Top Banner
May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 1 Flat Glass Logistics Council Flat Glass Logistics Council Issues Chicago, May 1, 2003
41

Flat Glass Logistics Council

Jan 19, 2016

Download

Documents

Alvis

Flat Glass Logistics Council. Issues Chicago, May 1, 2003. Who are we?. Evolution. Don Osterberg – Military Logistics Officer Took responsibility for Schneider Specialized Carriers Recognized key industry problems Asked UT for help - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 1Flat Glass Logistics Council

Flat Glass Logistics Council

Issues

Chicago, May 1, 2003

Page 2: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 2Flat Glass Logistics Council

Who are we?

Page 3: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 3Flat Glass Logistics Council

Evolution

• Don Osterberg – Military Logistics Officer– Took responsibility for Schneider Specialized Carriers– Recognized key industry problems

• Asked UT for help• Together we recognized it was an industry rather

than a Schneider problem• Amendable to an industry standards committee

approach

Page 4: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 4Flat Glass Logistics Council

Two Conference Calls

• Call 1 – Everyone reluctant especially about antitrust issues & role of group

• Call 2 – Who would be willing to participate

Page 5: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 5Flat Glass Logistics Council

Two Chicago Meetings

• October 9, 2002 – Six issues raised and discussed by industry teams– Specified data needed to analyze safety issues

• November 21, 2002 – Reviewed safety data– Standardized data categories for future data collection– Group decision to move forward and form group

Page 6: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 6Flat Glass Logistics Council

Conclusion:

There are major industry problems.

There is no other group to address these issues.

If this group does not do it, it will not be done.

Page 7: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 7Flat Glass Logistics Council

What are the major issues?

Page 8: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 8Flat Glass Logistics Council

Distribution costs have been steadily decreasing since 1980.

Flat Glass has not benefited from this cost reduction.

Page 9: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 9Flat Glass Logistics Council

Index of Distribution Costs Over 20 years

Page 10: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 10Flat Glass Logistics Council

Expectations are changing

• In a world of – Efficient Consumer Response (ECR)– Vendor Managed Inventory (VMI)– Collaborative Planning, Forecasting and Replenishment (CPFR)– Need for greater communication & standards for efficiencies

• The world is expecting– Quick response– Short Lead Times– Synchronized Delivery– Greater Variety (mixed shipments)– Lower landed cost– Greater flexibility

Page 11: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 11Flat Glass Logistics Council

But we say

• Flat glass is different– Inability to adjust production level– We acknowledge this.

• But there are many areas where problems are self-inflicted.

Page 12: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 12Flat Glass Logistics Council

What are these self-inflicted areas?

• Driver safety and worker compensation costs

• Driver retention

• Loss and damage claims

• Capacity utilization

• Lack of supply chain collaboration

• Lack of participation on standards committees

Page 13: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 13Flat Glass Logistics Council

Today we will address the first issue – Driver Safety

• In an era of strict OSHA guidelines on safety issues, flat glass has not been covered

• OSHA covers plant workers

• DOT regulates safety issues for drivers– Drivers do not typically load truck

Page 14: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 14Flat Glass Logistics Council

OSHA Requirement

• Workers must have protective railing and/or tethers when work off the floor

• Limitations on weight employees are expected to lift without mechanical assistance

• Special attention must be given to employees working on wet or slippery surfaces

Page 15: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 15Flat Glass Logistics Council

130 lbs tarp

Page 16: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 16Flat Glass Logistics Council

How Would You Like to Explain?

• Drivers working 13’ 6” above the ground without railings or teathers

• Where they carry, spread and secure a 130# tarp• Surrounded by a product that is famous for sharp

edges and the ability to cut (sharp as glass)• Some times working outside where it has rained

and material is slippery

Page 17: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 17Flat Glass Logistics Council

Why are we here today?

• To develop best practice guidelines to reduce injuries• Why?

– Humanitarian – you want to protect workers– Reduce cost of worker’s compensation– Keep drivers on the road to reduce cost of retraining and recruiting– Don’t want a problem to occur and have OSHA and DOT impose

solutions– Supply chain interruptions

Page 18: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 18Flat Glass Logistics Council

How important is transportation to delivered cost of glass?

• High percentage– 16%

• Low percentage– 9%

Page 19: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 19Flat Glass Logistics Council

How important are losses to transportation costs?

Revenue % Compensation % Fuel %

Total Revenue

Purchased Transportation

Company Revenue

Driver Compensation 29.29% 100.00%

Fuel 13.38% 45.68% 100.00%

Equipment 13.79% 47.08% 103.06%

Risk: 6.47% 22.09% 48.36%

Accidents 1.25% 4.27% 9.34%

Work Comp 2.30% 7.85% 17.19%

Claims 1.50% 5.12% 11.21%

Recruiting 2.48% 8.47% 18.54%

Other

S, G, & A

Total Costs

EBIT

Page 20: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 20Flat Glass Logistics Council

• Activity when Injured

Amount of Loss AccidentsPercentage of Losses

Percentage of Accidents

Driving $34,375.76 4 2.5% 3.2%Loading $339,801.80 44 24.6% 35.2%Non-driving $0.00 1

0.0% 0.8%Unloading $1,008,505.93 76

72.9% 60.8%Total $1,382,683.49 125 100.0% 100.0%

Activities When Injured

Page 21: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 21Flat Glass Logistics Council

Type of Injury Driving LoadingNon-

drivingUnloading Total Percentage

BRUISE/CONTUSION $41,244.77 $15,200.76 56445.53 4.3%CARPAL TUNNEL $9,824.00 9824 0.7%CONCUSSION $0.00 0 0.0%CONTUSION $243.00 $2,727.00 2970 0.2%Cuts\Contusions $2,790.30 2790.3 0.2%DISC DAMAGE $8,981.00 $52,466.00 61447 4.6%FRACTURE $19,088.04 $151,983.96 171072 12.9%FROSTBITE $548.20 548.2 0.0%HERNIA/RUPTURE $3,981.42 $39,307.00 43288.42 3.3%INFECTION $28.36 28.36 0.0%INFLAM/SWELLING $75.27 $174.93 $7,083.94 7334.14 0.6%LACERATION/CUT $5,940.21 $4,208.52 10148.73 0.8%MULT. EXTERNAL INJ $19,699.57 $3,351.29 23050.86 1.7%MULT. INTERNAL INJ $12,952.45 12952.45 1.0%OTHER/ILLNESS $13.00 13 0.0%PAIN $238.08 $0.00 $94,548.32 94786.4 7.1%PULLED/TORN MUSCLE $3,259.40 3259.4 0.2%PUNCTURE $187.00 187 0.0%SCRATCH/SCRAPE $168,268.13 168268.13 12.7%Soft Tissue $15,495.49 $37.50 15532.99 1.2%SPRAIN $536.60 $34,348.03 34884.63 2.6%Strain $129,823.62 $468,386.32 598209.94 45.1%STROKE $5,871.00 5871 0.4%UNCONSCIOUS $59,718.00 59718 4.5%UNKNOWN $53.01 53.01 0.0%Total $34,375.76 $298,557.03 $0.00 $993,305.17 $1,326,237.96 100.0%Percentage 2.6% 22.5% 0.0% 74.9% 100.0%

Injury by Activity

Page 22: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 22Flat Glass Logistics Council

Injured Part Driving Loading Non-driving Unloading Total Percentage

$15,495.49 $19,937.65 $289,157.74 $324,590.88 23.48%Abdomen $8,405.24 $73,827.49 $82,232.73 5.95%Ankle $4,018.60 $496.31 $4,514.91 0.33%Arm $12,773.75 $2,207.74 $14,981.49 1.08%Back $8,981.00 $133,338.69 $398,551.72 $540,871.41 39.12%Chest $596.42 $895.32 $1,491.74 0.11%Elbow $83,910.31 $7,467.44 $91,377.75 6.61%Eyes $0.00 $455.83 $455.83 0.03%Foot $28.36 $13,702.03 $13,730.39 0.99%Hand $2,954.63 $7,046.00 $10,000.63 0.72%Head $66,550.00 $933.70 $67,483.70 4.88%Knee $75.27 $189.00 $68,292.91 $68,557.18 4.96%leg $187.00 $239.14 $426.14 0.03%Wrist $9,824.00 $6,912.15 $145,232.56 $161,968.71 11.71%Total $34,375.76 $339,801.80 $0.00 $1,008,505.93 $1,382,683.49 100.00%Percentage 2.5% 24.6% 0.0% 72.9% 100.0%

Injured Part by Activity

Page 23: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 23Flat Glass Logistics Council

Age Group

Driving LoadingNon

DrivingUnloading Total %

20 $1,133.26 $73,864.05 $74,997.31 5.4%30 $198,318.73 $0.00 $278,297.97 $476,616.70 34.5%40 $34,375.76 $21,265.65 $512,233.99 $567,875.40 41.1%50 $37,174.16 $98,383.37 $135,557.53 9.8%60 $81,910.00 $38,844.00 $120,754.00 8.7%70 $6,882.55 $6,882.55 0.5%

Total $34,375.76 $339,801.80 $0.00 $1,008,505.93 $1,382,683.49 100.0%% 2.5% 24.6% 0.0% 72.9% 100.0%

Injury by Activity and Age

Page 24: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 24Flat Glass Logistics Council

Tenure Driving Loading Unloading Total %0 $186,509 $75,248 $261,757 57.0%1 $9,824 $38,730 $35,917 $84,471 18.4%2 $9,971 $80,026 $89,997 19.6%3 $5,871 $2,727 $8,598 1.9%4 $111 $111 0.0%5 $8,981 $418 $9,399 2.0%6 $3,884 $3,884 0.8%7 $1,241 $1,241 0.3%9 $13 $13 0.0%

12 $75 $75 0.0%Total $18,880 $245,396 $195,270 $459,546 100.0%

% 4.1% 53.4% 42.5% 100.0%

Injury by Tenure and Activity

Did not have hire data for part of sample.

Page 25: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 25Flat Glass Logistics Council

Probability of Injury

• 10 percent of work force

• Higher rate for new employees

Page 26: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 26Flat Glass Logistics Council

Post Injury Activity

Driving Loading Non-driving Unloading Total %

$15,570.76 $94,405.80 $0.00 $813,235.93 $923,212.49 66.8%

Disabled $132,515.00 $132,515.00 9.6%

Retired $91,009.00 $68,616.00 $159,625.00 11.5%

Return to Work

$18,805.00 $21,872.00 $126,654.00 $167,331.00 12.1%

Total$34,375.76 $339,801.80 $0.00 $1,008,505.93 $1,382,683.49 100.0%

What Happens to Workers After Injury?

Page 27: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 27Flat Glass Logistics Council

Specific Injured

part<> Disabled Retired

Return to Work

Total %

$324,591 $324,591 23.5%abdomen $10,343 $32,570 $39,320 $82,233 5.9%

Ankle $844 $3,671 $4,515 0.3%Arm $14,208 $773 $14,981 1.1%Back $425,351 $91,009 $24,511 $540,871 39.1%Chest $1,492 $1,492 0.1%Elbow $8,482 $81,667 $1,229 $91,378 6.6%Eyes $456 $456 0.0%Foot $13,730 $13,730 1.0%Hand $8,055 $1,946 $10,001 0.7%Head $541 $50,848 $16,095 $67,484 4.9%Knee $63,080 $5,477 $68,557 5.0%Leg $239 $187 $426 0.0%Wrist $51,801 $36,046 $74,122 $161,969 11.7%Total $923,212 $132,515 $159,625 $167,331 $1,382,683 100.0%

% 66.8% 9.6% 11.5% 12.1% 100.0%

Losses by Post Accident Activity and Injured Part

Page 28: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 28Flat Glass Logistics Council

Summary

• High level of driver turnover

• High cost of driver recruitment

• High cost of driver training

• High probability of driver injury especially the first year

• High cost of injury

• Rapid decline in availability of new drivers

Page 29: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 29Flat Glass Logistics Council

Summary (cont)

• Loading and unloading procedures are not in conformance to OSHA guidelines because the drivers are in a no-mans area

• Unless this group does something to make area safer, standards will be imposed.

Page 30: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 30Flat Glass Logistics Council

Mission

• How to develop best practice guidelines to reduce loading and unloading accidents?

• How do you secure and tarp loads?– Faster – Safer

• How can drivers be protected while securing and tarping loads?

Page 31: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 31Flat Glass Logistics Council

Other Issues

• There are many other issues but they must wait until subsequent meetings.

• Safety is our first issue. We need to do it: – For humanitarian reasons. You cannot hire an

employee to be injured.– Do it now for cost reasons. – Do it before OSHA and DOT make you do it.

Page 32: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 32Flat Glass Logistics Council

Bright Spot

• One carrier here uses different methods– Did not have a single injury in 2001.

Page 33: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 33Flat Glass Logistics Council

NEW SLIDE

• Group Vision: The Flatglass Logistics Council will help make the flatglass supply chain safer and more responsive to customers with lower cost for consumers. The Council is an organization of flatglass logistics professionals and firms involved in manufacturing, transportation, and fabrication of flatglass, who are interested in improving the safety and supply chain management process in the industry. It is primarily interested in identifying best practices, developing standardized training programs, and adapting information and other standards that will improve logistics practice in their respective organization

• Group Mission:1.Develop improved safety practices in the transportation/ handling of flat glass

and educate firms on the use of these practices.2.Identify best practices in the supply chain management and educate the industry

in the use of these best practices3. Develop industry standards that facilitate the labeling, packaging, and

distribution of flat glass and educate the members on the use of these standards and encourage their adoption industry-wide.

Page 34: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 34Flat Glass Logistics Council

Page 35: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 35Flat Glass Logistics Council

Page 36: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 36Flat Glass Logistics Council

Page 37: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 37Flat Glass Logistics Council

Page 38: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 38Flat Glass Logistics Council

Page 39: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 39Flat Glass Logistics Council

Page 40: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 40Flat Glass Logistics Council

Page 41: Flat Glass Logistics Council

May 1, 2003 Chicago Council Meeting 41Flat Glass Logistics Council