New business strategy???

M

Manitoba Moose

Member
Jul 27, 2009
322
0
16
Otterburne, MB
10
Just ran across a new one and really don't know what to think of it. Please help me convince myself that I am right in my response...

Received a set up package from UTL Transportation Services, a broker out of Edmonton, AB since we were looking at maybe doing some loads for them. In their set up package, they include a 3 page questionaire that has to be filled by each and every individual driver from OUR company and returned to UTL before they will release the load info direct to OUR driver.

They say its because:
"As a Company serving the ever expanding and demanding Energy Sector, UTL has made a commitment to them that they will be completely in compliance with any reasonable request that our Customers in their make.

The need for a structured line of Logistics is critical for them. For as we, represent them, in our business dealings with the likes of TCPL, CNRL. Shell, etc., we have committed to be responsible . Part of our responsibility extends to the likes of ******* and other Professional
Transportation Companies.

Due Diligence and Vicarious Liability are two of the terms that are prominent in not only our Industry but have reached into the normal vocabulary of virtually every business in Canada and certainly the U.S.A.

The requirement for your Driving Team Members is being made at the request of our Customers. I believe this is really nothing more than what even your higher demand customers would request of yourselves".

I told them that there was no way that our drivers would fill out their forms and WE dispatch OUR trucks, not them. Well, they didn't like that and said "Unfortunately, until this need can be complied with UTL has no choice but to curtail business with your Company".

I can see one or two truck companies giving in to their request but companies with 30, 50, 100, 500 trucks... I really don't think so but, I may be wrong.

Has anyone else heard of this? Is this type of demand the "New world order" in the transportation business? Would your company be willing to have each and every driver fill in these forms and have your truck dispatched by UTL or another transportation company? Am I wrong in telling them to stuff it?
 
So, in effect, every time you hire a new driver, they have to fill out this form also and you would have to forward it to this company?
I don't mind giving our driver's cell phone number to brokers if they ask for it. I don't force the drivers to answer the calls, though. And I think I would pass on this company, if it were me. You are the dispatcher for your trucks. Drivers should not need to pass on their personal information to other companies. That is my opinion.
 
It is unusual. I know back in the day when you loaded for a US broker they did that, but that ship has sailed I believe.

You can't let a broker's dispatcher rule the roost as to what your driver is and is not going to do.
 
I guess it all depends on how much business you plan on doing with them and how much is that business worth to you? It doesn`t surprise me at all, that high profile companies involved in oil develpoment projects request such information from all of their suppliers. In the event of a serious accident they want to have all of their ducks lined-up correctly.
 
I believe there was also a precedent set when CH Robinson was fined $10 million in a wrongful death suit, where CH Robinson was directly dispatching a company's driver and the driver was involved in an accident that caused death. I believe this was posted on IST some time ago but would make for an interesting discussion with UTL. They dispatch the driver they take on a SERIOUS amount of responsibility.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Manitoba Moose said:
Just ran across a new one and really don't know what to think of it. Please help me convince myself that I am right in my response...

Received a set up package from UTL Transportation Services, a broker out of Edmonton, AB since we were looking at maybe doing some loads for them. In their set up package, they include a 3 page questionaire that has to be filled by each and every individual driver from OUR company and returned to UTL before they will release the load info direct to OUR driver.

They say its because:
"As a Company serving the ever expanding and demanding Energy Sector, UTL has made a commitment to them that they will be completely in compliance with any reasonable request that our Customers in their make.

The need for a structured line of Logistics is critical for them. For as we, represent them, in our business dealings with the likes of TCPL, CNRL. Shell, etc., we have committed to be responsible . Part of our responsibility extends to the likes of ******* and other Professional
Transportation Companies.

Due Diligence and Vicarious Liability are two of the terms that are prominent in not only our Industry but have reached into the normal vocabulary of virtually every business in Canada and certainly the U.S.A.

The requirement for your Driving Team Members is being made at the request of our Customers. I believe this is really nothing more than what even your higher demand customers would request of yourselves".

I told them that there was no way that our drivers would fill out their forms and WE dispatch OUR trucks, not them. Well, they didn't like that and said "Unfortunately, until this need can be complied with UTL has no choice but to curtail business with your Company".

I can see one or two truck companies giving in to their request but companies with 30, 50, 100, 500 trucks... I really don't think so but, I may be wrong.

Has anyone else heard of this? Is this type of demand the "New world order" in the transportation business? Would your company be willing to have each and every driver fill in these forms and have your truck dispatched by UTL or another transportation company? Am I wrong in telling them to stuff it?
Click to expand...


I'm wondering what "reasonable request" above and beyond basic due diligence these customers are making? I understand if these companies are ISO certified and they expect their partners to also follow a quality protocol to be "compliant", that is fine and they should say exactly that. Asking for information that is beyond the norms of what the business relationship actually needs, without justifying that need, is intrusive. Is this for security purposes? I know that when companies ask for C-TPAT and other security information, this is part of the drill. Unless your drivers are being subjected to some kind of screening because they're entering high security facilities where they might be refused entry, I wouldn't volunteer any personal data about your drivers and I would ask exactly what kind of compliance they are looking to have.
 
I believe when one is talking about stuff to do with oil/petroleum, the term is Responsible Care, actually. But this is taking it way further.
 
We would never offer any personal information on our drivers to anyone. All of our drivers have company identification. If there are specific policies that a driver must read prior to entering a facility and sign off then thats reasonable. But to ask that a carrier have everyone of their drivers sign off on a form prior to buisness (what if the carrier only handles 1 load) from this location/shipper?
 
Getting goofier and goofier every day. I had a customer last week demand that each driver hand over their driver licence at the gate so their security guard could make a photocopy of it. I told them that there was too much personal info on it and we would not play along. We have name badges with photo's - if that's not enough then sorry, find someone else.

I said I might go along if their owner and accounts payable person gave me the same information so I knew who I was dealing with in the event of a problem down the road. Not holding my breath.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No question, it seems to be getting crazier and more intrusive all the time, but it is something that will become more common. Large companies are getting more cautious about their exposure to risk and as a result are putting in place more stringent safety and compliance programs. If an outside supplier...truck driver, plumber, electrician, etc. comes onto their property, they are treated almost as an employee and are subject to the same level of checks. It all comes down to what they can offer as a credible defence in the event of an accident. A background check of an outside supplier demonstrates that they did perform their due diligence.
 
In the US in particular, it is not that uncommon for this to happen even when I'm making a sales call!

A couple of people have told me it's part of PIP compliance.
 
What happen to the privacy act, do we all need to get our drivers to sign release forms, before giving out their information. This would be a violation which could possibly see retribution from a driver.
 
Had enough of it...

I heard this from a number of drivers where a client implemented a policy of photocopying licenses at the exit gate, so I decided to pick up a load myself. The guard demanded my license, I refused, he would not open the gate so I shut the engine down. I made a quick call inside to the vp and we found a resolution. The op's manager had established the policy without consultation, the security guard was doing what he was told. The id our drivers present is acceptable. However corporate id cards i.e. the company issuing them, must first be approved. Simple, everybody's needs are met.

Back to the original thought; as we as a company are issuing the identification card, we are expressing that we as a company are accepting accountability for the individual to whom it is issued. There are very few places that we have been challenged on this, and a quick call to the toll free number printed on each id card usually resolves it. Wait time is back charged, and paid to the driver.
 
Last edited:
Seems fair enough.

I myself delivered a small ltl shipment to NEWALTA , yesterday.

What an interesting mess.
1st as a tractor trailer I was rerouted around a large building to come back out where I stared from.

I got to a security booth and was asked for ID and produced my FAST card, the guard wanted my drivers license and I told him he could not have that.

He called up his office and they said that if it had a picture it was enough.

Therefore delivering 2 skids took me nearly an hour instead of 15 minutes.

I do not allow my drivers to divulge their license number to anyone that is not a government official.
 
So, as per my post under Load brokers and shippers, now that we have info that brokers can be held responsible in case of accidents, maybe I'm changing my mind and will let these guys dispatch my trucks. Let all brokers take the hit.

Maybe that's the new way of thrucking these days. Am I wrong?
 
This practice will change the first time a female truck driver is stalked and attacked (heaven forbid) by some security guard or reciever because he learned her home address from the I.D given.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom