Letter: Safety, Broker Bonds

This Letter to the Editor appears in the Aug. 15 print edition of Transport Topics. Click here to subscribe today.

There are two points to make here, beginning with a question about road safety: How can the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration so closely regulate a driver and then ignore the environment in which that driver operates?

Drivers have no market power, nor do the vast majority of the nation’s motor carriers. The driver and, subsequently, the carrier end up being that “fuse” between the real world and the expectations, as well as between the loading dock and the broker.

Our nation is better connected than to allow the daily nonsense to continue, as it does. The free market has shown that, simply due to lack of capital, it will force out small, high-quality drivers and operators who operate safely.

If we allow this to continue unfettered, we are allowing the shipping bullies to dictate which motor carriers operate on our highways — the responsible ones who try to follow the rules or the shortcutters with the astronomically high driver turnover.



Now for the second point, which concerns broker surety bonds (“Bill Would Mandate Bond of $100,000 for Brokers,” 7-4, p. 3).

We carriers end up with unpaid bills for many reasons, and we know that if we aren’t paid, we may go out of business.

That means we pay attention to those for whom we are hauling. We pay money for credit checks, and we do our best to vet freight and freight sources.

Nonetheless, we too often end up in the cold while a well-executed plan of “book and leave” once again tarnishes the broker industry.

Unfortunately, there are too many brokers out there who work hard at, and are good at, fooling shippers into giving them freight and fooling carriers into hauling that freight.

We accept a certain amount of risk as part of doing business. The purpose of the surety bond is to give carriers a means to collect our money in the event of a broker failure. I cannot remember that ever working for our company — we are always “too late,” because the amount is far too small to cover more than a few loads. It’s the old “get in line, bud” answer.

If the answer is not to increase the surety bond limit, then what is it? Brokers and/or shippers paying into a pool of money for stiffed carriers?

Or are we content with the capital-intensive motor carriers of our nation taking hit after financial hit?

Danny Schnautz

Operations Manager

Clark Freight Lines

Pasadena, Texas