Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

A Dirty Trucking Industry Is Trying to Clean Up Its Act

By Kate Sheppard, In These Times. Posted April 30, 2008.


A diverse coalition is working to stop the exploitation of truck drivers by big corporations and help save the health of residents near ports.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Is Blind Faith in God and the Bible a Modern Invention?
Devilstower

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
What Can the Morass of the 1970s Tell Us About the Current Economic Crisis?
Alejandro Reuss

DrugReporter:
Why Are We Locking Up Traumatized Veterans for Their Addictions Instead of Offering Them Treatment?
Penny Coleman

Environment:
Why Max Baucus' 'No' Vote on the Climate Bill May Really Help Its Passage
Jeff Mcmahon

Food:
Soda Helps Make Americans Unhealthy and Fat -- Will Soda Tax Prevail Despite Pushback by Beverage Industry?
Christine Spolar, Joseph Eaton

Health and Wellness:
Does the House Bill's Public Option Kill Off the Senate's?
Booman

Immigration:
Recent Democratic Victories May Grease the Wheels for Immigration Reform in Congress
Marcelo Balive

Media and Technology:
Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh Stoking GOP Civil War
Eric Boehlert

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
What Obama Is Up Against in His Own Branch of Government
Russ Baker

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
"Precious" Star Claims the Spotlight
Emily Wilson

Rights and Liberties:
Hard to Believe: 73 U.S. Kids Sentenced to Life Without Parole at 14 or Younger, and All Are Black
Liliana Segura

Sex and Relationships:
9 Silly Things People Say When They Hear You Don't Want Kids (And Ways to Counter Them)
Liz Langley

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Radioactive Wastewater in New York Raises More Concerns About Oil Drilling
Abrahm Lustgarten

World:
Afghanistan Is Worse Off Than Ever, Thanks to the Sham Army We're Propping Up
Chris Hedges

More stories by Kate Sheppard

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Sandwiched between three freeways and the fourth-largest container port in the country lies the neighborhood of West Oakland, Calif. Its residents often choke down the exhaust of the 1,500 diesel trucks that pass through the community on the way to and from the Port of Oakland. On any given day, trucks are parked throughout this working-class, African-American neighborhood, sometimes idling for hours as drivers await their next load.

Margaret Gordon, 61, knows these trucks well -- and the toll they've taken on her neighborhood. She has asthma. Her son has asthma. So do her grandchildren and, according the Alameda County Public Health Department, at least one in five kids in the community.

Asthma is not all that afflicts the neighborhood. According to a March report by the California Air Resources Board, there are 1,200 excess cancers per 1 million people in West Oakland. And the average lifespan of residents is six years less than that of their more upscale neighbors in Oakland Hills, only 10 miles away.

"Every year for the last 15 years I have lived in West Oakland, I know somebody [who] has died of some form of cancer," says Gordon, a founding member of the Environmental Indicators Project, a nonprofit organization that studies the local effect of diesel pollution, and a member of the Oakland Port Commission.

For years, dirty air has pitted residents against truck drivers, many of whom are immigrants working long hours for low wages. A similar story plays out at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.

But over the past year, groups as diverse as the Teamsters, the National Resources Defense Council and the American Lung Association have joined community members and truck drivers to form the Coalition for Clean and Safe Ports to take on the broader culprit: an unsustainable trucking system.

In 1980, President Jimmy Carter signed the Motor Carrier Act, which deregulated the industry, turning truckers into independent contractors. Most drivers now own their trucks and are contracted by trucking companies that, in turn, contract with businesses that ship through a port. Drivers are responsible for maintenance, route planning and parking -- an expensive system for people whose average annual salary is $30,000.

Many can afford only older, polluting diesel rigs, and must park wherever they find free space. The trucking companies and the industries for which they transport goods, meanwhile, absorb almost none of these costs.

"This trucking system is totally broken," says Doug Bloch, an organizer with Change to Win and Oakland director of the Coalition for Clean and Safe Ports. "And it's exploiting the community and it's exploiting the immigrant truck drivers, all for the benefit of Wal-Mart and Target and these huge companies that are moving goods through our port."

In 2000, California set a goal of cutting overall diesel pollution in the state by 85 percent by 2020. And in December 2007, the state followed with a regulation limiting diesel emissions from port trucks. With port traffic expected to double by 2020, these state decisions marked two big victories for community and environmental groups.

In September, the port will begin phasing in new standards that require drivers to purchase clean-burning diesel or natural gas trucks, or to retrofit older trucks. By the end of 2009, all trucks will be required to meet these standards, but under the current system, few truckers can afford to do so.

"I'm in agreement that we should clean up the environment," says trucker José Manuel Lino Rivas, who lives in Oakland. "But we also need the authorities to help us obtain a truck, because with the salaries we're paid, we can't."

A new truck costs upward of $125,000. The ports are applying for state grants to help cover some of the costs of transitioning to the new rules. But under the most optimistic projections, grants would provide only $20,000 to $50,000 per truck, and maintaining new truck models can cost significantly more.

Rivas was one of 1,250 Oakland drivers to sign a petition last fall calling for a new system that makes them employees of the trucking companies, grants them the right to organize and forces trucking companies to purchase and maintain the trucks.

In addition, the Coalition for Clean and Safe Ports has proposed requiring businesses at the port to pay a fee and to provide information about truck noise, emissions and labor standards in order to do business there. The coalition is also asking for a local-hire policy, which would reserve half of new jobs at the port for people who live in the areas with the highest poverty and asthma hospitalization rates.

Business interests, though, are fighting this model and attempting to divide the coalition, attacking environmentalists in the press for taking up labor concerns, claiming that this shows a lack of commitment to clean air. The American Trucking Association, an industry group, has threatened to sue if the ports adopt a comprehensive plan such as the one the coalition proposes.

The threats, however, didn't stop the Port of Los Angeles Commission from adopting a plan on March 20 that requires the trucking companies to buy and maintain the new, modernized rigs and to employ truckers. And though the Long Beach port commission caved to industry pressure by approving a plan that left the independent contractor system in place, because of Long Beach's proximity to Los Angeles, it seems likely that Long Beach could ultimately accept Los Angeles' plan.

Meanwhile, in late March, the Oakland commission agreed to charge businesses a fee for each container that passes through the port -- with proceeds used to retrofit and replace trucks.

Port commissioners also agreed to hire consultants to look at the economic impact of a comprehensive truck management plan, and are expected to make a decision based on those results by late June.

"[Our plan is] good policy, and good policy trumps the grandstanding and misinformation campaigns that industry mounts," says Adrian Martinez, project attorney for the National Resources Defense Council. "Industry and other groups have been trying to separate us, but we've held strong."

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: environment, long beach, oakland, trucks, air pollution, asthma, ports, trucking

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
It's not one AND the other...
Posted by: ahmlco on Apr 30, 2008 11:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The article states, "A diverse coalition is working to stop the exploitation of truck drivers by big corporations AND [sic] help save the health of residents near ports."

Which isn't true, at least in the LA port. Replacing old trucks with new ones will definitely reduce pollution and improve air quality by a significant amount.

Though I agree that the port should help subsidize the purchases, provide loan guarantees, and so forth. That said, environmental protection rules affect everyone, and nearly every business, large and small, has had to spend money to comply.

Do you WANT a swarm of dirty trucks running around the harbor?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Part of the argument is left out
Posted by: djnoll on May 5, 2008 12:13 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The implication that all truckers are owner-operators who cannot afford the newer trucks, is in part erroneous. Yes, many of the drivers do own their own rigs and lease them to major trucking companies, but the fact is that even more of the drivers are company drivers who have no control over the type of rigs they own. Any driver who can qualify for a job, or who is leased to a company and wants to become a company driver, can usually have the job very quickly - under 3-5 days for the orientation and paperwork.

There is a shortage of drivers in this country, and most major companies try to convince company drivers to become owner-operators so the company can defray expenses. Smart drivers who take the time to actually look at the deal being offered say no, but for those who like the idea of being their own bosses, these deals may offer the only way to get into their own business. Unfortunately, like the mortgage industry, these deals are all on the company's side and not very beneficial for the drivers until their trucks are paid off, by which time they are in need of major overalls (a new motor can cost upwards of $35,000)or are only worth scrap metal value.

Major trucking companies usually rotate their stock every 2-3 years or at the 500,000 mile point which is when they begin to develop major repair issues. Owner operators who were company drivers usually are offered those trucks at a discount. These trucks are hard and expensive to maintain, and with the current price of diesel at well over $4.00 per gallon, the truckers have seen their profitability go straight down hill for several years now. If they clear $30 a year, then they are running as teams and running their trucks 24/7. In today's market if they clear $18K-$20K they will be very lucky. The average company driver will make around $40K per year without the headaches of owning a truck, so you can understand why companies want their drivers to become owner/operators who lease back to the trucking company - better bottom line for the trucking company.The higher rates that they must charge are being passed along to the average consumer, and we all feel the pinch.

I believe that the objectives of the various groups are great, and designers should be encouraged to design alternative power for the rigs - which I can assure you many drivers with health problems would welcome gladly. But do not fail to recognize that the companies who use these owner-operators have a vested interest in keeping them just where they are in the pecking order of the industry; they do not want to convert their own fleets; and companies like Wal-Mart will squeeze the trucking companies to keep rates down if they want their business. Until the citizens within these neighborhoods, and all those across the nation who live near truck stops or industrial areas, step up and tell companies like Wal-Mart and Schnieder and Swift and US Xpress trucking that they will not tolerate their kinds of operations any longer and stand beside the truckers who work hard and deserve a fair shake as they attempt to clean up the industry these companies pushed to deregulate so they could do this kind of thing, nothing truly significant will change.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Part of the argument is left out Posted by: chrysalis124812
That's why
Posted by: lamac66 on May 11, 2008 4:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Republicans push privatization. Pass the buck and get out of responsibility of doing the right thing.

Then turn around and try to get over on the independent contractor. Price fixing and any other underhanded thing you can name.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement