FSC nightmare for loads

K

Koala

New Member
Mar 24, 2026
3
0
1
Mississauga, ON
1
Hi all, so we've been having a dedicated carrier for loads but our production has increased for our product so we are in need of more carriers but with FSC I'm unsure of going rates as I've had decent responses but then some quoting 11k just for ON-BC. INSANE.

Anyone have suggestions as we're paying 6900 currently but there's room to increase as I want to pay carriers fairly for the service. With the 25-33% increase since January/feb to today, I'm thinking an additional 800 that's averaging between the 25-33%. Any insight would be great as I have the room to play a bit with the numbers.

Avg from quotes I'm sitting around 7500-7800 for ON-BC dry FTL (12000 lbs max). Need some insight. TIA
 
FSC at the current point in time is a conundrum for sure. It certainly doesn't help when the issues in the middle east are supposed to be fixed 'very soon' but another week goes by and it seems like the solution is even farther way. At the time I'm writing this WTI crude has crested $102.00

Being a carrier is not fun either in this situation. Not only did fuel, one of our largest expenses, jump 75-80% but so is a pile of other costs. Replacement parts, on road repairs, now have a fuel surcharge driving up the base costs as well as fuel. Top that with the cost of having to front and carry these costs. Sure, we get it back eventually, but we have to front the added fuel cost plus HST and that comes with a cost as well.

I would imagine that many carriers that are teetering on the edge of financial liquidity will shy away from taking an $8,000 load from ON-BC, only to wait 30 days (35-37 days from loading) to get paid (in the absolute best-case scenario). Taking quick pay knocks off 3% right off the top and who can handle that? Likely they'll shorten their lanes and hope to shorten the days between pickup and delivery to get the invoicing cycle shorter and the cash flowing quickly. Carriers who have all their trucks and trailers financed, renting from a big expensive location and cash strapped from the previous two years of diminished rates from the freight recession will not be able to financially carry the finances from large, long-haul trips such as this.


My quick math says that 4400KM uses about 1500L of fuel; at $2.26/L (much higher than that in northern Ontario) turns out to be $3390 that has paid out before the load is delivered and then has to be carried until the invoice cycle and payment has been received. Not many carriers have that kind of cash when the same load on Jan 1 would have been $1695.00.

I wish you luck!
 
  • Like
Reactions: MLCAR
Our one customer is paying 61% FSC currently.
Another is paying 36%
We're not being greedy, we just don't want to go broke like the thousands of other companies did in the past few years.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: MLCAR and tasuinam
Obviously, Inside Transport is not a place for a shipper to enter and try to ask, what appears to be, a legitimate question. Is it the shippers fault that a carrier was willing to do the job at that rate? No. At least in this instance the guy/girl realizes that their rate has to increase. Isn't that what we are all asking for, shippers accepting the fact that costs have increased dramatically and therefore rates must go up? I know the market is turning otherwise congenial, friendly folks into a bunch of miserable curmudgeons these days, but gee whiz fellas, lighten up. Who knows, maybe there is an opportunity to pick up some new business here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shakey, Fr8Guru, A.R123 and 1 other person
JACKBURTON said:
Our one customer is paying 61% FSC currently.
Another is paying 36%
We're not being greedy, we just don't want to go broke like the thousands of other companies did in the past few years.
Click to expand...
It all depends what the base rate is and what the fuel was when it was calculated. I never really could get an answer from anyone on the methodology for calculating FSC by percent. I think it's just an easy way because the OTA and Canada Post has it on their website.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shakey, JACKBURTON and loaders
@loaders Excellent point above.

@Koala

Unfortunately you've been experiencing an artificial overstimulation of the trucking industry. You've become accustomed to low prices for shipping due largely in part to unethical carriers that hired essentially slave labor, and a large percentage of load brokers who didn't give a crap about the carriers they hired. (not their fault per se, they need to make money too, though maybe it was a bit short sighted on their part.)
The good carriers had to reduce rates to compete until the turds finally sunk to the bottom. The pendulum has swung, loads are plentiful, fuel has skyrocketed, and other operating costs are increasingly on the rise. Carriers need to replace equipment that has been neglected since the start of Covid. All the money saved by shippers in the past now has to go to the carriers again. It's probably not your fault rates seem so high now, you were likely lied to and/or manipulated into thinking what you were paying was fair because a (perhaps desperate) company agreed to it.

It wasn't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LrgCar and Jim L
Exactly Jim L. The discrepancy in what different carriers are charging for FSC is due to a variation in what the "base rate" is.
 
JACKBURTON said:
@loaders Excellent point above.

@Koala

Unfortunately you've been experiencing an artificial overstimulation of the trucking industry. You've become accustomed to low prices for shipping due largely in part to unethical carriers that hired essentially slave labor, and a large percentage of load brokers who didn't give a crap about the carriers they hired. (not their fault per se, they need to make money too, though maybe it was a bit short sighted on their part.)
The good carriers had to reduce rates to compete until the turds finally sunk to the bottom. The pendulum has swung, loads are plentiful, fuel has skyrocketed, and other operating costs are increasingly on the rise. Carriers need to replace equipment that has been neglected since the start of Covid. All the money saved by shippers in the past now has to go to the carriers again. It's probably not your fault rates seem so high now, you were likely lied to and/or manipulated into thinking what you were paying was fair because a (perhaps desperate) company agreed to it.

It wasn't.
Click to expand...
Look at you being helpful!

I would add one more thing to this, your loads were likely railed/consolidated as well. 7k to BC was never sustainable and while I do not run that lane often, the only carriers able to offer that rate were ones that were known for that.

I am not sure what you ship or if that matters to you. If transit time is irrelevant, I would look at someone like Direct Right or Manney who LTL Consolidate/Rail.

Legit companies who do a good job.
 
Lets keep in mind what the OP's question actually was. The carrier they are currently using hasn't gone out of business due to charging a low rate, using slave labour, or avoiding source deductions, nor does it appear that the shipper has been lied to, manipulated or otherwise hoodwinked. Their freight volume has increased, requiring the need for additional capacity...that's a good thing. In addition, they seem to be somewhat aware that fuel and other costs have increased which will mean they will have to pay more for the additional trucks they need. I don't think the poster needs a lesson in transportation economics, they just need more trucks at a rate both the carrier and the shipper can live with. I am not in sales anymore, but this sure looks like an opportunity to obtain some new business, not a request for a lecture.
 
loaders said:
Lets keep in mind what the OP's question actually was. The carrier they are currently using hasn't gone out of business due to charging a low rate, using slave labour, or avoiding source deductions, nor does it appear that the shipper has been lied to, manipulated or otherwise hoodwinked. Their freight volume has increased, requiring the need for additional capacity...that's a good thing. In addition, they seem to be somewhat aware that fuel and other costs have increased which will mean they will have to pay more for the additional trucks they need. I don't think the poster needs a lesson in transportation economics, they just need more trucks at a rate both the carrier and the shipper can live with. I am not in sales anymore, but this sure looks like an opportunity to obtain some new business, not a request for a lecture.
Click to expand...
Ah I got confused as he said he seemed vexed by a fair market rate being "insane", so i covered a few bases.
 
loaders said:
Lets keep in mind what the OP's question actually was. The carrier they are currently using hasn't gone out of business due to charging a low rate, using slave labour, or avoiding source deductions, nor does it appear that the shipper has been lied to, manipulated or otherwise hoodwinked. Their freight volume has increased, requiring the need for additional capacity...that's a good thing. In addition, they seem to be somewhat aware that fuel and other costs have increased which will mean they will have to pay more for the additional trucks they need. I don't think the poster needs a lesson in transportation economics, they just need more trucks at a rate both the carrier and the shipper can live with. I am not in sales anymore, but this sure looks like an opportunity to obtain some new business, not a request for a lecture.
Click to expand...

Well, this is posted in moan and groan, so one would think anything goes, opinions, advice, heck, even lectures.

"They just need more trucks at a rate both the carrier and the shipper can live with"

Where was that same energy when rates were being pushed below cost, and carriers were told to accept it because that was the market? It's a bit rich to suddenly champion sustainability and fairness now that the shoe is on the other foot.

This industry sure has a short memory when it's convenient.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JACKBURTON
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom