Tradelink-eBiz Tradelink corporate website
Members
Login ID

Password

Login
Free Membership Forgot your password?
Training Courses
Exhibitions/Seminars
What's New
eBiz-Highlights
eBiz Pulse
e-Post
BizCentral
TexWeb
CIECC
TradeAids
e-Law
Tariffs & Regulations
Trade Info Circular
TradeStat
Labour Legislation
e-Connect

Ad in eBiz

Chinese VersionHome
e-PostBizCentralTradeAids
Search eBiz

 
| Talking Point | Interviews | Success Stories | China Today | Import & Export | Legally Speaking | Regional Development |
HK Shippers' Council "Chairman's Messgae"
Shippers: Go for all-in freight
I have to make this statement up front that shippers demand simple tariff from carriers. Shippers do not want tariff that is non-transparent, tagged on with numerous charge items.

To cope with the surge of enquiries arising from the implementation of E-MAN, the electronic submission of manifests, which were mostly against incomplete or inaccurate data on the air waybill, airlines and freight forwarders are introducing a data amendment fee. While we appreciate that airlines and freight forwarders have accepted our recommendations for 1) a grace period; 2) the publication of guidelines on websites on how to fill in air waybills and highlighting common mistakes; and 3) agreeing to explore jointly the possibility of using technology to pre-empt incorrect input, shippers nevertheless still face the prospect of a new charge. The point we raise is that technology is supposed to simplify and make processes cost-effective.

In a similar vein, three years after the 9-11 incident, some 15 airlines have sneakily added a Security Charge to their tariff and made it a separate charge item. The charge is indeed difficult to justify as the operational environment has already stabilized after three years and we see no grounds for a new charge. In addition, with the surge in oil prices lately, air carriers have filed for additional layers in the Bunker Surcharge formula that allows them more room to impose higher surcharges. When shippers agreed to the old formula, it essentially entailed a commitment on a ceiling bunker surcharge that airlines could charge. Regrettably, carriers seem impervious to the commitment.

I must appeal to shippers to protect their own interests and negotiate individually with carriers for an "all-inclusive freight" rate. Shippers should commit only to freight rates that include all surcharges and to make sure that all other charges--including local and miscellaneous charges at origin and destination--are included in the agreement. There have been so many unfortunate cases wherein shippers have been asked to pay for unknown charges upon delivery or collection of cargo.

On the sea cargo front, we have to reiterate that any and all security measures are to the benefit of ALL parties in the industry. We reject the idea that shippers have to pay for security-related costs and expenses. Some terminal operators in Europe have attempted to introduce new charge items because of the implementation of the International Ship and Port Security Code (ISPS). However, this must be justified and terminal operators must observe the traditional contractual arrangements, i.e. they should put the charge against their clients--the shipping carriers--and not against shippers who in this case are "indirect" users of the port. Shippers have no contractual relationships with terminal operators.

Nevertheless, it was still shocking news when a senior shipping line executive told me that at present, there are still, on average, two data amendments per Bill of Lading for shipments to the United States. At US$40 per amendment and Advanced Manifest Fee (AMF) at US$25 per bill, shippers on average are paying an additional US$100 per Bill of Lading. No wonder some carriers say they are 'contented' with the current situation! However, for the industry's long term benefit, electronic transfer of data should be encouraged. Transactions in Hong Kong are still heavily paper-based. I once again appeal to all shipping lines to follow Maersk Sealand and APL's practice of waiving the AMF in the case of shippers submitting shipment data via electronic means.

Asian shippers held their 1st Asian Shippers' Meeting in Busan on 17-18 June 2004. During the meeting, shippers reiterated their common demand for simple tariff. Shippers showed their concern for the increasing number of other charges and surcharges. In Japan, shippers have rejected all Documentation Fees and Peak Season Surcharges. Some shippers said they had successfully told carriers to quote all-in rates. With substantial new tonnage to be added to the trade in the next two years, we can expect excess capacity to build up in major trade routes again. Shippers should have open dialogue with carriers on their real needs and negotiate agreements based on simple freight rates.

Success to shippers!

 
September 2004

This article is courtesy of the Shippers Today magazine, published by the Hong Kong Shippers' Council for the shipping industry.
divide
 


| Home | About Us | Site Map | Legal Notice | Privacy Policy | Help | Contact Us |
Tradelink Electronic Commerce Limited. All rights reserved.