<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">With international rail volume down by double-digit percentages in 2023, chassis providers have an opportunity to reflect on the struggles of 2021 and 2022 and adjust their networks ahead of the next surge.</div>

With international rail volume down by double-digit percentages in 2023, chassis providers have an opportunity to reflect on the struggles of 2021 and 2022 and adjust their networks ahead of the next surge.

3686497_FI.jpg

<div>Marine chassis providers in the United States say shippers are returning equipment more promptly, easing the pressure on capacity and allowing lessors to evaluate how to better handle the next volume spike. Chassis providers believe there are lessons to be learned from the pandemic-induced surge in volume and resulting equipment shortages, including obtaining more forecast data, holding more equipment in reserve to flex up capacity when necessary and watching certain inland cities where equipment shortages were common in 2021 and 2022 more closely. “We have an opportunity to take a deep breath, to take a step back to recalibrate where...

Marine chassis providers in the United States say shippers are returning equipment more promptly, easing the pressure on capacity and allowing lessors to evaluate how to better handle the next volume spike. Chassis providers believe there are lessons to be learned from the pandemic-induced surge in volume and resulting equipment shortages, including obtaining more forecast data, holding more equipment in reserve to flex up capacity when necessary and watching certain inland cities where equipment shortages were common in 2021 and 2022 more closely. “We have an opportunity to take a deep breath, to take a step back to recalibrate where we positioned our chassis and examine how we realign them, so that we have the right amount of fleet in the right markets to meet our customers’ needs,” Val Noel, COO of TRAC Intermodal, told the Journal of Commerce. International intermodal rail volume, a primary feeder of inland marine chassis demand, began to fall in 2022 and has continued to decline this year. Trains in North America moved 2.4 million ocean containers in the first four months of 2023, down 12.7% year over year, according to the Intermodal Association of North America. As a result, street dwells for US chassis have fallen to between six and eight days through April, down from eight to 10 days in the same four-month period in 2022, according to data from TRAC and DCLI. Both chassis lessors said street dwells are on par with 2020 levels in some cities but remain at 2021 levels in other markets. “Container volumes have generally returned to pre-pandemic levels, and street dwell has declined significantly, creating surplus chassis inventory across our entire network,” Mike O’Malley, senior vice president of government and public relations for DCLI, told the Journal of Commerce. “DCLI continues to invest in our fleet with refurbished chassis, radial conversions and hard-wire lights to meet future customer demand. We have also expanded our footprint in key markets and enhanced our ability to relocate chassis to where they are most needed.” Better data is the key The three largest US marine chassis lessors — TRAC, DCLI and Flexi-Van Leasing — emphasized the potential benefits of the US Department of Transportation’s Freight Logistics Optimization Works (FLOW) program , an information-sharing initiative aimed at improving supply chain efficiency. Flexi-Van COO Than Seeds said he hopes FLOW will give chassis lessors access to enough data to “better anticipate the next shock” and take a proactive — rather than reactive — approach to congestion and fleet management. Ocean carriers already share data with the major chassis lessors and railroads, but the lead times are much shorter than what the FLOW program can offer. Those shorter lead times create logistical challenges for chassis providers, who depend on truckers to reposition chassis between cities. Often, higher volume in ports and rail terminals corresponds to heightened demand for trucking, making it more challenging to procure capacity. DCLI said that having volume forecasts up to 90 days in advance, as proposed by FLOW, will make it easier to reposition chassis to ports and rail hubs ahead of time, rather than scrambling after the cargo has already arrived. Noel said better forecasts could have helped chassis providers avoid unexpected shortages in Omaha, Neb.; Kansas City and St. Louis, Mo. ; Houston; and several Ohio cities in 2021 and 2022. “From an [international intermodal] perspective, these are some of the markets where we have to be laser-focused going forward because they gave us the most challenges during the pandemic,” Noel said. Creating a buffer All three equipment providers said they are reevaluating their prior strategies around carrying excess chassis in case container volumes spike suddenly. Like many shippers prior to the pandemic, chassis providers generally do not want too much inventory at any given time. But like shippers that suffered the consequences of just-in-time inventory strategies in the form of stockouts and lost sales, lessors are embracing a just-in-case fleet model. DCLI said it is taking a “market-by-market” approach and building a “reserve fleet” in regions where flexibility is important. TRAC said it will focus on increasing its reserve fleet in cities where railroads pre-mount containers onto chassis at the terminal before a driver arrives to pick them up, known as “wheeled” operations. BNSF Railway, CSX Transportation and Union Pacific Railroad operate wheeled terminals across several major US markets. Wheeled terminals in Chicago and Dallas suffered some of the worst congestion and chassis shortages in 2021 and 2022. “In a wheeled environment, having enough fleet on-site in a volume upswing is critical just to keep fluidity going,” Noel said. “In a grounded environment, it's important, but it doesn't bring the entire supply chain to a halt like it can in a wheeled environment.” Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com and follow him on Twitter: @arijashe .

Drayage

US chassis lessors learning from pandemic surge as demand wanes

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">A range of vendors have emerged in recent years with a singular focus on improving coordination of truckload arrivals, keying on load prioritization and performance metrics.</div>

A range of vendors have emerged in recent years with a singular focus on improving coordination of truckload arrivals, keying on load prioritization and performance metrics.

Feature image

<div class="phx-topic">Fragmentation in the truckload market is behind many of the challenges that have prevented shippers, brokers and carriers from coordinating more effectively on appointment scheduling. But technology that assists all three parties, especially software focused on system connectivity and appointment performance, is driving progress in this long-neglected corner of the industry. <div class="wrapper-narrow float-right-element"><img src="/images/phoenix/6094563_0.1.jpg"></img></div>In particular, software is aiming to help receivers coordinate with carriers by pulling data from their respective backbone systems, whether it’s a purchase order management or warehouse management system used by a shipper or a transportation management system used by a carrier. Since more than one in five truckloads is brokered, technology is also geared towards letting the broker manage appointment coordination. “Connectivity is really the solution to that problem, not necessarily saying one specific group has to own it,” Tom Curee, president of appointment scheduling software vendor Qued, said at the Journal of Commerce’s Inland Distribution Conference in Chicago last week. “Because then you've got two other groups that are pointing the fingers at one group, and I just don't think that ever ends.” Taking responsibility for the challenges of appointment scheduling remains an issue, largely because of the inherent fragmentation of the industry. That manifests itself in a lack of clarity over who takes the lead in setting up the appointment, and who invests in technology to improve the process. “It is a challenge for everyone, but it impacts different parties to different degrees,” Jesse Buckingham, CEO of truckload automation vendor Vooma, said at the Inland conference. “If you're running a warehouse, you're really thinking about the optimization of your labor, and that might actually mean having a bunch of trucks stacked up outside. You want to be a good shipper, but being a good shipper might not actually matter quite as much to your bottom line.” A carrier, meanwhile, will focus on whether a driver is waiting at a facility. ”That can really destroy the utilization of that driver’s time and that asset,” Buckingham said. “If you’re a broker, you know the difference between scheduling a really good appointment and a bad one can be $100 or $200 of margin.” <h3>Proper incentives </h3>For Buckingham, that is a matter of incentive structure, and his assertion is that the newer, technology-focused approaches to the appointment scheduling problem are best aimed at brokers, “who, frankly, care a little bit more.” But Tony Botos, vice president of operations at Capstone Logistics and a former shipper, said at the conference that shippers have a huge incentive to invest in scheduling technology. He said Capstone “saw over a million dollars in labor savings” by being able to reduce the number of customer service representatives responsible for coordinating carrier arrivals at receiving facilities. ”And it’s not too capital intensive,” Botos said. “You can quickly establish this type of software in your environment and get the systems to talk to the TMS. The [return on investment] on this is less than six months in most cases.” One way he navigated those competing priorities was to focus on appointment performance. ”That’s maybe adjusting that appointment from 60 minutes to 65 minutes to 67 minutes,” Botos said. Deema Adama, CEO of scheduling software company Bigger Picture, said a platform should be able to gauge not just how an appointment is scheduled but also the effectiveness of those appointments. “Are we making the right decisions when we're setting those target times based off of performance that we're learning from these interactions?” Adama said at the Inland conference. “And the warehouse can judge how they are allocating labor based off of the trends of capacity coming in and out of their warehouse.” <h3>Prioritization problem </h3>One other element that vendors are focused on: allowing shippers to prioritize appointment-setting based on the demands of individual shipments. For instance, if an appointment is available at 9 am, it’s likely that a shipper or broker will grab a time slot regardless of how important it is for that load to use that appointment. “There may be an inbound load of Styrofoam material that isn't going to actually halt production for something that you're doing,” Curee said. “Meanwhile, that buffalo seasoning actually has to be here at 9 am because the buffalo seasoning is going to stop the line. And the receiver doesn’t have an appointment until 3 pm. Well, we would have taken 9 am if we would have had access to it, but appointment scheduling is nothing more than a glorified ‘first-come, first-served.’” Contact Eric Johnson at <a href="mailto:eric.johnson@spglobal.com">eric.johnson@spglobal.com.</a></div>

Fragmentation in the truckload market is behind many of the challenges that have prevented shippers, brokers and carriers from coordinating more effectively on appointment scheduling. But technology that assists all three parties, especially software focused on system connectivity and appointment performance, is driving progress in this long-neglected corner of the industry. In particular, software is aiming to help receivers coordinate with carriers by pulling data from their respective backbone systems, whether it’s a purchase order management or warehouse management system used by a shipper or a transportation management system used by a carrier. Since more than one in five truckloads is brokered, technology is also geared towards letting the broker manage appointment coordination. “Connectivity is really the solution to that problem, not necessarily saying one specific group has to own it,” Tom Curee, president of appointment scheduling software vendor Qued, said at the Journal of Commerce’s Inland Distribution Conference in Chicago last week. “Because then you've got two other groups that are pointing the fingers at one group, and I just don't think that ever ends.” Taking responsibility for the challenges of appointment scheduling remains an issue, largely because of the inherent fragmentation of the industry. That manifests itself in a lack of clarity over who takes the lead in setting up the appointment, and who invests in technology to improve the process. “It is a challenge for everyone, but it impacts different parties to different degrees,” Jesse Buckingham, CEO of truckload automation vendor Vooma, said at the Inland conference. “If you're running a warehouse, you're really thinking about the optimization of your labor, and that might actually mean having a bunch of trucks stacked up outside. You want to be a good shipper, but being a good shipper might not actually matter quite as much to your bottom line.” A carrier, meanwhile, will focus on whether a driver is waiting at a facility. ”That can really destroy the utilization of that driver’s time and that asset,” Buckingham said. “If you’re a broker, you know the difference between scheduling a really good appointment and a bad one can be $100 or $200 of margin.” Proper incentives For Buckingham, that is a matter of incentive structure, and his assertion is that the newer, technology-focused approaches to the appointment scheduling problem are best aimed at brokers, “who, frankly, care a little bit more.” But Tony Botos, vice president of operations at Capstone Logistics and a former shipper, said at the conference that shippers have a huge incentive to invest in scheduling technology. He said Capstone “saw over a million dollars in labor savings” by being able to reduce the number of customer service representatives responsible for coordinating carrier arrivals at receiving facilities. ”And it’s not too capital intensive,” Botos said. “You can quickly establish this type of software in your environment and get the systems to talk to the TMS. The [return on investment] on this is less than six months in most cases.” One way he navigated those competing priorities was to focus on appointment performance. ”That’s maybe adjusting that appointment from 60 minutes to 65 minutes to 67 minutes,” Botos said. Deema Adama, CEO of scheduling software company Bigger Picture, said a platform should be able to gauge not just how an appointment is scheduled but also the effectiveness of those appointments. “Are we making the right decisions when we're setting those target times based off of performance that we're learning from these interactions?” Adama said at the Inland conference. “And the warehouse can judge how they are allocating labor based off of the trends of capacity coming in and out of their warehouse.” Prioritization problem One other element that vendors are focused on: allowing shippers to prioritize appointment-setting based on the demands of individual shipments. For instance, if an appointment is available at 9 am, it’s likely that a shipper or broker will grab a time slot regardless of how important it is for that load to use that appointment. “There may be an inbound load of Styrofoam material that isn't going to actually halt production for something that you're doing,” Curee said. “Meanwhile, that buffalo seasoning actually has to be here at 9 am because the buffalo seasoning is going to stop the line. And the receiver doesn’t have an appointment until 3 pm. Well, we would have taken 9 am if we would have had access to it, but appointment scheduling is nothing more than a glorified ‘first-come, first-served.’” Contact Eric Johnson at eric.johnson@spglobal.com.

Logistics Technology News

Surface

Truckload

Truck brokers

Supply chain

Connectivity the key to bypassing hurdles in truckload appointment scheduling

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Gov. Gavin Newsom has until Sunday to sign or veto a bill that ocean carriers and terminal operators say would derail current and future attempts to automate cargo-handling operations in the name of reducing stress on the state’s power grid. </div>

Gov. Gavin Newsom has until Sunday to sign or veto a bill that ocean carriers and terminal operators say would derail current and future attempts to automate cargo-handling operations in the name of reducing stress on the state’s power grid.

<div class="phx-topic">Whether or not ports in California can continue to automate seemingly hinges on whether Gov. Gavin Newsom signs legislation that would, in effect, render the equipment unusable. SB 34 is a state bill that would ban current and future automated or remotely operated technology used at California ports from plugging into the state’s power grid. The legislation, which is supported primarily by dockworkers, has already been approved by both houses of the California Legislature and awaits action by Newsom, who has until Sunday to sign or veto the bill. But terminal operators and shipping lines say the bill would undermine the billions of dollars already invested in marine terminal automation and likely threaten future investment in cargo-handling efficiency. Mike Jacob, president of the Pacific Merchant Shipping Association (PMSA), which represents terminal operators and container lines that call at West Coast ports, told the Journal of Commerce Wednesday the bill’s supporters are pitching it as an environmental effort to reduce demand on the power grid, when in reality it is intended to block any automation that labor interests see as threatening to dockworker jobs. “This is ILWU’s priority bill,” Jacob said of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU). Jacob also said the bill is vague and its language is so expansive that it could impact present and future funding from local, state and federal sources for port-related equipment, including charging infrastructure for zero-emission cargo-handling equipment and battery-electric trucks. Long Beach Container Terminal and TraPac in Los Angeles are the West Coast’s only fully automated container terminals. The APM terminal in Los Angeles is partially automated. So far, more than $2 billion has been invested in developing automated facilities, zero-emission cargo handling equipment and charging infrastructure in Southern California. The ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach did not respond to requests for comment. <h3>Bill ‘undermines’ labor agreement </h3>The Pacific Maritime Association (PMA), which represents terminal operators and shipping lines in negotiating coastwide labor contracts with the ILWU, emphasized in a Sept. 18 letter to Newsom that SB 34 “directly undermines the collective bargaining agreement between PMA and the ILWU.” PMA noted that dating back to the 2008 coastwide contract, the labor agreements “explicitly permitted automation in exchange for steep wage hikes, $100,000 pensions and fully employer-paid healthcare.” “...Any proposed changes should be addressed through the collective bargaining process, not through legislation that circumvents the contract,” PMA said. The presidents of ILWU Locals 13, 63 and 94 in Southern California recently distributed an “Urgent: Call to Action” flyer to union membership to publicly push labor’s support for SB 34 and to urge Newsom to sign the bill. “Protect good union jobs, strengthen our ports, keep California competitive,” the flyer read. An ILWU spokesman said Wednesday union leaders were not available for comment. SB 34 also comes at an inopportune time in that the ports and port stakeholders in Southern California last month reached an agreement with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) to work cooperatively in the coming months to develop a plan to further reduce port-related emissions. The agreement would replace the <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/la-lb-likely-to-work-with-regulator-on-emissions-cutting-plan-for-ports-6084550">port Indirect Source Rule (ISR)</a> that the AQMD had originally proposed. Meanwhile, Jacob said it is difficult to gauge Newsom’s position on SB 34. “There’s still no clear indication as to where it is going,” Jacob said. Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at <a href="mailto:bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com">bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Whether or not ports in California can continue to automate seemingly hinges on whether Gov. Gavin Newsom signs legislation that would, in effect, render the equipment unusable. SB 34 is a state bill that would ban current and future automated or remotely operated technology used at California ports from plugging into the state’s power grid. The legislation, which is supported primarily by dockworkers, has already been approved by both houses of the California Legislature and awaits action by Newsom, who has until Sunday to sign or veto the bill. But terminal operators and shipping lines say the bill would undermine the billions of dollars already invested in marine terminal automation and likely threaten future investment in cargo-handling efficiency. Mike Jacob, president of the Pacific Merchant Shipping Association (PMSA), which represents terminal operators and container lines that call at West Coast ports, told the Journal of Commerce Wednesday the bill’s supporters are pitching it as an environmental effort to reduce demand on the power grid, when in reality it is intended to block any automation that labor interests see as threatening to dockworker jobs. “This is ILWU’s priority bill,” Jacob said of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU). Jacob also said the bill is vague and its language is so expansive that it could impact present and future funding from local, state and federal sources for port-related equipment, including charging infrastructure for zero-emission cargo-handling equipment and battery-electric trucks. Long Beach Container Terminal and TraPac in Los Angeles are the West Coast’s only fully automated container terminals. The APM terminal in Los Angeles is partially automated. So far, more than $2 billion has been invested in developing automated facilities, zero-emission cargo handling equipment and charging infrastructure in Southern California. The ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach did not respond to requests for comment. Bill ‘undermines’ labor agreement The Pacific Maritime Association (PMA), which represents terminal operators and shipping lines in negotiating coastwide labor contracts with the ILWU, emphasized in a Sept. 18 letter to Newsom that SB 34 “directly undermines the collective bargaining agreement between PMA and the ILWU.” PMA noted that dating back to the 2008 coastwide contract, the labor agreements “explicitly permitted automation in exchange for steep wage hikes, $100,000 pensions and fully employer-paid healthcare.” “...Any proposed changes should be addressed through the collective bargaining process, not through legislation that circumvents the contract,” PMA said. The presidents of ILWU Locals 13, 63 and 94 in Southern California recently distributed an “Urgent: Call to Action” flyer to union membership to publicly push labor’s support for SB 34 and to urge Newsom to sign the bill. “Protect good union jobs, strengthen our ports, keep California competitive,” the flyer read. An ILWU spokesman said Wednesday union leaders were not available for comment. SB 34 also comes at an inopportune time in that the ports and port stakeholders in Southern California last month reached an agreement with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) to work cooperatively in the coming months to develop a plan to further reduce port-related emissions. The agreement would replace the port Indirect Source Rule (ISR) that the AQMD had originally proposed. Meanwhile, Jacob said it is difficult to gauge Newsom’s position on SB 34. “There’s still no clear indication as to where it is going,” Jacob said. Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com .

Port News

North American ports

Longshore labor

Maritime

Fate of future automation at California ports in governor’s hands

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The average monthly year-over-year decline in imports from October through February is almost 16%, according to the latest Global Port Tracker.</div>

The average monthly year-over-year decline in imports from October through February is almost 16%, according to the latest Global Port Tracker.

<div class="phx-topic">Monthly US containerized imports will slide below 2 million TEUs and be at a year-over-year deficit at least through February due to an early peak season driven by tariff frontloading and as importers contend with new tariffs yet to come, a major retail group said Wednesday. The average monthly year-over-year decline in imports from October through February is significant — almost 16%, the National Retail Federation (NRF) and Hackett Associates revealed in their latest Global Port Tracker (GPT). “This year’s peak season has come and gone, largely due to retailers frontloading imports ahead of reciprocal tariffs taking effect,” Jonathan Gold, NRF’s vice president for supply chain and customs policy, said. “New sectoral tariffs continue to be announced, but most retailers are well-stocked for the holiday season and doing as much as they can to shield their customers from the costs of tariffs for as long as they can.” The latest GPT forecasts sub-2 million TEUs in imports for at least the next five months: October (1.97 million TEUs), November (1.75 million TEUs), December (1.72 million TEUs), January (1.87 million TEUs) and February (1.77 million TEUs). October would be the first month since June to see imports below 2 million TEUs. The monthly projections for the fourth quarter are up about 1% from the forecasts made in September’s GPT. In September, US import volumes — which have not yet been finalized — are projected to reach 2.12 million TEUs, unmoved from <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-retailers-upgrade-import-forecast-but-still-expect-q4-decline-6077875">forecasts made last month</a> but down 6.6% compared with last year. August US import volumes came in at 2.32 million TEUs, unchanged from last year but up 1.7% from projections made last month. Full-year imports are forecast at 24.79 million TEUs, down 2.9% from 2024. “Many large companies preemptively imported goods to build up inventories, but as those stockpiles are depleted, the full inflationary impact of the tariffs will become apparent,” Hackett Associates founder Ben Hackett said. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="16bac55d-49bc-45ea-8386-312c19837f9b"></dynamic-object></div>From January through July, US retailers have kept only about 1.3 months of inventory on hand, according to the US Census Bureau. “Ongoing volatility in US tariff policy is creating significant economic uncertainty, with trade volumes expected to see unpredictable shifts over the next four to six months,” Hackett said. As tariff uncertainty stifles US demand, August imports from China were down 4.8% month over month and 11% on the year, according to PIERS, a Journal of Commerce sister product within S&amp;P Global. And as imports drop, Chinese producers are turning to customers in other countries to buy their products, said Jon Monroe, who serves as an adviser to forwarders. “They’re pivoting elsewhere,” Monroe told the Journal of Commerce. The Global Port Tracker covers the ports of Los Angeles/Long Beach, Oakland, and Seattle and Tacoma on the West Coast; New York/New Jersey, the Port of Virginia, Charleston, Savannah, Port Everglades, Miami and Jacksonville on the East Coast; and Houston on the Gulf Coast. Contact Laura Robb at <a href="mailto:Laura.Robb@spglobal.com">laura.robb@spglobal.com</a>.  Senior Editor Bill Mongelluzzo contributed to this report. </div>

Monthly US containerized imports will slide below 2 million TEUs and be at a year-over-year deficit at least through February due to an early peak season driven by tariff frontloading and as importers contend with new tariffs yet to come, a major retail group said Wednesday. The average monthly year-over-year decline in imports from October through February is significant — almost 16%, the National Retail Federation (NRF) and Hackett Associates revealed in their latest Global Port Tracker (GPT). “This year’s peak season has come and gone, largely due to retailers frontloading imports ahead of reciprocal tariffs taking effect,” Jonathan Gold, NRF’s vice president for supply chain and customs policy, said. “New sectoral tariffs continue to be announced, but most retailers are well-stocked for the holiday season and doing as much as they can to shield their customers from the costs of tariffs for as long as they can.” The latest GPT forecasts sub-2 million TEUs in imports for at least the next five months: October (1.97 million TEUs), November (1.75 million TEUs), December (1.72 million TEUs), January (1.87 million TEUs) and February (1.77 million TEUs). October would be the first month since June to see imports below 2 million TEUs. The monthly projections for the fourth quarter are up about 1% from the forecasts made in September’s GPT. In September, US import volumes — which have not yet been finalized — are projected to reach 2.12 million TEUs, unmoved from forecasts made last month but down 6.6% compared with last year. August US import volumes came in at 2.32 million TEUs, unchanged from last year but up 1.7% from projections made last month. Full-year imports are forecast at 24.79 million TEUs, down 2.9% from 2024. “Many large companies preemptively imported goods to build up inventories, but as those stockpiles are depleted, the full inflationary impact of the tariffs will become apparent,” Hackett Associates founder Ben Hackett said. From January through July, US retailers have kept only about 1.3 months of inventory on hand, according to the US Census Bureau. “Ongoing volatility in US tariff policy is creating significant economic uncertainty, with trade volumes expected to see unpredictable shifts over the next four to six months,” Hackett said. As tariff uncertainty stifles US demand, August imports from China were down 4.8% month over month and 11% on the year, according to PIERS, a Journal of Commerce sister product within S&P Global. And as imports drop, Chinese producers are turning to customers in other countries to buy their products, said Jon Monroe, who serves as an adviser to forwarders. “They’re pivoting elsewhere,” Monroe told the Journal of Commerce. The Global Port Tracker covers the ports of Los Angeles/Long Beach, Oakland, and Seattle and Tacoma on the West Coast; New York/New Jersey, the Port of Virginia, Charleston, Savannah, Port Everglades, Miami and Jacksonville on the East Coast; and Houston on the Gulf Coast. Contact Laura Robb at laura.robb@spglobal.com .  Senior Editor Bill Mongelluzzo contributed to this report.

Tariff uncertainty to keep lid on US import growth until spring: retailers

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The fresh disruptions come as the Asia-Europe trade lane continues to present shippers with the worst schedule reliability among the major ocean corridors. </div>

The fresh disruptions come as the Asia-Europe trade lane continues to present shippers with the worst schedule reliability among the major ocean corridors.

<div class="phx-topic">Rotterdam and Antwerp are facing increasing congestion this week as strike action from auxiliary companies significantly disrupts container handling operations at Europe’s two busiest ports. Flemish pilotage services have only been working during office hours since Monday in a dispute over recent federal pension reforms, severely disrupting vessel arrivals and departures in the Belgian hubs of Antwerp and Zeebrugge. In Rotterdam, container lashing companies embarked on a two-day strike on Wednesday in a dispute over working conditions and wages. The strike is affecting all major terminals in Rotterdam: APM Terminals Maasvlakte II, Hutchinson Ports Delta II, ECT Delta and Rotterdam World Gateway. A Maersk advisory said the suspension of services was significantly impacting operations, given that lashing is critical to the safe securing and release of containers onboard vessels. Kuehne + Nagel echoed Maersk’s concerns in an advisory of its own, warning that in addition to the impact on container vessel handling, the 48-hour strike at Rotterdam will significantly disrupt inland container transport operations. “These developments place further strain on the port, which was already significantly affected by last weekend’s storm-related closures,” Kuehne + Nagel noted. The strikes add further pain to the overall Asia-Europe trade lane that continues to present shippers with the worst schedule reliability among the major ocean corridors. On-time performance recorded in September was 23%, according to industry analyst Xeneta. While the performance is a slight improvement on the 17% reliability seen in August, persistent port congestion across the main North Europe gateways is a factor keeping schedule reliability at dismal levels. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="cce7dbee-2611-492e-9c9e-325c0aa7d3fe"></dynamic-object></div>Destine Ozuygur, product marketing manager at Xeneta, noted that port congestion and operational hurdles were major contributing factors to the poor on-time performance, but if they were to disappear overnight it would still not resolve poor reliability issues on Asia-Europe. “Longer transits and ensuing injection of larger-capacity vessels is the defining factor here,” Ozuygur told the Journal of Commerce. “Port issues or tricky alliance handovers do serve to exacerbate those underlying problems, but they wouldn’t help reliability recover if resolved.” <h3>Gemini reliability showing signs of ‘wear’ </h3>The poor Asia-Europe schedule reliability is also taking a toll on the Gemini Cooperation between Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd. Although the alliance continues to lead Xeneta’s global reliability tables, Gemini is showing shows signs of wear on Asia-Europe, closing September with 81% of on-time arrivals. Gemini was launched in February <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/tpm25-gemini-hitting-90-reliability-target-as-new-network-rolls-out-habben-jansen-5955794">on the premise of delivering 90%-plus schedule reliability</a> to the market. Ozuygur said none of the other alliances came close to matching Gemini’s performance across any trade, but how long Gemini could hold out under these conditions remained unclear. “Asia-Europe [poor reliability] affecting all alliances and carriers negatively shows us that there are some factors even a remodeled hub-and-spoke can’t effectively outmaneuver,” she said. “While their clever model doesn’t make [Gemini] impervious to these negative reliability factors, it’s more likely that they would hit a limit of wear and maintain that, still significantly above the other alliances,” Ozuygur added. The Premier Alliance has continued to decline against its global second-quarter average of 26%, closing the third quarter with 21% on-time performance, Xeneta data shows. Ocean Alliance fell to 24% globally in the third quarter, the worst on-time performance of the longstanding alliance since its 27% average in the fourth quarter of 2022. Contact Greg Knowler at <a href="mailto:greg.knowler@spglobal.com">greg.knowler@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Rotterdam and Antwerp are facing increasing congestion this week as strike action from auxiliary companies significantly disrupts container handling operations at Europe’s two busiest ports. Flemish pilotage services have only been working during office hours since Monday in a dispute over recent federal pension reforms, severely disrupting vessel arrivals and departures in the Belgian hubs of Antwerp and Zeebrugge. In Rotterdam, container lashing companies embarked on a two-day strike on Wednesday in a dispute over working conditions and wages. The strike is affecting all major terminals in Rotterdam: APM Terminals Maasvlakte II, Hutchinson Ports Delta II, ECT Delta and Rotterdam World Gateway. A Maersk advisory said the suspension of services was significantly impacting operations, given that lashing is critical to the safe securing and release of containers onboard vessels. Kuehne + Nagel echoed Maersk’s concerns in an advisory of its own, warning that in addition to the impact on container vessel handling, the 48-hour strike at Rotterdam will significantly disrupt inland container transport operations. “These developments place further strain on the port, which was already significantly affected by last weekend’s storm-related closures,” Kuehne + Nagel noted. The strikes add further pain to the overall Asia-Europe trade lane that continues to present shippers with the worst schedule reliability among the major ocean corridors. On-time performance recorded in September was 23%, according to industry analyst Xeneta. While the performance is a slight improvement on the 17% reliability seen in August, persistent port congestion across the main North Europe gateways is a factor keeping schedule reliability at dismal levels. Destine Ozuygur, product marketing manager at Xeneta, noted that port congestion and operational hurdles were major contributing factors to the poor on-time performance, but if they were to disappear overnight it would still not resolve poor reliability issues on Asia-Europe. “Longer transits and ensuing injection of larger-capacity vessels is the defining factor here,” Ozuygur told the Journal of Commerce. “Port issues or tricky alliance handovers do serve to exacerbate those underlying problems, but they wouldn’t help reliability recover if resolved.” Gemini reliability showing signs of ‘wear’ The poor Asia-Europe schedule reliability is also taking a toll on the Gemini Cooperation between Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd. Although the alliance continues to lead Xeneta’s global reliability tables, Gemini is showing shows signs of wear on Asia-Europe, closing September with 81% of on-time arrivals. Gemini was launched in February on the premise of delivering 90%-plus schedule reliability to the market. Ozuygur said none of the other alliances came close to matching Gemini’s performance across any trade, but how long Gemini could hold out under these conditions remained unclear. “Asia-Europe [poor reliability] affecting all alliances and carriers negatively shows us that there are some factors even a remodeled hub-and-spoke can’t effectively outmaneuver,” she said. “While their clever model doesn’t make [Gemini] impervious to these negative reliability factors, it’s more likely that they would hit a limit of wear and maintain that, still significantly above the other alliances,” Ozuygur added. The Premier Alliance has continued to decline against its global second-quarter average of 26%, closing the third quarter with 21% on-time performance, Xeneta data shows. Ocean Alliance fell to 24% globally in the third quarter, the worst on-time performance of the longstanding alliance since its 27% average in the fourth quarter of 2022. Contact Greg Knowler at greg.knowler@spglobal.com .

International ports

Strike action piles new bottlenecks on Europe’s two busiest ports

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The US Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case, and without a clear ruling from the court, brokers, shippers and manufacturers will face ongoing uncertainty, potentially weakening the national economy, writes trucking expert Matthew Leffler.</div>

The US Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case, and without a clear ruling from the court, brokers, shippers and manufacturers will face ongoing uncertainty, potentially weakening the national economy, writes trucking expert Matthew Leffler.

<div class="phx-topic">The case of Montgomery v Caribe Transport II, LLC holds significant implications for the transportation and logistics industry, particularly for large shippers and manufacturers. The US Supreme Court on Oct. 3 granted certiorari — meaning it has agreed to hear the case — for the first time on the issue of broker liability. <div class="wrapper-narrow float-right-element"><img src="/images/phoenix/6094010_0.1.jpg"></img></div>This legal dispute centers on the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act (FAAAA), a law designed to streamline trucking regulations across state lines. A key issue has emerged regarding the interpretation of the FAAAA’s safety exception, creating uncertainty that could disrupt the supply chain. <h3>Background of the case </h3>In 2018, Shawn Montgomery was stopped on the side of the road in Illinois in his tractor-trailer, when Yosniel Varela-Mojena, driving a tractor-trailer for the motor carrier Caribe Transport II, LLC, veered off the roadway and collided with Montgomery’s vehicle, causing severe injuries. The shipment was arranged by C.H. Robinson, which had hired Caribe to handle the transport. Montgomery sued Varela-Mojena, Caribe, and Robinson alleging negligent hiring of the carrier and driver, as well as vicarious liability for their actions under state tort law. The district court granted summary judgment to Robinson on these claims and the 7th Circuit affirmed in January 2025, citing FAAAA. FAAAA was enacted to preempt a patchwork of state laws and ensure a uniform regulatory framework for interstate trucking. However, a disagreement has arisen over the “safety exception,” which allows states to regulate motor vehicle safety. The question is whether this exception extends to freight brokers, intermediaries who arrange transportation but do not operate vehicles. The 6th and 9th Circuits have ruled that state tort claims, such as negligent hiring of motor carriers, can proceed against brokers. In contrast, the 7th and 11th Circuits have determined that such claims are preempted. <h3>Impact on large shippers and manufacturers </h3>Large shippers and manufacturers, such as those in the retail and automotive industries, depend on brokers to connect their goods to the trucking network. If brokers face varying liabilities depending on the location of a truck accident, it can potentially lead to increased costs or service disruptions for large companies. And with over 95% of motor carriers operating 10 trucks or fewer, those relying on brokers may face challenges. To mitigate the challenges posed by liability, brokers would likely need to make significant changes, many of which would drive costs up for consumers and shippers alike. For example, brokers may increase their fees to cover the added risk and potential legal costs, which would raise transportation expenses for shippers who rely on them to move billions of tons of freight annually, potentially impacting profit margins. Brokers might also become more cautious, preferring to work only with well-established carriers, reducing competition and limiting the pool of available truckers, which could lead to delays in delivery schedules critical for manufacturers and retailers. Finally, the uncertainty and potential for lawsuits could discourage smaller brokers from operating, shrinking the network of intermediaries and forcing shippers to seek alternative, possibly less efficient, logistics solutions. <h3>The US Chamber takes issue </h3>In an amicus brief in the case of Total Quality Logistics, LLC v. Robert Cox,a similar suit to Montgomery, the US Chamber of Commerce, along with the National Retail Federation, argued that freight brokers should not be held liable for tort claims related to the safety of motor carriers they hire. The organizations argued that existing federal and state regulations, not lawsuits against brokers, are the right way to keep the nation’s roads safe. The Chamber pointed out that brokers lack reliable tools, such as the Compliance, Safety, Accountability (CSA) system, to properly screen carriers because it was designed for law enforcement, not brokers, and has data issues that make it hard to compare carriers effectively. The Chamber also warned that allowing these lawsuits could disrupt the transportation of goods, raise prices and hurt manufacturers, retailers and consumers, urging the Supreme Court to resolve the issue to protect the economy. <h3>Supreme Court intervention </h3>With a lack of uniformity threatening FAAAA’s original goal of fostering a stable, competitive trucking industry, it is little surprise that the US Supreme Court would grant certiorari. As emphasized by the Transportation Intermediaries Association as well as the Chamber, without a clear ruling, brokers, shippers and manufacturers will face ongoing uncertainty, potentially weakening the national economy. Looking ahead, this might be the most conservative Supreme Court in 100 years. Perhaps tellingly, this Supreme Court granted certiorari in Montgomery, where the broker won, and not Cox, where the broker lost. Does this bode well for brokers? Time will tell. But despite ever-increasing liability, trucking remains the dominant mode of freight transportation in the US. Measured by weight, trucks transport 72.6% of the country’s freight. The future of brokerage is at stake, and for now, all eyes look to the Supreme Court. Matthew Leffler is a trucking industry expert and an adjunct professor of law at Michigan State University College of Law. Contact him at <a href="mailto:matthew@armchairattorney.com">matthew@armchairattorney.com</a>. </div>

The case of Montgomery v Caribe Transport II, LLC holds significant implications for the transportation and logistics industry, particularly for large shippers and manufacturers. The US Supreme Court on Oct. 3 granted certiorari — meaning it has agreed to hear the case — for the first time on the issue of broker liability. This legal dispute centers on the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act (FAAAA), a law designed to streamline trucking regulations across state lines. A key issue has emerged regarding the interpretation of the FAAAA’s safety exception, creating uncertainty that could disrupt the supply chain. Background of the case In 2018, Shawn Montgomery was stopped on the side of the road in Illinois in his tractor-trailer, when Yosniel Varela-Mojena, driving a tractor-trailer for the motor carrier Caribe Transport II, LLC, veered off the roadway and collided with Montgomery’s vehicle, causing severe injuries. The shipment was arranged by C.H. Robinson, which had hired Caribe to handle the transport. Montgomery sued Varela-Mojena, Caribe, and Robinson alleging negligent hiring of the carrier and driver, as well as vicarious liability for their actions under state tort law. The district court granted summary judgment to Robinson on these claims and the 7th Circuit affirmed in January 2025, citing FAAAA. FAAAA was enacted to preempt a patchwork of state laws and ensure a uniform regulatory framework for interstate trucking. However, a disagreement has arisen over the “safety exception,” which allows states to regulate motor vehicle safety. The question is whether this exception extends to freight brokers, intermediaries who arrange transportation but do not operate vehicles. The 6th and 9th Circuits have ruled that state tort claims, such as negligent hiring of motor carriers, can proceed against brokers. In contrast, the 7th and 11th Circuits have determined that such claims are preempted. Impact on large shippers and manufacturers Large shippers and manufacturers, such as those in the retail and automotive industries, depend on brokers to connect their goods to the trucking network. If brokers face varying liabilities depending on the location of a truck accident, it can potentially lead to increased costs or service disruptions for large companies. And with over 95% of motor carriers operating 10 trucks or fewer, those relying on brokers may face challenges. To mitigate the challenges posed by liability, brokers would likely need to make significant changes, many of which would drive costs up for consumers and shippers alike. For example, brokers may increase their fees to cover the added risk and potential legal costs, which would raise transportation expenses for shippers who rely on them to move billions of tons of freight annually, potentially impacting profit margins. Brokers might also become more cautious, preferring to work only with well-established carriers, reducing competition and limiting the pool of available truckers, which could lead to delays in delivery schedules critical for manufacturers and retailers. Finally, the uncertainty and potential for lawsuits could discourage smaller brokers from operating, shrinking the network of intermediaries and forcing shippers to seek alternative, possibly less efficient, logistics solutions. The US Chamber takes issue In an amicus brief in the case of Total Quality Logistics, LLC v. Robert Cox,a similar suit to Montgomery, the US Chamber of Commerce, along with the National Retail Federation, argued that freight brokers should not be held liable for tort claims related to the safety of motor carriers they hire. The organizations argued that existing federal and state regulations, not lawsuits against brokers, are the right way to keep the nation’s roads safe. The Chamber pointed out that brokers lack reliable tools, such as the Compliance, Safety, Accountability (CSA) system, to properly screen carriers because it was designed for law enforcement, not brokers, and has data issues that make it hard to compare carriers effectively. The Chamber also warned that allowing these lawsuits could disrupt the transportation of goods, raise prices and hurt manufacturers, retailers and consumers, urging the Supreme Court to resolve the issue to protect the economy. Supreme Court intervention With a lack of uniformity threatening FAAAA’s original goal of fostering a stable, competitive trucking industry, it is little surprise that the US Supreme Court would grant certiorari. As emphasized by the Transportation Intermediaries Association as well as the Chamber, without a clear ruling, brokers, shippers and manufacturers will face ongoing uncertainty, potentially weakening the national economy. Looking ahead, this might be the most conservative Supreme Court in 100 years. Perhaps tellingly, this Supreme Court granted certiorari in Montgomery, where the broker won, and not Cox, where the broker lost. Does this bode well for brokers? Time will tell. But despite ever-increasing liability, trucking remains the dominant mode of freight transportation in the US. Measured by weight, trucks transport 72.6% of the country’s freight. The future of brokerage is at stake, and for now, all eyes look to the Supreme Court. Matthew Leffler is a trucking industry expert and an adjunct professor of law at Michigan State University College of Law. Contact him at matthew@armchairattorney.com .

Trucking News

Transport, Trade and Regulation News

Broker liability in the spotlight in ‘Montgomery v Caribe Transport’

Use code GTW595 at checkout and save $900 on first year of an annual Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription - Gold Trials

Become a Gold Subscriber and Save!

Arm your team with the most trusted information portal for the international container shipping industry.

Group Subscriptions - Wide Box

Get into a group subscription today

Use code STSW20 at checkout to save 20% on a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription! 

Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to S/SP - Wide Box

SUBSCRIBE TODAY AND SAVE!

Upgrade to Gold using code TPMGW595 to save $900 on first year of a Gold subscription and 20% on a TPM26 registration!

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Wide Box

SAVE MORE WITH GOLD

Access Journal of Commerce content for 30 days

Free Trial - Wide Box

START A FREE TRIAL TODAY

Use code TPM26GW995 at checkout to save $500 on first year of a Gold subscription and 20% on a TPM26 registration!

Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to Gold - Wide Box

The world of LTL is slow to embrace change. Business anachronisms permeate current supply chain processes. These vestiges of the way things used to work define the LTL freight transportation procurement process of many modern shippers.David Knuth, logistics specialist at IEWC, a global supplier of cable and wire based in Wisconsin, is happy to have modernized the RFP process, automating the entire LTL bidding procedure with Bid$ense, SMC³’s automated truckload and LTL freight transportation sourcing solution. But when prompted, he can still recall what once was.In his previous job, a large part of his duties were consumed by creating an intermodal bid package for carriers. In a spreadsheet, Knuth detailed the company’s volumes lane by lane, taking care to delete any errant keystrokes or misleading data. He would then email out the information to each carrier, taking time to respond to detailed technical questions about the spreadsheet data. Finally, he had to compile all the results, create an algorithm that would compare the carriers on each lane, and award the business.“It was a huge undertaking. It took about four months to do,” Knuth said of the old process. “It was almost a full-time job for that part of the year, every year.”In his new job at IEWC, he sat down with Bid$ense on day one and was amazed at the capabilities. Knuth had never before used a bid tool. SMC³’s latest versions of Bid$ense automate the process even further, taking truckload and LTL RFPs entirely online. The tool draws on RFP best-practices protocols to streamline the bidding communication process, enabling bidding carriers to respond accurately and promptly to shipper requests. The solution also does all the distribution work automatically, electronically submitting shipper bid data to carriers based on their actual service capabilities and performance records. Carriers are alerted with timely prompts for RFP deliverables, so shippers aren’t waiting by the phone for responses.Another benefit of automating the process is the data-cleansing assistance. When Knuth sent spreadsheets to carriers, data errors might cloud the bidding process; he might have to resend data or simply accept a price that did not truly reflect the costs of doing business. Data cleansing is incredibly beneficial, he said.The spreadsheet technique also made bidding analysis an onerous task. Since Bid$ense automates and streamlines the entire RFP process, intensive examination is now simple. SMC³ knows that each bid has more than one best outcome. With uniform responses from each carrier, shippers can quickly rank results and create an unlimited quantity of what-if scenarios to make the optimal procurement decision.Jesse Burnett of Central Garden &amp; Pet experiences many of the same benefits. Founded in 1980, Central Garden &amp; Pet has spent the last three decades growing from a small garden supply company to a provider of a range of products from dog chews and bird seed to soil supplements and natural insecticides. For much of its life, the company shipped these disparate goods via LTL and truckload carriers to retailers throughout the country, relying on each business unit to negotiate directly with their freight transportation providers. This arrangement worked fairly well for a small company, but as Central Garden &amp; Pet expanded, leadership decided to consolidate decision making.Burnett helped centralize the transportation decision making in 2015 with SMC³’s Bid$ense. Before Bid$ense, every business unit operated independently as far as negotiating with carriers.“There were a lot of different things just floating around,” he said. “We didn’t have master agreements in place; no national pricing at all. The pricing from carriers was just all over the place, depending on where you were.”The transformations he saw with Bid$ense were immediate. Burnett has been using the tool about every other year since its implementation at the company. Central Garden and Pet’s $19.6 million 2019 LTL bid saved the company just more than 9 percent when compared to its historical average. For Burnett, though, bid automation extends far beyond savings.“We knew that we weren’t getting the best pricing offer from our carriers just because nothing was centralized,” he continued. “We knew that if we combined everything from all these business units and paired it with one corporate offering, then it would drive some cost benefit with it.”When the company initially decided to centralize bid procurement, executives researched a number of different methodologies and technologies. In the end, though, Burnett found that Bid$ense was both widespread and well known, and that his carrier partners already knew how to use the application. Burnett also highlighted the data-cleansing process as a major benefit, saying the rigorous process ensures that carriers always return the best price.“It definitely has helped drive savings,” he said. “Any time you go out there and you drive that competitiveness with the carriers and they know they’re in a bid environment, it seems to sharpen their pencils.”Transportation procurement is an integral part of the modern supply chain. With Bid$ense, shippers can develop a strategic implementation plan that saves them time and money, but also helps them create strong relationships with their carrier partners. These carriers appreciate the solution’s data-cleansing process; when carriers receive a complete shipment history and future volume forecast, they don’t have to guess on pricing. Carriers that receive more data from shippers get a complete picture of that shipper’s freight, allowing them to accurately plan instead of simply preparing for the worst-case scenario. Clean data presented through an automated system can lead to both bigger shipment savings and a lasting partnership between carrier and customer.Whether customers are looking to streamline over-the-road transportation bidding by automating the RFP process or create an entirely new, centralized sourcing process, Bid$ense has the analytical horsepower to get the job done.SMC³ 2020 Customer Case Study

SMC3rates_shutterstock_5247046.jpg

Shippers save money, time with automated transportation bidding tools

If there’s one immutable truth in the world of logistics, it’s this: LTL is an inherently complex form of transportation. Tariffs, rates, DIM weights, transit times — it’s enough to confuse even seasoned logistics professionals. The solution to this knowledge gap has historically been on-the-job training or university supply chain education, but for a variety of reasons there is now a pressing need for third-party, remote LTL training that prepares logistics workers for transportation success. Global Scope Can Overlook Local Intricacies In the past, professionals looking to move into a supply chain career learned about the basics of supply chain from universities. However, many of these college supply chain programs are now global in scope, focusing on worldwide supply chain management instead of the intricacies of specialized domestic transportation. And even these programs, which used to be widespread, are becoming less common. LTL is not an industry of broad-brush strokes; supply chain professionals really need a pointillistic understanding of the logistics of LTL in order to excel in the industry. Accelerating Need for Dedicated LTL Education This lack of specified training put the onus on employers to prepare new hires with the LTL knowledge needed to do their jobs. Dedicated LTL study is a necessity, not a luxury. At the same time, changes in LTL and the broader supply chain world are accelerating. The reliance on e-commerce has ballooned since the start of the pandemic, and last-mile LTL shipments and related e-commerce strains on the supply chain won’t diminish once social distancing abates. That genie isn’t going back into the bottle. So supply chain employers need logistics workers that are fully versed in all aspects of the industry, ready to solve unique shipping and delivery problems based on their extensive supply chain knowledge But why care about LTL? It’s been reported that some shippers in today’s world are no longer concerned with what mode is used to ship their goods. A Multimodal Approach Ensures On-Time Delivery This mode agnosticism means supply chain stakeholders have to be well versed in all modes of transportation. As unforeseen weather events and other disruptions, such as protests, become more common, savvy logistics employees will need to be armed with familiarity of all modes, not just the most popular, to ensure that freight is delivered on time, without damage, and in the most financially expedient way possible. Offerings like SMC³’s LTL online education courses cover a wide range of topics from LTL basics and operations to more advanced concepts like pricing analytics and transportation law. The company also has plans to continually refresh content, adding new expert presenters and taking the feedback of students to make the courses even better as time goes on. Learn more about&nbsp;<a href="https://logisticstrainingcenter.com/smc3-courses/" rel="noreferrer" class="joc_admin__link">SMC³’s LTL Online Education program</a>&nbsp;and view the 2021 hybrid schedule, featuring live industry experts,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.smc3.com/onlinelearning2021/" rel="noreferrer" class="joc_admin__link">here.</a>

SMC3rates_shutterstock_5247046 (1).jpg

Filling the Supply Chain Education Gap with LTL Education Courses

START A FREE TRIAL: Access Journal of Commerce content for 30 days

Free Trial - Offer Box

Free Trial

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE: Use code STSW20 to save 20% on first year of a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription!


Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to S/SP - Offer Box

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE

GET INTO A GROUP SUBSCRIPTION: Arm your team with unlimited Journal of Commerce content

Group Subscriptions - Offer Box

Group Subscriptions

UPGRADE TO GOLD AND SAVE: Use code GTW595 at checkout and save $900 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription

SAVE MORE WITH GOLD: Upgrade to Gold using code TPMGW595 to save $900 on first year of a Gold subscription and 20% on TPM26! 

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Offer Box

SAVE MORE WITH GOLD: Use code TPM26GW995 at checkout to save $500 on a Gold subscription and 20% on a TPM26 registration!

Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to Gold - Offer Box

Monthly publication providing an editorial deep dive into global supply chain news

Journal of Commerce Magazine - Rectangle Box

Journal of Commerce Magazine

A premium access index of savings using domestic intermodal vs. OTR 

ISI Report - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Savings Index

An in-depth analysis of transport trends in the multipurpose and heavy-lift fleet segment

Breakbulk Report - Rectangle Box

Breakbulk Quarterly

An extensive dashboard of charts organized by trade lane, mode, and topic

Gateway - Rectangle Box

Gateway

Customers scoring their intermodal partners to identify the best service providers

Intermodal Service Scorecard - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Service Scorecard

A premium access outlook critical to shippers and transportation providers

QI Report - Rectangle Box

Quarterly Intelligence

The premier conference for the global container shipping and supply chain community

TPM Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend TPM26

The latest port news from the Journal of Commerce spans the globe from North Carolina and Florida to Shanghai and Singapore. Port news includes port automation, terminal construction projects, the future of decarbonization and net-zero shipping, dredging, port hinterland connectivity, labor, disruption, port congestion and cargo flow.

Marine terminals

Port infrastructure

Breakbulk ports

Stay informed on port news worldwide with Journal of Commerce. From decarbonization to labor updates, get insights on global developments.

Port News | Journal of Commerce

The Journal of Commerce is the industry’s source for maritime news and analysis about ocean container shipping, logistics, supply chains, global shipping ports, shipping technology solutions and end-to-end connectivity. Coverage tracks the movement of containerized cargo — from origin to destination — handled by marine terminals in the US and abroad, depots, container ports, container lines, drayage, consignees and shippers, forwarders, non-vessel operating common carriers (NVOs) and off-dock warehousing providers, as well as pricing, capacity, volume and reliability on the trans-Pacific, Asia–Europe, North America–Caribbean, Central and South American and intra-Asia trades.

Discover comprehensive trucking news and trends with Journal of Commerce - from trucking LTL to regulation and trucking supply and demand.

Breakbulk News shipping | Journal of Commerce

Breakbulk News

Container shipping news and analysis of ocean container shipping, logistics, supply chains, technology and end-to-end connectivity.

Container Shipping News | Journal of Commerce

Container Shipping News

News and analysis of ocean containerized cargo movement, logistics, supply chains, technology, and end-to-end connectivity. Maritime news and analysis of containerized ocean cargo movement, breakbulk and roll-on and roll-off shipping from origin to destination.

Latest News

More News & Analysis

Connectivity the key to bypassing hurdles in truckload appointment scheduling

Fate of future automation at California ports in governor’s hands

Tariff uncertainty to keep lid on US import growth until spring: retailers