There is an odd disjuncture occurring in the air freight industry. In recent weeks Payload Asia has been deluged by press release after press release extolling the virtues of the ongoing e-freight initiative.
The press releases all drivel on in seemingly copy-cat formulation about how much paper, time, effort, efficiency – and ultimately money – is wasted on filling in documents relating to air cargo. Think how much better the environment will be without the 39 B747 freighters-worth of documents. And look at the passenger side, e-ticketing has become the norm without the travelling public even blinking. Certainly hard to argue, but then again, there’s always more to the story.
Where the disconnect comes into play is with the ‘other half’ of the air cargo equation – the forwarders and shippers. To be polite about this, they are adamantly unenthused with the plan. Actually to be fair, most whole-heartedly agree with the concept, they just don’t fancy IATA’s imperious implementation of it. This was abundantly evident during the recent meeting of the International Federation of Freight Forwarders Associations (FIATA).
The way they see it, IATA’s e-freight implementation is being shoved down their throats with little heed to what the implications are for the forwarders and their clients. One of the harshest critics of the plan is FIATA president Bill Gottlieb.
A self-acknowledged proponent of e-commerce, Gottlieb says IATA “must awaken to the reality of the cargo marketplace, and rethink e-freight by partnering with the forwarding community. Simply put, forwarders possess the intimate understanding of the needs of the commercial traders they serve.” In other words, its not quite as simple as switching from a paper airline ticket to an e-ticket.
The solution according to Gottlieb, is to shelve a large portion of the e-freight business plan. “It is time IATA strategists realise its primary e-freight objective is plain stupid,” he says, arguing its focus should be on what is “do-able”.
In the meantime, he suggests some incremental steps, like gathering support from industry groups including IATA, FIATA, the World Customs Organisation, the UN Conference on Trade and Development and global shippers councils.
He also suggests getting rid of the air waybill as a form-set document and require carriers to accept laser-printed plain paper air waybills. Go paper free from the forwarder to the carrier by allowing the air waybill and cargo manifest to be delivered electronically. Allow the carrier to also accept cargo and return a ‘signed’ air waybill electronically. And, allow the carrier to electronically pre-advise and deliver to the destination forwarder/customs broker or consignee, the arrival manifest and other documents. Finally, explore going paper free for other transport documents like dangerous goods certifi cates.
Most important, he says, is for all parties to truly work together for the mutual benefit of everyone involved in the supply chain.
The irony of this situation is of course that IATA and in particular its chief, Giovanni Bisignani, who is never short of a stinging quote or two on things he sees wrong with the industry, is being accused of exactly the same behaviour he has harshly criticised others for. The most recent example being the European Council’s rubber stamping of the EU’s emissions trading scheme in which he accused Brussels of “acting in a bubble”.
Let us assume, that even if some of the forwarders’ complaints are over-blown, clearly there is a persistent and consistent message emanating from the community that they have not been adequately involved in an issue they understand intimately. It leads one towonder if indeed it’s not IATA who are the ones in the bubble