We Have Mail
Thu, 29 Jul 2010
Letters to the Editor
Re: container weight
Dear Kizzi,
Very interesting points brought up by Tony [Berkeley], regarding the practices tolerated.
As regards weighing containers at the terminal gate, the trucks and trailers can bear barcodes indentifying their respective weights on the weighbridge and a computer readout display the container weight.
The time needed for this process would be minimal. However, the question of what to do about overweight boxes remains.
Not only are overweight boxes a danger, they also add to the fuel consumption of vehicles carrying them, be it via road, rail or water. Thus, they contribute to pollution and its associated problems including the health of those living near to port areas.
As to stopping the loading of overweight boxes, there are legal restrictions by public authorities for the maximum weights transported by road, therefore why let them on the roads in the first place?
Fitting sensors on boxes would add to the cost of them and would not be viable for the millions currently in service. It would be more practical to have sensors fitted to the trailers as they are much fewer in number than the boxes they carry.
However, again what would this do to stop what is common practice?
In the event of an incident resulting from an overweight container, take criminal action against those who overload containers and those who permit it to go on. Insurers should also deny damage claims made in such circumstances.
Continuing to turning a blind eye in the name of profit to the detriment of safety of others must cease
Jim Nicoll,
NewsLink Services
Re: shipping surcharges
Dear Kizzi,
It is interesting that the delays in port operations for various reasons are charged back to the consignees as congestion surcharges by liner companies. It is ironic that these lines tend to punish their customers, “the shippers”, when their service arrangements are disrupted by ports where they come into terminal agreements and so on.
Instead of trying to make a non-transparent quick buck from shippers, these lines should negotiate congestion rebates from ports of call to reduce ship-handling charges for each delayed voyage, rather than punishing shippers (their clients) if they have to anchor for a longer period due to strikes and labour issues.
This is another way of generating extra revenue by passing the blame on ports. Amazingly, these same liners are now
practicing a new term called “zero-rated freight” and have started to run their businesses on surcharges and other non-transparent charges, which are invariably many times higher than the market-driven freight rates.
They decide to charge these surcharges on the weaker link of the supply chain who does not have much bargaining power when clearing goods for exports or imports, (either the buyer or the seller).
This is why governments must intervene to bring in competition rules and rate filing mechanisms in international trade to understand the anti-competitive pricing methods used by these shipping lines.
Asia must follow these competition rules and must adapt from the US and the EU to keep the carriers under check
Rohan Masakorala
Secretary General, Asian Shippers’ Council
Dear Kizzi,
Very interesting points brought up by Tony [Berkeley], regarding the practices tolerated.
As regards weighing containers at the terminal gate, the trucks and trailers can bear barcodes indentifying their respective weights on the weighbridge and a computer readout display the container weight.
The time needed for this process would be minimal. However, the question of what to do about overweight boxes remains.
Not only are overweight boxes a danger, they also add to the fuel consumption of vehicles carrying them, be it via road, rail or water. Thus, they contribute to pollution and its associated problems including the health of those living near to port areas.
As to stopping the loading of overweight boxes, there are legal restrictions by public authorities for the maximum weights transported by road, therefore why let them on the roads in the first place?
Fitting sensors on boxes would add to the cost of them and would not be viable for the millions currently in service. It would be more practical to have sensors fitted to the trailers as they are much fewer in number than the boxes they carry.
However, again what would this do to stop what is common practice?
In the event of an incident resulting from an overweight container, take criminal action against those who overload containers and those who permit it to go on. Insurers should also deny damage claims made in such circumstances.
Continuing to turning a blind eye in the name of profit to the detriment of safety of others must cease
Jim Nicoll,
NewsLink Services
Re: shipping surcharges
Dear Kizzi,
It is interesting that the delays in port operations for various reasons are charged back to the consignees as congestion surcharges by liner companies. It is ironic that these lines tend to punish their customers, “the shippers”, when their service arrangements are disrupted by ports where they come into terminal agreements and so on.
Instead of trying to make a non-transparent quick buck from shippers, these lines should negotiate congestion rebates from ports of call to reduce ship-handling charges for each delayed voyage, rather than punishing shippers (their clients) if they have to anchor for a longer period due to strikes and labour issues.
This is another way of generating extra revenue by passing the blame on ports. Amazingly, these same liners are now
practicing a new term called “zero-rated freight” and have started to run their businesses on surcharges and other non-transparent charges, which are invariably many times higher than the market-driven freight rates.
They decide to charge these surcharges on the weaker link of the supply chain who does not have much bargaining power when clearing goods for exports or imports, (either the buyer or the seller).
This is why governments must intervene to bring in competition rules and rate filing mechanisms in international trade to understand the anti-competitive pricing methods used by these shipping lines.
Asia must follow these competition rules and must adapt from the US and the EU to keep the carriers under check
Rohan Masakorala
Secretary General, Asian Shippers’ Council
Click here to email the editor and comment on this story
Receive our FREE news email bulletin click here
- Job of the WeekSales Manager Ref: 50063824 SO2 (SCP 32-34) £27,052 - £28,636
- 13 − 15 March 2012
- 22 − 23rd March 2012
- 25th April 2012 for 12 weeks.
- 12 − 14 June 2012
