Post by hopeulikit on Oct 16, 2008 13:41:58 GMT -5
Pacific Shipper
10-13-08
Congress approves fuel surcharge pass-along
Legislation that, for the first time, would require fuel surcharges to be passed through to owner-operators and other drivers who purchase fuel has won final approval in Congress.
The scope of the legislation is limited — it applies only to surcharges on shipments moved under Defense Department freight contracts. But it could give a push to broader fuel surcharge bills now in both chambers of Congress.
The limited fuel-surcharge legislation approved by Congress and expected to be signed by President Bush was included in the Defense Department authorization bill at the request of the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, which also is seeking a broader bill covering all commercial freight transactions.
The legislation requires Defense Department “to the maximum extent practicable” to pay fuel surcharges to the person paying for the fuel. The OOIDA claims that unscrupulous brokers, shippers and trucking companies are collecting surcharges and not passing them on to the independent truck drivers who buy the fuel.
When truckers are paid using taxpayer dollars, as they are under Defense Department, not passing through 100 percent of a fuel surcharge amounts to taxpayer fraud, said Rod Nofziger, OOIDA’s director of government affairs. “To folks on Capitol Hill, it wasn’t a hard sell to tell them that this is important and necessary legislation to get passed,” Nofziger said. “It’s got to be a hard argument to make that it’s not fraudulent for some intermediary to pocket a small or large part of a fuel surcharge.”
Commercial carriers move roughly 95 percent of the military’s surface freight, Nofziger said.
The legislation was opposed by a coalition of trucking company, broker and business associations, led by the Transportation Intermediaries Association, the American Trucking Associations, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Industrial Transportation League. Earlier this year, the groups formed a “Coalition to Stop Re-Regulation of the Trucking Industry.”
At least one of those critics, however, said he could live with the version of the surcharge bill that ended up in the defense authorization bill. Several provisions that businesses objected to were stripped from the final version.
As originally proposed in the House, the bill would have required disclosure of “any fuel-related adjustment by making the amount of the adjustment publicly available,” as well as a call for enforcement regulations. Those requirements were dropped from the bill.
“We are pleased with the way things turned out,” said Robert A. Voltmann, the TIA’s president and chief executive. “The legislation is not self-implementing, there is no enforcement provision, there is no publication provision. These were all traps we feared would create a tariff regime and a filed-rate doctrine.
“We think we were very successful in changing the legislation, and my hat’s off to OOIDA for getting as far as they did and getting it on the table,” he said. “We were opposed to it. But the way this town works is you can be opposed to something right up until it becomes law, and then you learn to live with it.”
The battle, however, is far from over. Some in the industry say the broader surcharge bill in Congress may be difficult to stop, following the passage of the provision included in the Defense Department bill and a changing attitude toward regulation among lawmakers brought on by the financial crisis on Wall Street.
“I think re-regulation no longer has the same connotation it once had,” said Mike Regan, chief executive of transportation consulting firm TranzAct Technologies in Elmhurst, Ill. “There is going to be this push to say, ‘We need to protect the little guy.’ In this case, the members of OOIDA are the little guy.”
Regan foresees a broader push for regulations in Congress. “It’s not good,” he said. “But let’s face it, you’re not going to be able to stop it.”
10-13-08
Congress approves fuel surcharge pass-along
Legislation that, for the first time, would require fuel surcharges to be passed through to owner-operators and other drivers who purchase fuel has won final approval in Congress.
The scope of the legislation is limited — it applies only to surcharges on shipments moved under Defense Department freight contracts. But it could give a push to broader fuel surcharge bills now in both chambers of Congress.
The limited fuel-surcharge legislation approved by Congress and expected to be signed by President Bush was included in the Defense Department authorization bill at the request of the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, which also is seeking a broader bill covering all commercial freight transactions.
The legislation requires Defense Department “to the maximum extent practicable” to pay fuel surcharges to the person paying for the fuel. The OOIDA claims that unscrupulous brokers, shippers and trucking companies are collecting surcharges and not passing them on to the independent truck drivers who buy the fuel.
When truckers are paid using taxpayer dollars, as they are under Defense Department, not passing through 100 percent of a fuel surcharge amounts to taxpayer fraud, said Rod Nofziger, OOIDA’s director of government affairs. “To folks on Capitol Hill, it wasn’t a hard sell to tell them that this is important and necessary legislation to get passed,” Nofziger said. “It’s got to be a hard argument to make that it’s not fraudulent for some intermediary to pocket a small or large part of a fuel surcharge.”
Commercial carriers move roughly 95 percent of the military’s surface freight, Nofziger said.
The legislation was opposed by a coalition of trucking company, broker and business associations, led by the Transportation Intermediaries Association, the American Trucking Associations, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Industrial Transportation League. Earlier this year, the groups formed a “Coalition to Stop Re-Regulation of the Trucking Industry.”
At least one of those critics, however, said he could live with the version of the surcharge bill that ended up in the defense authorization bill. Several provisions that businesses objected to were stripped from the final version.
As originally proposed in the House, the bill would have required disclosure of “any fuel-related adjustment by making the amount of the adjustment publicly available,” as well as a call for enforcement regulations. Those requirements were dropped from the bill.
“We are pleased with the way things turned out,” said Robert A. Voltmann, the TIA’s president and chief executive. “The legislation is not self-implementing, there is no enforcement provision, there is no publication provision. These were all traps we feared would create a tariff regime and a filed-rate doctrine.
“We think we were very successful in changing the legislation, and my hat’s off to OOIDA for getting as far as they did and getting it on the table,” he said. “We were opposed to it. But the way this town works is you can be opposed to something right up until it becomes law, and then you learn to live with it.”
The battle, however, is far from over. Some in the industry say the broader surcharge bill in Congress may be difficult to stop, following the passage of the provision included in the Defense Department bill and a changing attitude toward regulation among lawmakers brought on by the financial crisis on Wall Street.
“I think re-regulation no longer has the same connotation it once had,” said Mike Regan, chief executive of transportation consulting firm TranzAct Technologies in Elmhurst, Ill. “There is going to be this push to say, ‘We need to protect the little guy.’ In this case, the members of OOIDA are the little guy.”
Regan foresees a broader push for regulations in Congress. “It’s not good,” he said. “But let’s face it, you’re not going to be able to stop it.”