launch it in unison? Why 105km/h versus 109 km/h and why November versus February? Harmonizing these two policies would have gone a long way towards bringing government onside – but then again, from what most of you are saying, it’s just as well it didn’t happen that way. It will be very interesting to see what driver reaction is from south of the border. Those of you who drive down there can respond to this blog entry and let us know what you think.

The ATA announcement certainly adds a new dynamic to the debate and it will be very interesting to see how it plays out.

A full report about these latest developments will be available in the April issue of Truck News – and we fully expect to have a decision from the Ontario MoT by that time as well.

See ya at the next stop,
James

Permalink | Comments (11)

Welcome to the Truck News blog! The addition of the blog to trucknews.com not only makes the Web site more interactive, but it will also provide you with a look behind the scenes of Canada's largest trucking newspaper.

In addition to providing thought-provoking industry commentary, we will also share some of our own stories about our experiences covering the industry and a look at the lighter side of the job we do.

I am writing my first blog entry from St. Petersburg, Florida...but you wouldn't know it by the weather. I am here to cover the ATA's Technology and Maintenance Council meetings. If you've never been to TMC, it's quite a show. In fact, technical editor John G. Smith will be accompanying me on the trip to ensure we can properly cover all this show has to offer.

I must admit, I was pleased to hear the show was taking place in Florida. It is February after all, and although there's little time to relax here, the prospect of soaking up a few rays definitely appealed to me. But when the plane landed and they opened the doors a gale-force wind swept through the aircraft. I feared I had mistakenly boarded a flight to Winnipeg. It is cold and miserable outside, but alas, I'm here to work anyways.

There's a lot going on at TMC this year. Many of the industry's top suppliers are hosting press conferences over the next few days. I'm a bit surprised, considering the Mid-America Trucking Show (the industry's favourite venue to debut new products) is just around the corner. I take it as a sign of a healthy industry. Check for updates all week on www.trucknews.com to find out what's new and what's coming up down the road.

As I await the first of these press conferences, the waves are crashing against the shore outside my hotel room. The taxi driver who drove me here said not everyone is upset about the weather. "You should have brought your wet suit," he said. "Surf's up!" Maybe next time I'll check the weather report. One final note about this unseasonable weather we're experiencing here. The same gale-force winds that swept through the plane when the doors were opened made for a hairy landing. A poor kid two rows ahead of me proceeded to fill not one - but two air sickness bags on our descent. It's the first time I've seen one of those things used. I felt bad for the kid, but worse for the poor old codger who happened to be seated next to him.

Well, that's all for now. I hope you check back regularly for updates from the Truck News editorial staff. Despite the weather, this promises to be an exciting week for the industry with plenty of new product announcements expected. In addition, technical guru John G. Smith will be scribbling furiously in his notepad during the technical sessions. The April issue of Truck News and Truck West will carry a full report from him.

See ya at the next stop,
James

Permalink | Comments (1)