Tag Archives: ports

PierPass shelves permanent TMF plan as Long Beach calls for 24/7 supply chains

The problem with 24/7 operation at ports is that no one wants to pay for it. And that is despite the fact that the costs will probably wind up being added to the import cost and passed on to the shipper and customer.

It seems port executives and supply chain players differ in their view of what’s needed. Terminals and warehouse operators and perhaps even drayage firms don’t think 24-hour service is needed to relieve the current congestion. And the staffing costs of staying open 24/7 would rise, with a lot of potential dead time. It is also hard to find additional trained staff today.

Unions are resisting because they claim the port terminals and other unionized players are not willing to hire more union workers.

And the PierPass is being taken unfair advantage of; apparently some are charging higher fees for using the time slots in the hours outside normal working times. See the second article below, which claims PierPass is only incentivizing adjustments that make them more money, rather than enhancing the flow of goods.

Is it possible for port management to get control of this? It’s doubtful under the current port governance rules.

Perhaps we need even more involvement from the federal government or the FMC to get action.

By Ian Putzger in Toronto 14/02/2022

PierPass shelves permanent TMF plan as Long Beach calls for 24/7 supply chains – The Loadstar

Kim Biggar February 14, 2022

https://splash247.com/fmc-says-non-profit-pierpass-at-los-angeles-and-long-beach-is-making-millions-in-profits/

Glimmer of hope: Has the ship gridlock off ports finally peaked?

Flexport’s chief economist seems to think that’s possible.

He points to the fact that there won’t be any more stimulus checks to generate more demand for consumer goods. And the graphs show a rollover after a peak in January. The chart is telling:

Source: American Shipper, Chart: American Shipper based on data from Marine Exchange of Southern California

Flexport is a major broker and forwarder, based in San Francisco. They have a very thoughtful approach to understanding what they face in their markets. A pronouncement from them has some weight. Flexport just managed to raise $935 million to continue their advancement. That’s a bunch of capital.

The backers are big names, too. Andreesen Horowitz is a major VC with many successes to its credit.

It’s too early to declare victory. over port congestion. More demand will come. There is a lot of replenishing of inventory going on. And the excess empty containers at LA and Long Beach, and elsewhere as well, are still a big source of onshore logistics problems. And the truck driver shortage, and the Great Resignation. And demand is still elevated; when people can’t travel or go to restaurants, they buy stuff.

But with recognition of a problem, and it’s certainly well recognized now, people have started to work on solving the many little bottlenecks that conspire to make a supply chain grind its gears. Perhaps we will see a slow unwinding of the problems.

Greg Miller, Senior Editor Tuesday, February 8, 2022

Glimmer of hope: Has the ship gridlock off ports finally peaked? – FreightWaves

Los Angeles imports slump further as congestion throttles volume

American Shipper has done a very nice article showing that LA/Long Beach is actually slowing down in throughput in the last two months or so. The graphs from their SONAR statistics show clearly that container processing is bottlenecked at those two ports.

It’s also true that both the port management at Los Angeles and Long Beach has emphasized the overall gains in 2021. But most of that was accomplished before the end of the year,and there has been a dramatic slowdown recently.

One issue that has only recently been mentioned is the large excess of empty containers at these two ports, waiting to be exported back to the Far East. These empties get in the way of unloading and loading real cargo.

Ocean carriers are recalcitrant about taking on the empties, as they don’t pay any fare. And it’s almost cheaper to build new containers in China for Chinese exported goods, than it would be to carry them back. So there is little economic incentive for those containers to be returned. And ocean carriers can’t be ordered to take them by any government.

One option for the ports of LA and Long Beach is to actually enforce fines per day on empty containers not taken by ocean carriers. These have been discussed previously and keep being passed on by the Port Boards.

Another option is for the Ports to declare that any empty container left in the port for more than some number of days will be scrapped for the steel, and the container owner charged for the cost of scrapping. The value of the sold metal could accrue to the port, or could be paid back to the original owner, according to the politics. I’d favor the port keeping the scrap money.

China has been accused of dumping steel in the US before. Now China is dumping fabricated steel in the form of containers. It’s not sustainable to have these boxes build up beyond a point where they interfere with import and export of real goods.

Greg Miller, Senior Editor Thursday, January 27, 2022

Los Angeles imports slump further as congestion throttles volume