2020 Fall PPF Summary

September 21, 2020

IAM participated in all 4 PPF sessions with USTRANSCOM J9 and the Services/JPPSOs.  Below is a “short” summary; but there were many topics covered and this is NOT an attempt to detail them all.  If something gets glossed over that you are interested in, let me know and I can try to go into more detail.  I did not focus on taking notes, but mostly followed along with the slides, the conversation, and the chat box. 

Download Day 1 Slides

Download Day 2 Slides

 

I think it’s right to acknowledge that J9 and the Services not only provided morning and evening sessions to push information and be able to get input from Europe to the Pacific; but many of the J9 briefers and some Service representatives participated in all four sessions.  This on-line format was much more effective than the Spring PPF virtual venue from an IT perspective.

 

Beyond J9, all Services provided briefings and inputs; and some MCOs participated as well.

 

Top issues covered: 

  • COS 4 Special Solicitation for Hawaii, Okinawa, and Spain. 
  • Saturday customer service hours. 
  • Inconvenience claims. 
  • Reweigh program.
  • 5 or 10 days for meeting the members requested delivery date out of SIT.
  • Prohibition on surveying customers.
  • Communication and data input into DPS.

 

In terms of discussion, the COS 4 SS was the hottest topic.  It appears DoD is very serious in considering the use of a winner take all COS 4 Special Solicitation for Hawaii, Okinawa, and Spain. The topic was covered over both days, and in all sessions.  DoD is frustrated and believe there is too much friction with 100 TSPs trying to gain access to capacity with the 11 agents in Hawaii.  In their mind, why not let one TSP coordinate the whole effort. DoD made it clear, it’s not their job to find capacity, they pay the TSP to get them capacity.  That’s a position that many don’t agree with.  The DoD has a responsibility to find capacity for the customers; just as industry does.  And DoD can create policy and operate in ways that negatively impact capacity.  But the DoD opinion right now is, JPPSOs do too much to find capacity, that they believe TSPs should be doing.  When industry reps brought up issues with unlocking capacity due to time differences, business hour differences, etc, J9 Director stated, “this is a global program, I need TSPs to figure this stuff out.”

 

IAM has notified the J9 Director that we intend to bring TSPs and agents together to offer another proposal for Hawaii, Okinawa, and Spain capacity, instead of resorting to a COS 4 SS.  On 18 September IAM held the first meeting with 26 total attendees to discuss proposals. 

 

A number of people (IAM included) were surprised by J9’s discussion of how the 5 & 10 days to deliver a customer’s shipment from SIT should work.  Many (most, all??) industry reps believed that, depending on the time of year, industry has 5 (or 10) days from the date of the request for delivery to deliver the shipment from SIT; and after the 5th day (or 10th) then inconvenience claims can start.  That is not the J9 interpretation.  The scenario they presented was, if a customer calls on 1 September and requests delivery on 15 September, and the agent can’t deliver until 18 September, the TSP owes 3 days of inconvenience because the member requested over 5 days in advance of the delivery.  There was a lot of back and forth.  At the end of the last day, the J9 Director stated he believed industry and DoD could come together to find a policy that both sides could agree upon.  J9 asked IAM if we would put some effort towards creating some proposals on this topic.  Stand-by for a call for further discussion on this topic.

 

J9 was also clear that based on their research, industry is not properly informing customers per requirements, about inconvenience claim requirements when it’s clear they miss an RDD.  The Marine rep wanted to be clear that while, in his mind J9 danced around the topic, he wanted it known that from his perspective, industry was purposefully not following this requirement. 

 

On the topic of Saturday customer service hours, the J9 Director feels strongly about this requirement.  He essentially stated (in so many words) this is a simple requirement that customers should expect from TSPs; and if TSPs don’t feel like they should be providing this service to a customer, then they are probably not TSPs that should be in the program.  DoD received quite a bit of feedback on this topic.  Industry should continue to work on proposals to cover customer issues for Saturday pickups/deliveries short of full office manning for the entire day.  J9 made it clear that the TSP/agent must provide Saturday customer support for normal workday hours in the location of the customer; not the location of the TSP.

 

DoD showed reweigh statistics that suggest up to early September, only 62% of required reweighs were being performed…38% were not accomplished.  And those numbers are worse internationally than for domestic shipments. DoD is looking for much better numbers on reweighs; they are looking for JPPSOs to ensure they are collecting the non-reweigh fee (and believe many JPPSOs haven’t focused on this punitive area enough).

 

J9 made it clear they have every intention to make clear rules prohibiting any surveying of performance to the customer outside the DoD CSS. 

 

DoD reps were clear they need better/timely data input into DPS.  They stated they are missing opportunities for QA visits on the inbound side of the shipment due to a lack of uploading delivery dates in advance of delivery.  Therefore QA can’t visit because they don’t know about deliveries in advance; and thus miss opportunities to head off issues (on behalf of customers and industry).

 

Army MCO is takin over HHG claims for Europe; and by Jan ’21 should have all Army claims consolidated in their Ft Knox office.

 

Marines focus item they talked about was that they’ve received “a lot” of feedback on poor packing practices. When asked what poor practices they were referring to, they stated missing or insufficient packing materials; putting heavy items on top of more delicate/fragile items, etc.

 

J9 stated that they are pushing to have all business rules finalized by 2 December.  And that there would certainly be more changes to business rules coming; and what they’ve already put out was just the first round. 

 

There is a customer satisfaction survey contract request for proposal being solicited.  J9 quickly discussed a non-temporary storage contract in the future, but that it would not occur until GHC was up and running…likely in the 2024 time frame.