Conway

G

guest

Guest
In the interest of fairness to Con Way Now, I want to reiterate that there is an increase in the team rate in D units from 1.15 per mile to 1.21 per mile accompanying the fsc change, which comes out to an extra $6,000 extra annually based upon 100,000 loaded miles.

No help to me as a single, but a nice perk for teams.
 

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
Was the original post positive or negative? It was negative. The writers first sentence charges negative motives and paints Conway with a broad brush. Had the first sentence been omitted, the post would have been neutral.
 

bryan

Veteran Expediter
HI
I think the problem is the third party logistic companies.If your carrier say no to all .04cpm fsc then the 3rd party log. isn't going to offer them any of the loads that pay more.If you say no to GM then NLMI isn't going to offer you Ford or Detriot Deisel.So the gun is also pointed at the carriers heads.
As the 3pl's get bigger and bigger they gain more control over the carriers and the o/o's.I feel this is going to eliminate alot of the smaller expedited carriers and move the industry back to where there were only 3 to 4 carrriers.The only way I can see to stop this is for the smaller carriers to increase their sales teams and go after 1 or 2 different aspects of the business.To specialize in a certain field or for the bigger carriers to grow their own logistics companies.Either way the industry is changing and we are either going to change with it or be pushed out.Just my 2 cents.
 

Moot

Veteran Expediter
Owner/Operator
Excellent point Bryan, sometimes as a driver I forget that the carriers also have to deal with outside forces.
 

gandrew

Expert Expediter
It seems to us, as team drivers of a D truck, that we will all lose money on this deal except on the rare occasion when we run a DCX, Maytag or GE type low fsc load. Officials at Con-way insist this plan is in response to drivers refusing to haul freight for these customers, and they must cover these loads somehow. This truck has NEVER refused a load because of low fsc and feel we are being punished for the acts of a few other drivers. If we drivers would take the low pay with the good pay and not turn these down this may not have been put on us. Based on our loads the last few times out, we would have lost hundreds of dollars with the new deal. The real winners in this are fleet owners: they get 40% of the six cent increase, big losers are the fleet drivers who only get 3.6 cents additional along with less fsc. Con-way is a really good company to run for but this plan is ill-conceived and should be retracted. At least as an o/o we have some options: "when you can't stand the heat,..."
 

Tennesseahawk

Veteran Expediter
Whether driver or o/o, I would hope that the one paying the fuel would look at a low fsc and say "No thanks!"

If you take the good with the bad, that provides the companies with reasons to keep rates and/or fsc low. If no one wants to take a .08 fsc, that'll tell the customer that they should either get with the program or find someone who is still in the stone age.

I, for one, turned down an 800 mi run with a .06 fsc last year. I got hell from the weasel dispatcher. Too bad... I don't get paid by the hour.
 

Tennesseahawk

Veteran Expediter
This is an interesting thread. The way I see it, Conway is averaging out all the fsc charges so as to make them more consistant. This way, your Maytag runs will make as much as a Joe Shmoe run. If this is correct, there's no reason to gripe, as it all evens out (or hypothetically does so). I could see this as a problem if the company holds back some surcharge, instead of putting it in the pool. And yes, if you're used to turning down some of the lower fsc runs, your average fsc for the month will be lower. I can understand Conway's logic for this, and think it's a better system all the way around, if it REALLY is fair.

So... overall, what are you averaging per mile for fsc, now that this new rule is in effect?
 

davekc

Senior Moderator
Staff member
Fleet Owner
his is an interesting thread. The way I see it, Conway is averaging out all the fsc charges so as to make them more consistant. This way, your Maytag runs will make as much as a Joe Shmoe run


If that is their intent, it would seem they would get a more positive response from their drivers if it all is explained to them.
As it appears right now, the information seems shuffled.
Just my opinion based on these posts.




Davekc
owner
21 years
PantherII
EO moderator
 

x06col

Veteran Expediter
Charter Member
Retired Expediter
US Army
Yahooo, 17 Jan and it's starting already this year. Conway screwing you on this thread, Pilot screwing you on another thread. Man, if everyone is getting screwd as much as I read about here, there should be nothing but perpetual smiles on most everybodys faces. Seriously, if you can't run a load for what is offered, fsc no fsc don't run it. It is simple math, not Trig. If you think for a minute that a free shower with a purchase is not a gift/extra etc.
then stop at your corner station and request/demand a free meal/shower/ or other comp. Let me give you a clue, the only thing you are entitled to out on the street, is to get seperated from your money. So, happy getting seperated and get seperated wisely.
 

ConWay

Expert Expediter
I would like to respond on behalf of Con-Way NOW in an effort to clarify some of the information that has been presented (this is an excerpt from an upcoming newsletter as written by Michelle Potter, President).

Yes, there have been some some contract changes as it pertains to rates and fuel. Here are the facts and reasons for the changes:

As fuel prices rose, so did our phone volumes. We heard and understood our O/O's pain and as a result worked diligently to reach out to our customer base in an attempt to secure competitive fuel surcharge structures. It’s simple to argue that if the customer won’t concede to the rate structure we desire, that we just shouldn’t do business with them, but it’s not realistic. Removing just one volume customer from our network of customers can collapse the entire balance we’re always striving to achieve.

So here lies the challenge. We’re all too frequently focused on living and dying per shipment rather than focusing on the big picture. As a result we discriminate against our customers in load selections and cause the domino effect. As a means to alleviate that issue, we’ve implemented the mileage based fuel structure for our van and straight truck fleet. No longer will it require inquiries about how much is going to be paid per load for fuel as it’s the same rule across the board and all customers are on an equal playing field. The fuel matrix that was designed was very well considered and analyzed and took into consideration fuel pay that occurred during 2005. We ensured that average MPG’s were taken into consideration (vans 13MPG & straights 10MPG), as well as what the standard fuel operating expenses were for our fleet prior to fuel prices escalating. Also understand that there are many instances where we are not paid from the customer the fuel that we pay out. Will they find that on some loads they would have done better on the old program? Yes. Will they find that on some loads they will do better on the new program? Yes. Remember that the objective is to simplify and provide clarity to their fuel pay while ensuring that on every load their pay will be compensatory to their costs.

The final change is the pay structure change for D teams to $1.21. There is a high demand from our customer base for shipments requiring D teams. We belive that this rate changes will position ourselves to effectively recruit and retain for this very important niche that often times warrants supporting two separate incomes as opposed to the ideal single family income and to further financially support the teams currently in our fleet.

Hope this helps clarify some of the questions on this thread. For our current O/O - if you need further clarification pls contact recruiting or safety.

Lori Blaney
Director Recruiting/Safety
Con-Way NOW
800-950-7670 X3247
[email protected]
 

LDB

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Lori,

Thank you for joining our forum and contributing to this thread. If possible, could you clarify this a little further? Is the fsc for the week paid on every loaded mile regardless of who the customers are? In other words, if the fsc for a given week is 15cpm and a run is made for Acme Widgets who previously had a 4cpm fsc will that run now pay 15cpm fsc? It would seem to me if that interpretation is correct the annual picture should look very good although the snapshot of Acme Gadgets who use to pay 23cpm fsc isn't as pretty.

Having run many loads for another carrier that were on the anywhere from zero fsc to a few pretty high fsc I can say the annual average does not come out any better than a weekly fixed rate per mile and very possibly not quite as well, at least in my experience.

Another question for clarification. Is the 2 tier system still in effect for mileage and the increase to $1.21 for teams is on the 200 or less miles with 201+ still at $1.30? Is the 2 tier still in effect for solo at $1.15/1.30 as well? Thank you again for joining. We'll look forward to your contributions.

Leo Bricker, owner trucks 3034, 4958
OOIDA 677319
73's K5LDB
Highway Watch Participant
EO Forum Moderator 1+ Years of Service
-----
Support the entire Constitution, not just the parts you like.
 

ConWay

Expert Expediter
HI Leo,

You are correct that the FSC that is in effect for that week is for all customers. Regardless if they are the customer that has no FSC (which some are) or at .20cpm it is the same. We analyzed the avg for all customers for all loads in 2005 to constuct the matrix.

And yes our rate structure is as follows:

Team: 1.30 under 200/1.21 over 200
Solo: 1.30 under 200/1.15 over 200

Thanks!

Lori Blaney
Director Recruiting/Safety
Con-Way NOW
800-950-7670 X3247
[email protected]
 

davekc

Senior Moderator
Staff member
Fleet Owner
I think Lori and Conway should be commended for coming on the forum and explaining this change in their rate structure. I don't have a relationship with Conway but they have made significant headway in addressing the many questions. As to how it effects Conway drivers, only time will tell.
It would be a hope that other companies will follow your lead when a major change takes place and provide accurate information here on EO.
Again, thanks for your contribution.




Davekc
owner
21 years
PantherII
EO moderator
 

jaminjim

Veteran Expediter
I agree Dave, It is a shame that some of the othere large companies will not come and explain why they do some things.
 

Guvna

Expert Expediter
My congrats to Conway. Seems like a well thought out, easily managed and understood formula. Further it would seem to me that there is virtually no room for misperception, or perception of deceit. More than I can say for others.......
 

Dynamite 1

Moderator
Staff member
Fleet Owner
glad to see that this thread is finally getting some well deserved, positive response. i am assured that the response Blaney gave can be banked on as the truth. in almost five years of conway and at times a close working relationship with Blaney on a few projects she has exemplified a most upstanding truthfullness and business demeanor. i do think that this new program will even out overall. as all of us pbo's know, we had many customers who's fuel contracts were old and outdated. while we may take a 5 to 10 cent cut on some of the higher paying accounts we will also see a significant rise of the same amount or more on the old low paying fixed accounts. on top of this, this is the second rate increase in as many years. yes there are companies that pay more than we make rite from the get go and all are welcome to make a move if so needed, but the contracts are there when you start and the addendums are also. it is up to you as a o/o to decide if you are willing to accept or if you need to move on. it is not a ploy or a company that is being spitefull. they have a bottom line just like we do. is it not pretensious to think we as owners are allowed to make our business decisions but the company is not. granted their income levels way exceed ours but the bottom line is and always has been that when you are an owner you have the rite to do as you see fit, whether you are a 50,000 $ a year co. or a 50 million $ a year co. make your own decision based on the info you have and decide what is best and hold no blame on anyone else. tnt1175
 

Margie

Expert Expediter
My husband and I drive as a van team for Conway-Now. The purpose of our message is purely factual. Fourth quarter 2005 paid miles for us at 80 cents per mile were 18,284. Total fuel surcharge paid was $2,955.94. Average fuel surcharge for quarter was 16 cents per mile. Under the new rules, with the National Diesel Fuel Index being $2.45 this week, our fuel surcharge this week will be 9 cents per mile across the board.
 

TheGoodGuy

Expert Expediter
Margie's figures represent hard evidence as to who will benefit from the fsc reduction!!!!!

And it sure isn't the owner operator.

Any good bean counter will be able to "hide the profits", that will be reaped from this "greatplan"

Quote "As a result we discriminate against our customers in load selections and cause the domino effect. As a means to alleviate that issue, we’ve implemented the mileage based fuel structure for our van and straight truck fleet. No longer will it require inquiries about how much is going to be paid per load for fuel as it’s the same rule across the board and all customers are on an equal playing field."

Interpretation "don't inquire about the fuel surcharge, you don't need to know what compensation we are receiving from the customer."

I'd say that it was the owner's that are on the equal playing field which equates to .08 cents per mile "take it or leave it".

Lawrence let me apologize for my negative comments, hope this doesn't creat a "Domino Effect".






God Bless America
 

TheGoodGuy

Expert Expediter
Thanks ATeam for your interpretation!

I'm sure that it was directed to all those individuals; that YOU felt were unable, (for some unknown reason) to discern whether the thread was negative or positive.

Just to save you the trouble, and to reach the audience that your comment was directed to, I'd like to announce that my thread was negative.

God Bless America
 

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
>My husband and I drive as a van team for Conway-Now. The
>purpose of our message is purely factual. Fourth quarter
>2005 paid miles for us at 80 cents per mile were 18,284.
>Total fuel surcharge paid was $2,955.94. Average fuel
>surcharge for quarter was 16 cents per mile. Under the new
>rules, with the National Diesel Fuel Index being $2.45 this
>week, our fuel surcharge this week will be 9 cents per mile
>across the board.

Now I must add MY 2 cents

Margie says the fsc will be .09 cents. How many miles per gallon does she get? 13mpg? for a difference of 5mpg?
AND before all this FSC started how much FSC did you get? Who paid the cost? You did, I did.

MY point being is... the fsc wasn't created to make a profit from or break even, just to help offset rising expenses in very bad economic times.

Some seem to think the fsc should pay all or nearly all fuel expenses.
We as O/O's are ultimately responsible for ALL our costs regardless! If tires were to go thru the roof would we want a tire surcharge based on miles per run?

My van runs about 10 to 11 cents per mile on 24mpg last month I was getting based on a simular fsc formula 13.5 cents per mile darn I MADE money on the FSC!!!
 
Top