I think as far as fuel goes , it should be paid for by the driver after a reasonable percentage of gross can be determined considering all costs . It would be interesting to see how mpg compares on trucks where the owner pays the fuel vs the driver pays for it . You can be sure when the driver pays the fuel their is less idling , less speeding and more seeking out fuel stops with lower fuel prices .
O/O revenue and drivers pay
- Thread starter davekc
- Start date
Twmaster
Expert Expediter
>As for me, my O/O calls me his partner - and he is
>absolutely 100% correct. If it doesn't work fairly both
>ways, I do not think it should be expected to last very
>long.
That right there is a point that seems to never get across. I am of the belief that the company, fleet owner & driver (or O/O) are indeed partners and should treat each other accordingly. It's amazing how many on either side of the fence seem to be trying to get over on their 'partners'.
--
Mike N
Faster than a speeding poulet.
>absolutely 100% correct. If it doesn't work fairly both
>ways, I do not think it should be expected to last very
>long.
That right there is a point that seems to never get across. I am of the belief that the company, fleet owner & driver (or O/O) are indeed partners and should treat each other accordingly. It's amazing how many on either side of the fence seem to be trying to get over on their 'partners'.
--
Mike N
Faster than a speeding poulet.
>>As for me, my O/O calls me his partner - and he is
>>absolutely 100% correct. If it doesn't work fairly both
>>ways, I do not think it should be expected to last very
>>long.
>
>That right there is a point that seems to never get across.
>I am of the belief that the company, fleet owner & driver
>(or O/O) are indeed partners and should treat each other
>accordingly. It's amazing how many on either side of the
>fence seem to be trying to get over on their 'partners'.
>
>--
>Mike N
>
>Faster than a speeding poulet.
You do at times see that going on. Desperate people do desperate things. On both sides of the fence.
Davekc
>>absolutely 100% correct. If it doesn't work fairly both
>>ways, I do not think it should be expected to last very
>>long.
>
>That right there is a point that seems to never get across.
>I am of the belief that the company, fleet owner & driver
>(or O/O) are indeed partners and should treat each other
>accordingly. It's amazing how many on either side of the
>fence seem to be trying to get over on their 'partners'.
>
>--
>Mike N
>
>Faster than a speeding poulet.
You do at times see that going on. Desperate people do desperate things. On both sides of the fence.
Davekc
>And secondly, for drivers, what kind of revenue is expected
>in order for survival or to keep you in the profession.
>I have my own thoughts relating to this but this seems to be
>a topic that is coming up more frequently.
>Any input would be helpful as alot of owners are struggling
>to find drivers. 150 ads under teams wanted indicates that.
>Davekc
Allow me to respond as a driver (wife and me, team, D-unit). We currently run on the industry-standard 60/40 split; 60% of the truck's gross to the driver, 40% to truck owner, driver pays fuel, owner pays all other truck expenses (in a nutshell).
We've found that arrangement to be satisfactory, providing sufficient income to meet our goals. We began driving, and still are driving trucks that we would never own ourselves. Our preferences draw us toward something a bit more elaborate. We started in those trucks to learn the business and will stay in them only as long as necessary for our vendor group to build the truck we've ordered.
For us, it was not about 60/40, or 58/42, or owner pays half fuel, or bonus money after certain performance. It was not about getting into a fleet-owner-provided truck with all the bells and whistles. For us, it was about getting into the business and into our own truck.
Numerous fleet owners and former fleet owners will confirm this industry dynamic. In general, the good drivers (make money, good work ethic, good decision making skills, accurate perception of reality, etc.) that start with fleet owners move on to become owner/operators in about 6 to 18 months.
It is a fair deal, we feel. The fleet owners profited with their 40% as we learned and grew. We get to give the business a try before committing capital to a truck of our own.
It seems to me that the the fleet owners that align their interests with those of their drivers will do better at recruiting and retaining divers than those that see and/or act as if their interests differ from their drivers.
It's not about how much money one party can make off the other. It's about how much both parties can make together by understanding what is in their mutual interests and acting accordingly.
Given the above-mentioned dynamic, fleet owners should be prepared for 100% a year driver turnover; and probably more since you'll likely need to get rid of some not-so-good drivers sooner than that.
>in order for survival or to keep you in the profession.
>I have my own thoughts relating to this but this seems to be
>a topic that is coming up more frequently.
>Any input would be helpful as alot of owners are struggling
>to find drivers. 150 ads under teams wanted indicates that.
>Davekc
Allow me to respond as a driver (wife and me, team, D-unit). We currently run on the industry-standard 60/40 split; 60% of the truck's gross to the driver, 40% to truck owner, driver pays fuel, owner pays all other truck expenses (in a nutshell).
We've found that arrangement to be satisfactory, providing sufficient income to meet our goals. We began driving, and still are driving trucks that we would never own ourselves. Our preferences draw us toward something a bit more elaborate. We started in those trucks to learn the business and will stay in them only as long as necessary for our vendor group to build the truck we've ordered.
For us, it was not about 60/40, or 58/42, or owner pays half fuel, or bonus money after certain performance. It was not about getting into a fleet-owner-provided truck with all the bells and whistles. For us, it was about getting into the business and into our own truck.
Numerous fleet owners and former fleet owners will confirm this industry dynamic. In general, the good drivers (make money, good work ethic, good decision making skills, accurate perception of reality, etc.) that start with fleet owners move on to become owner/operators in about 6 to 18 months.
It is a fair deal, we feel. The fleet owners profited with their 40% as we learned and grew. We get to give the business a try before committing capital to a truck of our own.
It seems to me that the the fleet owners that align their interests with those of their drivers will do better at recruiting and retaining divers than those that see and/or act as if their interests differ from their drivers.
It's not about how much money one party can make off the other. It's about how much both parties can make together by understanding what is in their mutual interests and acting accordingly.
Given the above-mentioned dynamic, fleet owners should be prepared for 100% a year driver turnover; and probably more since you'll likely need to get rid of some not-so-good drivers sooner than that.
I understand most of your post (A-Team) but it doesn't indicate what generally most would want. Your situation is unique as you sold off your assets to pursue expediting. As an average, most would not be willing to do that. You also mentioned 100 percent turnover. I agree with you and alot of newer fleet owners are struggling as they don't have the capital for sustained dormancy of their equipment.
I think it will be the largest hurdle for companies and owners to jump. I think when it is all said and done, it will have to come down to an issue of money, hometime, and some type of benefit package.
Davekc
I think it will be the largest hurdle for companies and owners to jump. I think when it is all said and done, it will have to come down to an issue of money, hometime, and some type of benefit package.
Davekc
I think when it is all said and done, it
>will have to come down to an issue of money, hometime, and
>some type of benefit package.
>Davekc
And that's pretty much how every recruiting ad in every trucking magazine reads...."401K! Guaranteed Home Time! Top Pay!" Page after page, the ads read like a broken record. Do they work? To a point, I'd guess they do. But what a challenge! How do you put a driver on the road where he or she can make some money, and keep him or her at home a lot too?
Expediting is not a good job for someone that wants to be home a lot. It's a fantastic job for people that enjoy living and working on the road.
A thought, for what it's worth....what about an arrangement where two teams share a truck with a committment that together they'll keep the truck itself working nearly 100% of the time? Each would get 50% home time and both would make enough money to be worth their time. That would raise a host of sharing, scheduling, and fairness issues, most of which could be resolved by leaving it to the teams to decide when each will work. Of course the teams would have to be able to get along with each other and probably live near each other to facilitate passing the truck back and forth. Just a thought.
>will have to come down to an issue of money, hometime, and
>some type of benefit package.
>Davekc
And that's pretty much how every recruiting ad in every trucking magazine reads...."401K! Guaranteed Home Time! Top Pay!" Page after page, the ads read like a broken record. Do they work? To a point, I'd guess they do. But what a challenge! How do you put a driver on the road where he or she can make some money, and keep him or her at home a lot too?
Expediting is not a good job for someone that wants to be home a lot. It's a fantastic job for people that enjoy living and working on the road.
A thought, for what it's worth....what about an arrangement where two teams share a truck with a committment that together they'll keep the truck itself working nearly 100% of the time? Each would get 50% home time and both would make enough money to be worth their time. That would raise a host of sharing, scheduling, and fairness issues, most of which could be resolved by leaving it to the teams to decide when each will work. Of course the teams would have to be able to get along with each other and probably live near each other to facilitate passing the truck back and forth. Just a thought.
I think your latter comments have some merit under the right conditions. Might work for families that are close together. We did something simular 5 years ago when I was involved with another business at the same time. The other team was a retired couple with us owning the truck. Went well for a couple of years until health issues forced them off the road. Still would be tough to implement in alot of cases.
You are right relavent to the broken record of ads. They all sound the same. That is why the only temptation seems to be centered around the three that I mentioned. It appears that it is those three that would recruit or persuade the majority of drivers in form or another.
Davekc
You are right relavent to the broken record of ads. They all sound the same. That is why the only temptation seems to be centered around the three that I mentioned. It appears that it is those three that would recruit or persuade the majority of drivers in form or another.
Davekc
Tom Robertson
Veteran Expediter
Dave...
First of all, we already follow all of the important suggestions.
We are honest with our prospective drivers, and follow through with performance as a carrier providing not only the miles needed to make the projections but pay much more rapidly than all others (or at least most). Our equipment is top notch, so that shouldn't be a problem.
So we decided to get creative, and offered two round trip airline tickets to any point in the continental US.
Reply's ... one from a single driver... another from a well known jumper (three companies in two years and many "driver available" ads.
I now believe that "experienced teams" are either well taken care of and happy with their present set up or simply complacent.
<at this time the first 10 ads on E.O. have produced 5 responses.
and I would bet that 3 or 4 of those are from the same people>
We have decided to put a single driver to work in this vehicle and give up on the idea of an experienced team.
First of all, we already follow all of the important suggestions.
We are honest with our prospective drivers, and follow through with performance as a carrier providing not only the miles needed to make the projections but pay much more rapidly than all others (or at least most). Our equipment is top notch, so that shouldn't be a problem.
So we decided to get creative, and offered two round trip airline tickets to any point in the continental US.
Reply's ... one from a single driver... another from a well known jumper (three companies in two years and many "driver available" ads.
I now believe that "experienced teams" are either well taken care of and happy with their present set up or simply complacent.
<at this time the first 10 ads on E.O. have produced 5 responses.
and I would bet that 3 or 4 of those are from the same people>
We have decided to put a single driver to work in this vehicle and give up on the idea of an experienced team.
It is very difficult to find good teams. The majority of the good ones already own their own equipment or are working towards that goal. As I look at other web sites, persuasive negativity is running rampant through the trucking industry. I think it effects all aspects of trucking including expediting.
While you may be offering a very genuine opportunity, many as mentioned by other folks, seem to be mislead or as new folks, don't fully understand what they are getting into. Probably alittle bit of both.
Davekc
While you may be offering a very genuine opportunity, many as mentioned by other folks, seem to be mislead or as new folks, don't fully understand what they are getting into. Probably alittle bit of both.
Davekc