TT (Trucker Topic) >> Truckers Vow Work Stoppage Monday

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

[Fair Use: For Education and Research Purpose Only]

TRUCKERS VOW WORK STOPPAGE MONDAY

Independent drivers are protesting high fuel rates and want pay hikes.

02/20/00

FAIRLESS HILLS (AP) -- More than 230 independent truckers in the Delaware Valley voted over the weekend to keep their rigs off the road Monday to protest skyrocketing diesel fuel costs and pay rates that have not kept pace.

The truckers, from 65 different companies in Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware, said they will refuse to load their trucks until they get a 30 percent rate hike as well as a 15 percent fuel surcharge from customers.

"We simply cannot afford to get in the trucks on Monday," said independent trucker Jacquie Medaglia at Saturday's meeting in Bucks County. "We can't afford to run down the highway."

The action follows trucker protests last week at the statehouses in New Jersey and Rhode Island and a demonstration by hundreds of truckers Friday that slowed traffic to a crawl outside cargo companies' doors in Elizabeth, N.J.

The truckers say fuel costs, equipment costs and road and bridge tolls have risen but the rates paid to owner-operator truckers have remained the same since the industry was deregulated in the 1980s.

Now, they say, diesel oil prices have gone up about 30 percent in the last three weeks to about $2 a gallon.

"I've been shut down for two weeks, because I can't work for nothing," said Larry Binner, an owner-operator with Falcon. "When I started 26 years ago, it wasn't much, but it was a living. Now the prices have all gone up 200 percent."

http://www.mcall.com/html/news/regional/a1_truck.htm

-- Dee (T1Colt556@aol.com), February 20, 2000

Answers

Truckers are just feeling first what we'll all feel later if we don't get those systemic problems addressed.

-- Okie Dan (brendan@theshop.net), February 20, 2000.

Well waaaaf***ingwaaaa. Farmers and ranchers have been living like this for umpteen years. The bread basket of America should have grabbed their (so called) 'fellow citizens' by the short and curlies years ago. Truckers think *they* can't make a living? Maybe they should speak with the waitress making $2.10 PER HOUR that was stiffed by the First Lady for her tip! I'm sure Billary and Hill will help them out just as soon as they've completed their federal land grab, eliminated the 2nd amendment and have saved every child with your tax dollars at the expense of your own children. They're very busy people.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), February 20, 2000.

This strike is in addition to those in Main and Miami. Shipping on the East coast is going down. "Death by a thousand cuts"

-- JOHN (LITTMAJT@AOL.COM), February 20, 2000.

Will,

This thread is about the trucker strike. It is not about the President, his wife, land grabs, the plight of the farmer, or the hopitality industry preponderance to pay less than the minimum wage.

While your input is valuable, it is a distraction on this thread. If you or your husband are truckers or know something about the strike, please contribute. If you you would like to discuss other issues, please start your own thread.

I am sure you can now find some way to waste all our time by posting a long-winded arguement describing how each of these issues is somehow related to the strike (isn't everything related to tranportation?). Believe me, your issues are related to the strike only as is the alpha to the omega.

Y2K Focused Today,

-- Uhhmmm... (JFCP81A@aol.com), February 20, 2000.


Got preps?

-- (ladybuckeye_59@yahoo.com), February 20, 2000.


I'd be curious to know what the current rate IS for these truckers that a 30% increase in their rate is now a demand IN ADDITION to the 15% surcharge for fuel. As another thread indicated, the railroads once moved supplies for less than the trucks, but the trucks took over that market when they could move supplies for less. I suspect this move could push the independent truckers right out of the market as railroads and non-independents fill the gap.

-- Anita (notgiving@anymore.thingee), February 20, 2000.

Some of the reasons why the railroads lost market share to truckers include items not directly related to price. Truckers were faster, offered direct to end user delivery (as opposed to a mile long train whic needs blocking at a classification yard, and final delivery by a local switch run). Not all industries or factories have rail connections, either. Railroads were oriented to hauling large amounts of basic commodities, which weren't so time-dependent. Trucks were more flexible in routes, delivery, and pricing, which better suits the JIT schedules of many industries today. Still, cost per mile is cheaper with rail, if it's mode fits your needs.

-- Sure M. Hopeful (Hopeful@future.com), February 20, 2000.

Hopeful:

Good points there. I'm thinking, however, that if rail could take the goods from the Delaware Valley to somewhere/anywhere near the final destination, LOCAL truckers at the destination end could pick up the goods and continue.

-- Anita (notgiving@anymore.thingee), February 20, 2000.


My Dear Uhhmmm,

Truely you are inflicted with "tunnel vision". It all, every part of the economy is related to truckers (and the prices of fuel). To chastise one for noting a part of the economy, and not your part in particular. Is the height of immaturity and is an self admission (publically made) of having a limited view point on those things directly affecting your life.

I would suggest, strongly. That you re-examine the linkages between JIT supply, demand, and available supplies on hand. The relationship between the three. And the effect that any and all of them WILL have on your life in the near future.

Because they will deffinately (the lack of them) have an effect...With-in months now.

"As for me...I shall finish the Game"!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Shakey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

-- Shakey (in_a_bunker@forty.feet), February 20, 2000.


Anita- It is common practice for truckers to be the recipients of rail freight and haul it to the desired location. The significant benefit of rail transportation is in its ability to transport enormous volume of freight(i.e. coal). Rail will be a major means of transport for many years to come.

-- NoJo (RSKeiper@aol.com), February 20, 2000.


Shakey,

Since my original plea was one of focus, it is not productive that I continue this divisive discourse. However, I respect your opinion and so, against my better judgement, take this space and implore you to reread my post and that of Will's.

I well understand that transportation and oil impact our everyday lives in every way possible. However, that does make every response to the trucker strike an appropriate post. Since transportation and the reliability of our energy delivery system impact all else in the economy, we could not well discuss anything related to these two topics without discussing everything - unless we focus on the subject at hand.

In this instance, I think it a waste of others' time to discuss political ideologies and macroeconomics. I hope you will not consider this carefull stewardship of my time a sign of immaturity. Likewise, I hope you will not think it uncaring if I wish to read about the subject of this post - the upcoming trucker strike.

Sincerely,

-- Uhhmmm... (JFCP81A@aol.com), February 20, 2000.


As usual, proof is in the proofing:

However, that does -NOT- make every response to the trucker strike an appropriate post.

-- Uhhmmm... (JFCP81A@aol.com), February 20, 2000.


Sure M Hopeful,

Railroads aint what they used to be. Massive mergers such as Union Pacific and Southern Pacific along with the CSX/Conrail mess have created huge shipping problems. Ask Kansas wheat farmers. The railroads are jammed up. Many small rail companies have long since failed and had their rails removed. Here in my neck of the woods all the abandoned rail road right of ways are being turned into bike paths. Great for the walkers and cyclists; bad for shipping freight.

I question the sanity of a nation that destroys it's rail infrastructure. Perhaps this fuel price mess will give sagging rail companies a boost.

-- Trafficjam (road@construction.ahead), February 20, 2000.


I asked two trucker friends about rail vs. trucking to deal with increased fuel costs.

They said that 1) rail is too busy as it is, and 2) that they don't think things like lettuce or strawberries could be delivered on time by rail consistently.

Neither has any predictions as to what is going to happen if fuel continues going up.

-- S. Kohl (kohl@hcpd.com), February 20, 2000.


The cost of goods purchased will increase. INFLATION. PERIOD. And of course, food and fuel cost are not included in the CPI. Leaving these 2 items out reduces retirement income to the elderly.

It's going to be a long trip.

Still prepping....

Tommy

-- Tommy Rogers (Been there@Just a Thought.com), February 20, 2000.



As far as rail and trucking go, this will change the equation of economics in choosing which method of shipment. UPS is very much the barometer to watch. They use long-distance trucks out to the point where it's more economical to put the trailer on a train and haul it to someplace near it's destination.

A few years back it was more economical to truck freight up to six hundred miles, then use trains beyond that.The railroads have worked hard to try and get that down to five hundred miles. If fuel costs keep rising like they have, it could quickly get down to between three and four hundred miles.

But if you look at a map you'll find that most of the major east coast cities are closer than that. So look for the easten seaboard, especially the northeast, to be impacted by the rising costs of truck transportation.

WW

-- Wildweasel (vtmldm@epix.net), February 20, 2000.


Uhhhhmmmmm:

You're nearly as full of yourself as my little buddy Decker. Decker? or just a Decker wannabe? Truckers=strike=unions=liberals=WHINNING. I prefer posts that are short, honest and to the point. Don't like it? Tough titties......I'll leave the long winded, big brained phoo-phoo pontificating to you. thankyouverrrrymuch

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), February 21, 2000.


This is the beginning of the "Domino Effect" or "cascading failure" effects of the Computer Century Date Bug, in the petroleum industry. How many more "dominoes" are going to fall?

-- Robert Riggs (rxr.999@worldnet.att.net), February 21, 2000.

Will,

Thanks,

-- Uhhmmm... (JFCP81A@aol.com), February 21, 2000.


Uhhm:

In a way, Will is saying something similar to what I'm saying. My dad was a steelworker. Every other year my entire young life the steel mills went on strike because the unions voted for it. My dad was one of the guys who only joined the union when they tried to kill him because he wouldn't.

So...every other year we had NO income for several months. Yeah...when they went back to work they had an increase. Did it make up for the lack of income? Not that *I* could see. Did they price themselves out of the market? You betcha. In the steel industry, Japan filled the gap and, for the most, the steel mills in the U.S. simply shut down because they couldn't compete.

My point was/is that these independent truckers in New England could very well find themselves pricing themselves out of a livelihood altogether with their demands of a 30% increase over and above a 15% fuel surcharge.

-- Anita (notgiving@anymore.com), February 21, 2000.


Anita,

I would much prefer to hear about the knock-on effects of such a trucker stopage opon the economy; the Y2K related causes of the stopage explored in more detail; the likely insider speculation on its duration, and any possible futute trucker actions. In fact, one of the reasons I visit this forum is for its unique insider information and the ability of its participants to separate truth from fiction.

The anti-union argument gets rather tepid after the fourth time, and no side ever brings new info to the table. On the other hand, I rarely get my wishes in this regard, and your post is at least tangentally related to the thread.

Perhaps you should seek consulting fees as an interpreter for Will. Do you think you could review her posts in the future? Focus counts, just please do not edit her wry sense of humor.

Pedantically Speaking,

-- Uhhmmm... (JFCP81A@aol.com), February 22, 2000.


Gee, Uhhmmm:

I had to look to see who started this thread. By golly, it was Dee, and I didn't see any "rules" for what thoughts might be included.

My thoughts may not fit into that for which YOU'RE looking, Uhhmmm, but it sure seems to me that "union or non" when folks seek a 30% increase over and above a 15% fuel surcharge, SOMEBODY is going to say, "I'll look into alternatives before I support THAT type of increase."

-- Anita (notgiving@anymore.com), February 23, 2000.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ