The Motor Carrier Act of 1980 Set New Standards in Trucking Industry

The Motor Carrier Act of 1980 Set New Standards in Trucking Industry

The Motor Carrier Act of 1980 set new standards in trucking industry. Before the legislation, licenses had only 18,000 truckers and by 1990, this number increased to 45,500. First only a half of carriers had a right to move freight freely within 48 states and in 1990 – 20,000. It was a competition between railroads, air freight companies, the post office, and with package delivery companies and it brought significant savings to shippers and consumers. The result was the growth of low cost, non-union carriers and the creation of non-union subsidiaries of major firms. As a result, this Motor Carrier Act saves approximately $10 billion annually. Not only has deregulation benefited American consumers; but allowing manufacturers to reduce inventories, move their products more quickly and be more responsive to customers has significantly aided American industry in competing internationally. Until the passage of the Negotiated Rate Act in 1993, however, a regulatory mishap interfered with free competitive pricing. Lower rates were negotiated due to the competition, which were often failed to file with the ICC. Shrewd lawyers and bankruptcy trustees then sued shippers for the difference between the filed rate and the lower negotiated one and the Supreme Court upheld the suits. Since carriers were responsible for filing rates with the Commission, shippers often could not know whether the agreed upon rate would hold up in court or whether they might be liable for additional sums. The 1993 Act ruled out collecting for undercharges made prior to October, 1990, and limited claims for later undercharges. The Trucking Industry Regulatory Reform Act abolished the need to file rates at all and, at the same time, eliminated the issue for future traffic. Although the 1994 Act stripped away most remaining controls over freight motor carriers, they were still required to seek licenses from the federal government. The Department of Transportation does certify air carriers but such firms are inherently involved in interstate activities and the states have little expertise in this area. Most other industries need no government approval and those that do are typically licensed by state authorities. The operation of a trucking firm should require only that the operator have sufficient liability insurance to protect the public from accidents. In any case, accreditation can be handled at the state level; it need not to be a federal responsibility. The ICC still regulates the classification of goods moving by truck and, in a recent case, refused to go along with a higher classification that would have boosted rates. The law also requires the filing of tariffs set collectively and rates on household goods. Congress should clear away the remaining obstacles to a free market by abolishing any requirement to file rates or the classification of goods, while annulling any antitrust exemption for collectively set tariffs. Liability should be part of the price-quality package agreed upon by trucker and shipper. Since truckers may be unaware of the real value of goods being hauled, under current law they must build into their prices an insurance premium to cover any potential loss. Companies shipping less costly goods must pay a higher price and purchase a more expensive insurance policy than they need. Others may prefer to self-insure. The matter of insurance is best left to the market. On the other hand, most states specify liability requirements and both motor carriers and truckers prefer that a nationwide federal standard be maintained.

The social partners’ relationships should be based on national legislation, economic conditions, the prevailing political climate and the expectations of their members. Periods of transition have raised many difficult issues that are best addressed by negotiation and consultation. Social dialogue is a powerful tool that has helped solve difficult problems and it can foster social cohesion. But it cannot be taken for granted. Developing a reflex for consultation and negotiation takes time and commitment. It also needs social partners that have the capacity and will to engage in the process responsibly, and the strength and flexibility to adjust to the contemporary circumstances and exploit new opportunities. The State has an important role in enabling and fostering all forms of social dialogue. It needs to create an environment in which the contributions of employers, workers and other groups are demanded and valued. Despite its proven worth, social dialogue is far from being fully utilized. As well as facing familiar problems, social dialogue has been undermined by a number of recent developments that have tended to favor individual over collective action. More complex and flexible types of employment have loosened many social ties and have widened disparities between various groups in society. Together with high levels of unemployment, these widening gaps have weakened the solidarity that previously sustained social dialogue.

All these problems often lead to the strikes and lockouts. On the October, 7 2002 in New York there was one of such strikes. The reason was the following: “If the West Coast port shutdown continues for another week, New York’s trucking industry will begin to lose business, the head of New York’s largest trucking industry trade group.” The feeling of the effects of the West Coast port lockout was still too early for East Coast truckers. But if the situation had not been changed, shippers would have begun losing business as shipments from the west stop. Containers that were unloaded at West Coast ports came east becoming their load on rail flatcars. The trucking industry picked up the containers at railheads and after that they delivered these containers to their last destination. There still were containers unloaded before the shutdown of 29 West Coast ports, coming east by rail. When that flow of traffic cleaned up, things changed. If it had started to have an impact, it could be a real disaster. That could mean that the West Coast port shutdown would not mean more traffic for the Port of Albany. Shippers had begun diverting traffic to the New York-New Jersey Port Authority terminal in Elizabeth, New Jersey and other East Coast ports prior to the shutdown, so more traffic were coming into New York’s port.

custom essays term papers Buy essay

The only case when the strike could influence Albany’s port was if the International Longshoremen’s Association, which represents East Coast dockworkers staged strike to the side of the West Coast longshoremen. If the ships had started to come in there could have been a strike. But the situation was peacefully solved.

Unfortunately these strikes are taking place all the time. And for stopping this and enveloping this business of course it is necessary to establish special laws guarding the rights of the truckers, then to improve special services that produce the safety of the truck cars and their drivers.