Truckers on Strike

**Arborius** · 06-12-2008, 06:53 PM

Just curious what people think the worst case could be if the trucks stopped delivering food to the grocery store. Who's prepared to feed there family when the food is gone? Anyone have a plan they would like to share?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBgPA...&feature=email

**Rick** · 06-12-2008, 07:14 PM

You have to remember that truck delivery across country is a fairly recent phenomenon that has only taken place over the last couple of decades. Most foods, especially produce from the west coast, traveled across country by train. I suspect if fuel prices soared to the point that American truckers could no longer afford to operate then rail shipment would once again be the choice of producers.

My father was in the trucking industry from 1946 until he retired (for good) in 1988(?). I spent most of my summers working with him so I have a pretty good handle on that side of the business during that time frame. Truck delivery was generally only from rail depot to consumer. Although the rail depot could be 100 miles or more depending on where the consumer lived/operated. Most produce in the Midwest arrived at either Chicago, St. Louis or Memphis. Smaller yards were scattered around but those were the big three as I remember.

**crashdive123** · 06-12-2008, 07:18 PM

With the type of strike that you are describing....I wonder what kind of numbers there are of non-union truckers? For many of them it may be an opportunity to make a better living.

**wareagle69** · 06-12-2008, 07:31 PM

i would suspect that the government would declare them an essential service and force them back to work while negotiating

**Arborius** · 06-12-2008, 07:32 PM

In the northern panhandle of West Virginia were I live they took out all the railroad tracks and put in walking trails not sure about the rest of the country but our area is without rail service. I always thought it was a bad idea.

**Rick** · 06-12-2008, 07:51 PM

Non-Union truckers far outnumber union truckers. I wish I could pull up some numbers are that. I looked but couldn't find anything. It would be interesting to see the actually tally but I know the Teamsters have lost a lot of members since 1988 when the industry was deregulated. UPS is the largest unionized driving company.

As for pulling up track, that's just part and parcel of the trucking industry's growth. As they took over the shipping from the railroads the tracks were no longer needed. There are still main lines in W. Virginia.

Enjoy!! http://www.wvrail.railfan.net/navmenu.html

**jrock24** · 06-13-2008, 01:03 PM

I would go to the local docks and buy seafood.

**Ole WV Coot** · 06-13-2008, 01:47 PM

Originally Posted by Arborius

In the northern panhandle of West Virginia were I live they took out all the railroad tracks and put in walking trails not sure about the rest of the country but our area is without rail service. I always thought it was a bad idea.

Down on this end of the state new track has been laid from Kenova to East Lynn. When our senator, Rockey and his co-harts opened the mines again. When I left this part of the world most everything was union. Dad was an organizer in Harlan Co., KY and Floyd & Pike Co. Today mostly non-union mines(Massey Energy) and the same with truckers hauling up Rt. 23 to barges on the KY side of the river. I don't know how independent truckers can afford to run but they do. Right now the N&W pulls close to 100 cars out of East Lynn today. If you live in the panhandle anywhere near Martinsburg it is now becoming a suburb of Washington, DC. Had passenger service for commuters last time I was there to DC.

**Arborius** · 06-14-2008, 07:15 AM

Originally Posted by jrock24

I would go to the local docks and buy seafood.

The problem with that is everyone else would be also and the prices would be outrageous.

If you live in the panhandle anywhere near Martinsburg it is now becoming a suburb of Washington, DC.

I'm from Wheeling. I never pay much attention to railroad tracks I just know that the ones I new about are all gone and I never see trains anywhere any more. Either way it seems even if deliveries switch from truck to train the prices would still rise more than most people could pay.

**tacmedic** · 06-14-2008, 07:19 AM

Aren't most locomotive engines powered by diesel as well? If so, it seems like it would be just as costly to run them as it would to run trucks.

**Arborius** · 06-14-2008, 08:27 AM

Originally Posted by tacmedic

Aren't most locomotive engines powered by diesel as well? If so, it seems like it would be just as costly to run them as it would to run trucks.

Well trains can pull more cars behind them than trucks and they wouldn't have to sit in traffic like trucks.

**Rick** · 06-14-2008, 08:32 AM

Arborius - I think you are right. Prices will still rise but the cost per item would be less if shipped by train. Think of the Del Monte green bean warehouse and how many trucks they have lined up to ship those 10,000 cases of green beans. Now think of how many rail cars can be loaded with the same shipment. Both use diesel but it's a matter of economy of scale.

**bladefrenzy** · 06-14-2008, 12:57 PM

The problem with that is, the trucks usually distribute the items that are moved cross country by rail. No trucking may not cause a total SHTF situation across the USA but it would cause a big slow down in the delivery of goods and cause a large price increase, IMHO.

**Rick** · 06-14-2008, 05:08 PM

I agree. As I said in post 2. Local pedal was done by trucks back then. The only difference was the trip from the west coast to the east coast (and points in between) were done by rail.

If you remove the cost of fuel to ship across country and the independent trucker is only having to purchase fuel for a 100 mile trip instead of a 1000 mile trip then he can probably still afford to operate on a local route. Again, economy of scale. He could make 10 trips from St. Louis to Southern Illinois (when I grew up) instead of 1 trip from Los Angeles. He's hauled 10 trailer loads for the same amount of fuel. He just picks it up at the rail depot.

**crashdive123** · 06-14-2008, 07:44 PM

I would think that the indy's would be able to increase their prices to cover the increase in costs. With competion, the cost of shipping goods is staying relatively low, but when that competition decreases.....suppliers still need to move their goods. I know that supply and demand are going to dictate the cost of any goods and services, but I do believe that another influence in prices from the "big" players.

**Sam Reeves** · 06-14-2008, 08:03 PM

The real problem is that there is not a train depot at every Super Walmart. At some point trucks will still have to get stuff from point A to point B.

**Sam Reeves** · 06-14-2008, 08:05 PM

Originally Posted by Rick

I agree. As I said in post 2. Local pedal was done by trucks back then. The only difference was the trip from the west coast to the east coast (and points in between) were done by rail.

If you remove the cost of fuel to ship across country and the independent trucker is only having to purchase fuel for a 100 mile trip instead of a 1000 mile trip then he can probably still afford to operate on a local route. Again, economy of scale. He could make 10 trips from St. Louis to Southern Illinois (when I grew up) instead of 1 trip from Los Angeles. He's hauled 10 trailer loads for the same amount of fuel. He just picks it up at the rail depot.

Oops. I didn't see yer post before I responded.

**Sam Reeves** · 06-14-2008, 08:12 PM

I can't believe there is not a huge pipeline to a massive refineray in the Desert somewhere.

If Russia can do this surely we can pull something like that off.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...478448,00.html