You don't have to go far outside of the city of Washington to see trucks on the side of the road, in all disarray, with drivers sleeping in cabs, and so on. I saw one on the Pennsylvania Turnpike take advantage of his trailer by dropping a filthy mattress on stones and sleeping under the tandem axle in order to get some rest. That is not an unusual condition any longer. They imperil safety; create fatal accidents. Overloading becomes a standard practice because they can't live, anyway. Their hours of driving are far beyond the point of not only safety, but far beyond the point of comprehension. We are told of a racket that developed down in Florida where interests making the shipments are using what has been called a game. The game is called double or nothing. If an operator can make a trip from Orlando, Fla., to New York in 32 hours or less, he gets twice the amount of money for hauling the freight. If he can't make it, he goes for nothing. I never heard of such conditions in my life, and I hope they will never be permitted to permeate the transportation industry; but they are here now. This bill is antiregulatory. It is against the public interest and, in our opinion, would be a revolting and backwards development. It benefits no one other than those who exploit these arrangements for private gain. For-hire carriers cannot survive with the crumbs and leavings at the transportation table. Either the Congress of the United States was sincere when it developed public regulation for motor carriers in 1935 or it was not. It is left to the Interstate Commerce Commission as an arm of this Congress to meet that burden. The Interstate Commerce Commission each year makes its annual report to you. In many of these annual reports it has called your specific attention to these situations. Commissioner Cross has appeared before you and suggested this bill not be passed. The Interstate Commerce Commission will commence next Monday morning a series of orderly hearings, just as this committee is holding a series of orderly hearings on this bill now, to deal with a problem they know most about, and I believe, gentlemen of this committee and the Congress, that you should give this Interstate Commerce Commission which you have created a chance to do its job and, when and if it reports to you that legislative changes are necessary or desirable in the public interest, you will, as you always have, pay attention to their requests and take such action as you deem necessary. This bill is special-interest legislation. It is wrongly identified with the group of people who support it, and behind them stand the people who really support it, those who stand to gain, to make a profit from the misery of other people. The gypsy business is not transportation. If you want that kind of business made legal, then pass this bill; and if it is made legal, then you have said to the people of the United States and to the Interstate Commerce Commission that regulation of motor carriers is no longer in the public interest to that extent, and you have planted the first seed of destruction for the entire for-hire regulated transportation system, which has been developed in our country because the public desired it to be developed and which was regulated because the Congress said it should be in the public interest. Thank you. The CHAIRMAN. Do you have any questions, Mrs. Bowring? Senator BowRING. NO. The CHAIRMAN. Senator Duff. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Markowitz. The next witness will be W. D. Johnson, vice president of the Order of Railway Conductors, of Washington. Is he here? The next witness will be the executive vice president, Samuel Fraser, of the International Apple Association. STATEMENT OF SAMUEL FRASER, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, INTERNATIONAL APPLE ASSOCIATION Mr. FRASER. Mr. Chairman, my name is Samuel Fraser. I am executive vice president of International Apple Association, with offices at 1302 18th Street NW., Washington, D. C. This association is composed of producers, shippers, and distributors of apples and other fruits and has a membership of almost 1,400 firms, the majority being located in the continental United States. We cannot refrain at this time from expressing our appreciation of the splendid address on transportation problems made by the chairman of your honorable committe, Senator John W. Bricker, in his recent appearance before a group of the United States Chamber of Commerce. The title was "Clearing Transport Roadblocks." Let me quote, in part, at least: Since regulatory and promotional policies inevitably produce transport roadblocks, Congress should remove them before they become serious. Only by promptly removing such impediments can the Congress hope to preserve the inherent advantages of each mode of transportation. This statement meets the case before you. The Interstate Commerce Commission has, by its order in MC-43, even as amended, created a roadblock. It is a roadblock which was nonexistent until brought into being by the Interstate Commerce Commission. It is our well-advised judgment that it was never the intent of Congress to have this roadblock put in the path of flexible transportation. The law provides, as we understood it when it was placed in effect, absolute freedom to the truck moving agricultural commodities to go to any point and lease for a return trip by whatever route selected, with the parties to the contract free to negotiate the cost of the movement. I only want to insert that I have now appeared before this committee on one subject or another for almost 50 years. It has been my privilege to work on this legislation through all of its courses. Congress in its wisdom recognized the uncertainties of weather and market requirements as well as the uncertainties in marketing in the case of perishables and the necessity for freedom of movement if the commodities were to reach the public in the best possible condition and at least cost. The truck hauling fruits and vegetables has been free to move from producing areas to any point by any route selected and return to that area or another with a payload. If an agricultural commodity was not available, then lease of the truck for a single trip or a series of trips was negotiated. In the complicated language of the amended regulation we foresee the possibility of such narrow interpretation of what leasing is permissible as to forbid trip leasing to such an extent that it would cause waste in transport facilities. Deadheading when a load could be transported is just as wasteful in times of peace as it is in wartime, and narrow interpretation of the law and regulations thereunder should not be permitted to cause economic waste. Again may I quote Senator Bricker: The penalty for not clearing transport roadblocks is a transportation crisis. Transportation crises in the marketing of perishable agricultural commodities may well develop by reason of inadequate supplies of trucking facilities in producing sections during peak movements. As pointed out in the attached statement of a member of this association, the leasing of equipment away from producing areas for a period of 30 days may well bring about a loss to farmers by reason of a transportation roadblock. That is another reason for urging favorable action on this legislation now. Senator Bricker further advises: It may well be that carriers by rail, highway, waterway, and pipeline are overregulated. I think that is so. We seek to free the Interstate Commerce Commission from needless work and enforcement activties which we are satisfied the Commission will find difficult to police. Senator Bricker further states: We have also learned that the ills of each segment of the industry varied with the degree of Federal regulation under which each operated. It is perhaps a bitter commentary that the protecting arm of Federal regulation is bent in a stranglehold on many of the great carriers of the Nation. In the years prior to 1935 and the enactment of the Motor Carrier Act, it was my privilege to work to secure the complete exemption from Federal control, except as to safety regulations, for the truck engaged in the movement of agricultural commodities, my interest being fruits and vegetables. This freedom has been enjoyed up to now. The proposal confronting us in ICC's truck-leasing regulations is about like telling the farm dog he is a free pup at the time of putting him on a leash after he has enjoyed the privilege of roaming the farm. Senator Bricker ably quoted the late Senator Benjamin Harvey Hill on the dangers of extending the powers of Government agencies when he pointed out: I dread nothing so much as the exercise of ungranted and doubtful powers by this Government *** which can make all property rights *** and all liberty and hope its plaything in an hour and its victims forever. 36105-54-pt. 2—11 We recognize the danger inherent in extending such power to a Government agency that it, through administrative interpretation of the law, may issue regulations at odds with the original intent of Congress, and the folly of permitting such adverse interpretation to go uncorrected by legislative action. We ask that you take note of this danger and clarify the Interstate Commerce Commission's regulatory powers in the matters of leasing of trucks and the compensation to be paid therefor by promptly and favorably reporting to the Senate the bill H. R. 3203 presently before you. In so doing you will be commending Chairman Bricker for the clarity and soundness of his views. I would like to supplement and file a letter from the firm of J. G. Maples Co., Martingsburg, W. Va., signed by F. C. Matson. The CHAIRMAN. That will be made a part of the record. Mr. FRASER. I will read the letter from J. G. Maples Co., Martinsburg, W. Va., dated May 4, 1954, and I will omit the title at the front: Mr. SAMUEL FRASER, Executive Vice President, International Apple Association, Washington 6, D. C. DEAR SAM: The following is our reply relative paragraph No. 3 of your letter of April 26, having to do with ICC Order MC-43, section 203 (b) (4a), (5) and (6). This is necessarily a combination of opinion and facts and as to the latter the notarization certifies to their authenticity. In our business as a shipper we use three trucks of our own which handle a good proportion of the crops (apples and peaches) we market. To do this instead of hiring trucks, it means we have complete control over this perishable merchandise until it is in the hands of the next handler in the marketing chain of distribution. It means our own trained drivers are looking after our interest and, therefore, our fruit is handled with less bruising in both loading and unloading. Deliveries are made promptly and on schedule. Our drivers are on call 24 hours a day and are, therefore, available whenever needed. It is important in dealing in perishable commodities that the time to ship is when the customer wants it, not some indefinite time in the future. So much for the advantages of the shipper-owned trucks. Consideration of some of the problems arising with these trucks is also important. It has been stressed above that good drivers are an advantage. To keep good drivers on the job they must be satisfied with their work and their wages. To do this and to keep operating overhead such as insurance, depreciation, and interest to a minimum, it is necessary to find revenue-producing work during slack seasons while at the same time having the equipment available for whatever the shipper may need it. It is in this period when the shipper needs the most flexibility in operating his own trucks. During the busy season it is usually more advantageous for the grower or shipper to deadhead return trips in order to have his own equipment available to use, but in the slacker seasons the option of trip leasing to any destination for any period of time becomes important. Also during the busy season there are many times when sufficient numbers of trucks are not available and, even though many growers and shippers own trucks, it is necessary to hire trucks to move the crop to primary and subprimary destinations including canning plants, fresh slicing plants, freezing plants, fresh packing plants, to market, and to cold storage. One hundred percent of this fruit must move part or all of the way by truck; therefore, to have trucks economically available at this time they must be able to operate profitably throughout the year, and it is obvious that problems outlined above in connection with shipperowned trucks likewise arise in connection with privately owned trucks in an agricultural shipping area. In our own instance in the slack season we many times deadhead from our normal base to points as far as 350 miles distant to pick up loads on a trip lease to be delivered back to the home area, or in some instances we may have half a load of apples to deliver 100 miles to market then continue deadhead 250 miles farther to pick up lessee's load. Admittedly such operations would not be profitable per se, but during slack seasons it may give shipper-owned or normally exempt commercial agricultural hauler sufficient work to meet overhead and keep good drivers satisfied and available for the main seasonal business. There is no question but that the limitations proposed would stalemate any truck at shipping point which could not get a load out (an exempt movement) to the point where his truck was needed. Suitable 30-day leases might not be available or if available not satisfactory or desirable. This rule would certainly cause maladjustments in perishable shipping areas making essential transportation scarce and costly, which factors would eventually be reflected as higher costs to the consumer. We hereby certify that any matters of fact herein contained are true and complete statements to the best of our knowledge and beliefs. STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA, County of Berkeley: J. G. MAPLES CO. (Signed) F. C. MATSON, Owner. Signed and sworn to in my presence this 4th day of May 1954. (Signed) JOSEPH C. SNYDER, Notary Public. I have one more letter, dated May 3, 1954, from the Glasgow & Davis Co., Maryland: INTERNATIONAL APPLE ASSOCIATION, Washington 6, D. C. (Attention: Mr. Samuel Fraser.) DEAR SIR: We would like to state our views as to how the Interstate Commerce Commission regulation governing the leasing of loads, especially return loads, would impede our operation. In our hauling of produce it is very important that we get a return load from or near our destination. Freight rates as they are do not permit us to operate our trucks empty. We just could not stay in business if we could not pick up return loads. Even the ICC regulation that permits a return movement in a reasonable direct route would not be of much help to us. We must accept loads to any point or points whenever they are available. We cannot choose our loads and, as we said before, we cannot run our trucks empty. For example: Suppose we load produce for Chicago. When our driver has unloaded he will try to get another load and that may be to Moline, Ill. Then he may go up into Sumner, Iowa. From Sumner he may load to New York or Philadelphia. This could not be interpreted as a reasonable direct route back to Salisbury. Therefore, any legislation that would not be flexible enough to take care of a situation as explained above would surely hurt the haulers of produce and many, many truckers would have to go out of business. We hope that no such restricting legislation is ever passed. Very sincerely. (Signed) THE GLASGOW & DAVIS Co., It is attested by Frank L. Meade: To Whom It May Concern: This is to certify that the attached letter and any statements contained therein was sworn to before me, a notary public for the State of Maryland, by M. C. Glasgow and all statements made by him in this letter are true. Dated this 3d day of May 1954. [SEAL] (Signed) FRANK L. MEADE, Notary Public. |