What People Think
 |
 |
54% For, 46% Against
Take Action
| Vote on this Bill | |
  |
For |
  |
Against |
| Speak Out | |
  |
Comment on this Bill |
  |
Alert Your Friends and Colleagues |
  |
Write Your Representative in Congress |
| Save & Share | |
 |
del.icio.us |
 |
Digg |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Yahoo! |
H.R. 5977, The TRUCC Act (14 comments ↓)
H.R. 5977 would amend title 49, United States Code, to require a motor carrier, broker, or freight forwarder that collects a fuel surcharge to disclose and pay the fuel surcharge to the person responsible for bearing the cost of the fuel.
()
Learn More
Trackback URL: http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/trackback/110_HR_5977.html
RSS Feeds for This Bill
Keep yourself updated on user contributions and debates about this bill! (Learn more about RSS.)
Visitor Comments
Bruce
If I am reading this proposed bill correctly - they are basically requesting full disclosure of profits on a transaction. If so, what an absurd request. If this passes, will we then be able to request this of all other transactions? Is this only being proposed of this industry because of rising fuel costs? Not a reasonable request in my opinion.
trucker
Bruce you may have a good point, however the plight that cost bearers experience are that the rate to move freight has not changed in response to the increase in fuel spikes. Yes, we can implement fuel surcharge with existing customers. However they are not going to be our customers if we increase the rate to pay outbound and inbound costs. It appears that Brokers are claiming a flat rate and keeping the fuel surcharge they collect. So when an operator goes out with a load and delivers that load. He either takes a load at a rate that would not cover his expenses to even get back home or to make the point that this rate won't do refuses to move it. Then there is an even greater loss. Eventually, he or she is out of business. There is a 5 of 6% commission on real estate brokers and some kind of transparency should be applied to freight brokers.
jsb
If this bill passes it is the end of capitalism as we know it! Trucking companies don't have to take cheap freight. I can't even book loads for less than $2.00 per mile anymore. What a load of BS!
Have fun trying to get back home after all the brokers are out of business!
We're gonna do things they say can't be done
I am all for this bill. I have trucks of my own. It is not fair that you brokers are keeping most of the fuel surcharge, you did not pay for the fuel. I can care less what you charge for the load, but don't keep the fsc. Alot of trucking companies think they are funny, now that the fuel prices are so high they can shut down alot of their company trucks and use o/o's and not have to pay for fuel, repairs,drivers,or anything else.And then want to keep most of the fsc, that is not fair in anyway that you look at it. And for your comment jsb have fun finding drivers when fuel reachs 6-7 dollars a gallon and you want to keep half the fsc they will not be able to afford it, and there for will go out of buisness and so won't the rest of you selfish people who think they can steal other peoples money.
Gerry
many companies guarantee fuel reimbursement to independents through mileage contracts (including fuel pay for deadhead) and hope to collect enough from their shippers to cover this guarantee. Shippers don't pay for deadhead either. Many companies feel its unfair to put the owner operator in the middle of having to haul for shippers/brokers who don't pay their fair share. By forcing a passthrough will cause companies to cancel guarantees to drivers and drivers will be left with 100$ pass through but will get zero relief for shippers who pay nothing! A real bad deal!
Von
A broker that keeps the fsc, is nothing less than a thief!! You all are not paying for the fuel or hauling the load, what in your thought process tells you, thst you are entitled to any our the FSC?
5Mouths2Feed
Anyone that takes any part of the FSC other than the person it is intended for is already breaking the law. The FSC has only one purpose. Capitalism falls into the frieght rate category not the FSC. If you oppose this then you are a thief and should be held accountable for your actions
Ian
Brokers aren't the problem here, The companies you work for aren't passing the fuel surcharges on to drivers.
You don't have to haul cheap freight!!
This is a great start to a socialism!!
wrongway
I support this bill i could care less how much the broker makes on the line haul the problem is with the flat rate is there is no fuel surcharge posted so therefore the companies that have trucks leased on are not treating us fairly on the break down once the company starts taking a hit on the line haul rate then they will start saying no to the brokers and therefore the brokers will demand more money from the shippers s
mort
The money needs to go to the trucks. If you was in any other profession you wouldn't want someone taking some of your pay just because they could get away with it. Just say no to cheap frieght is great but how do you then try to pay your bills. Some of you people act as if a truck driver has enough that they can just sit back and do nothing.
mort
If the brokers are keeping the fss then they most ceertainly are the problem
Transportation Services Consumer
If the problem is that fuel surcharges aren't being passed on to the carrier, then a bill should be proposed to address that problem. This bill goes too far in calling for total transparency of a broker's transaction. This is not good for the trucker, this is not good for the broker, and it is not good for the consumer. Yes transportation brokers profitting from FSC is a bad thing, however passing bad legislation is a worse thing, and that is what HR 5977 is.
Paul
This bill is not the answer. This is OOIDA's way of trying to put brokers out of business. And its a bad move.
Mort, no one from a brokerage office is forcing carriers to haul loads at a specific rate. You can Always say no, its too cheap and either negotaite or move on to another broker and another load.
This bill is far to big brother. If this bill passes you will see rates drop even further as carriers who also broker freight will be capturing rate data and dropping rates to put others out of business to gain market share.
This is a free enterprise economy. This bill is wrong.
If you really want to raise rates have a nationwide strike. All trucks park for 3 days. Every broker I know supports this it helps the greater good of us all.
Without the transportation industry our country stops. Strike and bring the rates up for us all.
Frederick (SilverSurfer) Schaffner
There apparently seems to be some miss-understanding to this issue. The fuel surcharge was created after the '73 trucker strike. This legislated the person paying the fuel bill was to receive the fuel surcharge, only it was neglected to protect the person paying the fuel bill with transparency to ensure they weren't getting robbed. These TRUCC bills corrects that mistake from '73.
This is an issue of companies and brokers keeping a portion, or all, of a charge which is dedicated to the person paying the fuel cost. Fuel surcharge is not a freight rate. It's tacked onto the bill based upon fuel price variances. Brokers don't pay the fuel costs, which is what the surcharge is for, and the law states the surcharge portion of the freight bill goes to the person paying the fuel costs.
I vote for passage of these bills. It's time to protect professional drivers...the backbone of our economy.
Safe Trails and God Bless,
www.theamericandriver.com