An Oregon Shipwreck: the Back Story

Hi, my name’s Shelly, and I’m a daughter of a trucker.

I started this blog with this sentence on Nov 6, 2014 – almost 5 years ago to this day. I haven’t blogged since October 11, 2017… but this article brought me out of blogging retirement:

Jury awards $93.6 million to former operator of Port’s Terminal 6 for losses due to dock workers’ unlawful labor practices

Some history…  on November 7th, 2014, we were on Day 5 of not being able to turn in containers into the Port of Tacoma (full info here from that day). To make a terribly complicated and long story short…  we, the truckers that deliver containers to ports, were one step away from the West Coast Ports – including Los Angeles and Long Beach – being completely shut down. (Notable: 65% of America’s imports come through the Ports of LA and LB. The threat to America’s economy is estimated at $2 BILLION each DAY there is a shut down.)

Knowing now that it took until May of 2015 to get resolution, and years for the effects of this crisis to fully resolve with importers and exporters, I find it fascinating to look back and realize that us in the industry knew exactly what was going on almost immediately.

I’ve said this a thousand times, from the AgTC:

“There is nothing that we produce in this country in agriculture, that cannot be sourced somewhere else in the world. We can grow the best in the world, but if we can’t deliver affordably and dependably, the customer will go somewhere else… and may never come back”.

On November 13th, 2014, I was shocked we were still having issues. I was shocked this hadn’t made the news. My naive self actually wrote this this:

“I believe that the newspapers and TV will start covering this by the end of the week if this does not begin to improve. Until then, this is all I’ve got to help – one voice.”

Peter Friedmann, Executive Director of the Agriculture Transportation Coalition met with the White House on November 14th, 2014. Here is his summary of that meeting:

AgTC: White House Meeting Update
November 12, 2014
The AgTC and other industry groups met with White House leadership of the Domestic Policy Council, National Economic Council, and Department of Commerce to discuss the crippling port disruption on the West Coast. We alerted them that agriculture and forest products, America’s largest and most important export, are in serious peril.
There were a lot of aspects that the White House was completely unaware of– they didn’t know how much cargo is being left at the docks or is not able to be moved at all. We were very concerned at how little the White House knew about the situation at the West Coast ports and the impact on the nation’s economy. We made sure that they know now.
The White House said they were monitoring the situation, and we strongly emphasized that monitoring is insufficient. We urged the Administration to take firm action such as bringing in a federal mediator, as was the case in previous instances of labor-management disputes. We told them that we are weighing in with our Congressional delegations and that they will be hearing from Members of Congress.
In the meantime, we will continue to reach out to the press, because we believe the White House will respond immediately to the glare that is cast upon the White House by the press inquiries. We need to stimulate more of those press inquiries, and that is what we will continue to do.

Here’s the deal. It’s not just the White House that didn’t understand transportation. Our Oregon State government didn’t and still doesn’t understand transportation. It’s one of the reasons I ran for the state legislature. I am proud to represent House District 15, and be a voice for the transportation industry. There are a few legislators that “get it” – but honestly the vast majority simply don’t.

On November 19th, 2014, I wrote “Why this affects you” because I needed people to understand WHY they should care.

OR Ag important exports

Here is one really good reason why us as Oregonians should care. Agriculture is important to us as Oregonians and as Americans. From the words of our former Governor Kitzhaber: “Agriculture remains one of Oregon’s economic bright spots, creating about 1 in 10 Oregon jobs, with a $5.4 billion production value equal to roughly 15 percent of the state’s economy. There is tremendous diversity in what we grow, with more than 220 different commodities produced under some of the best growing conditions you’ll ever find.”

But if we can’t get it to market, then what good is any of it?

We were on day 13 of a West Coast Port crisis. The hard-working (when they’re working) members of the ILWU at the West Coast Ports were stuck in a negotiation-tactic filled fight with the PMA (Pacific Maritime Association). Until this was resolved and a contract  finally filed, we were at the mercy of the Big Dogs. Can you believe that? International commerce was practically at a standstill. Are you okay with that? Our farms were fighting, our company was fighting, our straw-export industry was fighting, the Christmas Tree industry was fighting, the Washington Apple industry was fighting – we were ALL fighting to stay alive, to continue business, to continue our ever-so-important relationships with our overseas buyers. Some of us did not survive the crisis, some of us lost market share, some of us lost customers,… and that is sickening.

Day 29 of port issues: slow-downs, lack in port production, ILWU walk-offs, truck congestion, and all-over harm to business, agriculture and the economy. The long term repercussions of this are yet to be seen.” I’m still amazed at what we knew at that time.

Interesting quote from that blog on December 11, 2014:

Do not invest another dime into technology, into automation, into innovation. Not until you two INCREDIBLY POWERFUL entities can learn to talk to one another.  Here’s some advice: PMA, learn to communicate. ILWU, take some business classes. For the sake of us all.

For more background information on the West Coast Port Crisis from 2014-2015 in my words:

AgTC: Statement of the Agriculture Transportation Coalition

Port Crisis 101: history of, where we stand, and a little of my own opinion…

1-Year Recap of the West Coast Port Crisis – the ship that sailed

Unfortunately: “I told you so.”

Transportation and Oregon – a love/hate relationship – Part 1

Let me explain the problem with this West Coast Port Crisis in simple terms: Let’s say Fred Meyer’s is your favorite grocery store, but for some reason the traffic is horrible specifically in front of that store. One mile down the road, there is a Safeway with no traffic and has easy access. It’s a little harder to get there, but you start going to Safeway because it is efficient to do so. If Fred Meyer’s fixes the traffic problem, do you go back? Maybe. But also maybe do you stay with Safeway because you like the store and you’re now used to it? Possibly. This is what this Wall Street Journal article speaks to. The west coast ports has a traffic problem. The east coast ports do not. China is choosing to spend a little more time and effort to ship into the east coast ports. And they might just find they are easier to work with. Will they make the move? Maybe. Will they ever come back? Maybe. Anyone want to take this risk? I don’t. But it’s not up to me.

OKAY – ENOUGH WITH THE HISTORY – BACK TO CURRENT DAY!

This article prompted me to write tonight:

Jury awards $93.6 million to former operator of Port’s Terminal 6 for losses due to dock workers’ unlawful labor practices

“A federal jury Monday awarded $93.6 million to the former operator of the Port of Portland’s container terminal, finding the dock workers union sabotaged shipping traffic and caused productivity to plummet through years of labor slowdowns and stoppages.”

YES! We knew this years ago. We knew there was sabotage. We knew this caused productivity to plummet. And we knew our business as we knew it was at risk. There is a long and storied history to Terminal 6 at the Port of Portland. Years of bad management, global trade changing, our inland port, and more.

From the article:

According to testimony, Leal Sundet, one of the leaders of the international union, had threatened the port operator’s chief executive officer Elvis Ganda on May 21, 2012, that “I am the guy who can (expletive) you badly” and that ICTSI “would pay the price” if it didn’t give the refrigerated container work to the longshore workers union. Three days later, Local 8 President Jeff Smith demanded ICTSI assign the dockside refrigerated container jobs to his workers and if not, the union would put ICTSI out of business and run every Hanjin container out of Portland, according to ICTSI’s lawyers.

Do I know everything that went on? No. Was I there? No. Do I have an opinion? Absolutely. I think that the ILWU is made up of incredibly hard working longshoremen – but I absolutely believe the leaders knew they could bully the terminal manager… and they did. Ultimately, ICTSI did not back down. And we all lost. The Port of Portland lost 98% of its container business. 

So what happened next? 

trucks-on-road

Short answer, there is now increased traffic on the roads. And we are some of those trucks on the road. We utilize Northwest Container Service (NWCS, a remote container yard) located in Portland. NWCS then rails containers north to the ports of Tacoma and Seattle. We can drop off and pick up containers at NWCS, but they cannot handle all of our volume in Oregon, and there are increased risks to only using NWCS (namely less ability to have on-time delivery and equipment availability due to being farther away from the actual ports). In addition, all refrigerated cargo has to be delivered directly to the Ports in Tacoma and Seattle. So, as part of our business strategy to keep our shipments on time and to best service our customers, we deliver to a combination of NWCS, and ports of Tacoma and Seattle. Recently, Terminal 6 added rail service, so we also utilize that rail yard. Diversification is a key strategy in being successful in the strange world of international container shipping.

I would be remiss to not bring the carbon emission debate into this conversation. According to the International Chamber on Shipping: “The shipping industry is a small contributor to the total volume of atmospheric emissions compared to road vehicles and air transport (see graph below) as well as public utilities such as power stations, and atmospheric pollution from ships has reduced in the last decade. There have been significant improvements in engine efficiency and hull design, and the use of ships with larger cargo carrying capacities have led to a reduction in emissions and an increase in fuel efficiency. In terms of CO2 emissions per tonne of cargo transported one mile, shipping is recognized as the most efficient form of commercial transport.”

Comparison of emissions_shipping

In summary, due to Port of Portland’s long and torrid history and the West Coast Port Crisis:

  • First quarter 2015 GDP slowdown
  • Oregon’s export companies lost business, some didn’t survive
  • Oregon’s agriculture lost market share and/or took years to climb out of the financial hole the West Coast Port Crisis
  • Oregon’s exporters – through trucking companies – now have to drive more to get crops and product to the international markets through Ports farther away
  • Oregon and Washington’s carbon footprint has increased since losing the Port of Portland’s container service at Terminal 6

This is a multi-prong, multi-year, multi-government problem we are dealing with. At this time, more people becoming more knowledgeable with both our history and our current state of affairs is exactly where we need to be.

Opportunity for change is on the horizon. Let’s right this ship. 

Transportation and Oregon – a love/hate relationship – Part 2

In January, I wrote “Part 1” talking about congestion and truck traffic.

Part 2 will focus on an upcoming Bad Bill: Senate Bill 1008.

There’s a lot in the bill that I’d love to take the time to research and discredit. As I’m not a scientist, or a public health official, it would be hard to do so. What I can speak to is this specifically in the first part of the bill, page 2:

Whereas the attrition rate of older, dirty diesel engines that are not retrofitted is too slow to adequately curb emissions in a timely manner and protect public health; and Whereas a strategy to shorten the timeline for conversion to the use of new diesel engines and older diesel engines retrofitted with particulate filters requires a combination of regulations and incentives; and Whereas the incorporation of California’s emission standards for nonroad diesel engines into the Department of Environmental Quality’s existing air quality regulations will benefit public health;

If you don’t want to read my testimony, here’s my point: the diesel-dependent trucking industry is fixing whatever emission problem that may or may not exist. The attrition rate is not too slow. The amount of time and effort the Oregon legislature is putting into this perceived problem will make almost zero difference in any emission standards that wouldn’t have already happened in the course of regular trucking industry’s business decisions over the course of the next few years. An absolute waste of time – at a time that Oregon has many problems it needs to focus on.

If you want to read more in-depth, here is my testimony:


 

Before the Senate Committee on Environment and Natural Resources

Testimony of Shelly Boshart Davis

Vice President

Boshart Trucking, Inc.

Senate Bill 1008 ~ March 7, 2017

 

Chair Dembrow and Committee – my name is Shelly Boshart Davis. Thank you for allowing me to submit testimony on behalf of our family farm and trucking company. We are a custom farming and trucking business that provides jobs to almost 50 employees. We also export over 2200 containers of Ag exports overseas.

I’m not a scientist, or a statistician, or like collecting or interpreting massive amounts of data. So I’m not going to try to discredit how not-clean or clean our air is. Here’s what I did find:

According to the DEQ, “Overall, air pollution in the Portland area has decreased dramatically over the last 30 years.” CEO of the American Lung Association said, “We are happy to report that the state of our air is much cleaner today than when we started the ‘State of the Air’ report 14 years ago.”

And I can tell you about trucks. And our trucking industry is pretty impressive – and just getting better. Diesel-dependent industries are improving on their own. For example, within the last few years, we have upgraded 25% of our port-destination portion of our truck fleet to have the new standard of engines: 2014 Peterbilt and Freightliner trucks. By 2020, we will have had most of our fleet upgraded to new or newer trucks because that’s what businesses and farms and people do – they upgrade over time. Whatever problem or perceived problem exists, it will be rectified. Why burden businesses with extensive costs to implement? Every dollar invested into retrofitting or buying new equipment is one less dollar that I can spend on my employees, that I can spend on garnering new business – that I can help the economy, the families that I employ, and providing food and feed for neighbors, Oregonians and the world.

I had previously testified in opposition to HB 3310 and SB 824 both in 2015, and pulled up these slides from the Department of Environmental Quality found in SB 824’s “meeting materials” in OLIS. Note the extreme low amount of trucks that you are ultimately concerned about. All of this legislation for only 36,537 trucks that are being used in Oregon? And this was from at least 2015 if not older information. The amount shown in the multi-state graph on the left can’t be regulated by the Oregon Legislature anyway. Even if you could, these trucks would have been updated in the next few years by normal business practices. And look at the small piece of the pie that includes Oregon based trucks…

This leads me back to my point: whatever problem we may or may not have – it’s already fixing itself.

 Take a look at how far diesel engines have come and I question why we need the mandates and regulation and legislation. 2010 is a tiny box. What does 2017’s box look like? When is enough, enough?

DEQ 3

The Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago posted this in 2014:

ACT Research defines the active population of trucks as those trucks still in service that are 15 years of age or younger. The reason for this distinction is that once a vehicle reaches 15 years of age, it becomes much less likely to be used for hauling meaningful amounts of freight over long distances.

Another factor affecting freight rates has been the significant increase in truck prices. Truck prices started increasing in 2002 because of federally mandated diesel emission standards that required the costly development of new engine technologies. ACT Research analysts contend that since 2002 the cost of meeting these standards has added an estimated $30,000 to the cost of a new truck—a price increase of about 31%.

There is yet another factor that is likely to drive up costs for the trucking industry: the projection for a severe shortage of qualified truck drivers. The effects of the shortage, which has been in the making for some time, were somewhat mitigated during the most recent economic downturn. Since then, as freight activity has recovered, the driver shortage has become a more serious problem.

Committee – Currently, the average age of Heavy Trucks is 6 years old. If this trend continues, by 2020, the average age of trucks will be on average 2014 trucks – this is great news! This means that trucking companies are constantly purchasing new equipment because they need reliability (i.e. no breakdowns on the road). We aren’t doing this because of mandates, we are doing this because it’s good business.

Graph - average age of Class 8 vehicles.png

Average age of active population of US Class 8 (Heavy Truck) vehicles

Labor and Fuel are trucking industries two largest costs. Labor is going up as truck drivers are harder and harder to find. According to the Journal of Commerce: Truckload carriers will need to raise driver pay substantially to attract the type of qualified candidates needed to haul freight. On top of that, a host of new driver-related regulations will make hiring truck drivers harder, and more expensive. Because Low Carbon Fuel Standards was recently signed into law, the fuel costs will be going up. I testified in opposition to the LCFS based on the fact that the increase in fuel costs was undetermined. Equipment is always a concern as is cost of doing business and providing a cost-effective service to customers. Mandated equipment upgrades or new purchases cannot be simply absorbed. What will this cost be to small business across the state?

Committee, this hits home to me. I urge you, do not pass this regulation on an industry that the Oregon Legislature recently passed to increase fuel costs (Low Carbon Fuel Standard) to, we’re looking at a possible gas tax in an upcoming transportation package, and who is already struggling with labor force – not to mention our recent and current port struggles… We are not California, we do not have their problems, and our diesel-dependent trucking industry is getting better. Because trucking companies are continuously upgrading their fleets/trucks with stricter emissions controls, older trucks are already being phased out and replaced by the cleaner burning trucks as companies can afford to do so.  Disrupting this process by mandating a costly upgrade is an added burden to businesses and commerce – and more importantly, completely unnecessary.