b'22American Journal ofTransportation ajot.com(CENTERcontinued from page 20) (HEADACHEcontinued from page 18) M.E.Deyscenario. Accordingtothecomplaint, in retailing, and especially online retailing, whichmonth later, Hapag had imposed late charges of overthe trucker New Age Logistics offered to provide means that vendors that ease the returns process$150,000 and CSX hit them with over $135,000.its own chassis to move the containers, but Hapag-for their customers will have a leg up on the com- Aftersomewavering,Hapag-LloydagreedtoLloyd refused to authorize that. The complaint also petition. As returns become an important elementrescind its charges, but, according to the complaint,alleges that CSX advised that Hapags failure to of the overall customer experience, vendors needboth Hapag and CSX refused to take any action toprovide chassis was the reason the containers were to give some serious thought on how to managereduce the CSX charges. Dey paid CSX its fees tonot mounted. CSX claimed it could not request that returns and the related reverse logistics processes. get the containers released and is now asking theHapag approve the waiver of the CSX charges, and Facilitating returns, its worth noting, also bene- FMC to order their refund.Hapag refused to take any action to reduce the fits sellers. Once an item is to be returned, it reverts tochargesbeingassessedbyCSXdespitethefact the shippers inventory. By making returns processesfmCandr ails torage that Hapags own actions caused the demurrage to easy, retailers can retrieve their inventory quicker. Although the controversy boils down to the rea- occur. These allegations suggest that the crux of But just how to do that that puts retailers insonableness of rail storage fees, the jurisdiction ofthe complaint involves the wrongdoing of Hapag-something of a quandary. Some vendors favor cus- the FMC is predicated on its authority to regulateLloyd, more so than CSX.tomer returns to stores, according to Delaney. Theocean carriers. The contract for carriage was enteredAn eventual FMC determination could hinge on idea is, if youre in my store theres a good chance,into between M.E. Dey and Hapag-Lloyd and theits evaluation of Hapags actions and inactions, in Im going to get you to buy something else, hecase before the FMC was filed against Hapag-Lloydwhich case its decision would not provide a clear explained. But if youre simply dropping it off inonly,althoughitisdemandingtherefundoftheprecedent for the assertion of jurisdiction to regu-a third party location or shipping it back, I lose thatCSX charges. As the complaint alleges, The Com- late rail storage charges on a through bill of lading opportunity. missionmaintainsjurisdictionoverrailtransportwhen the railroad acted unreasonably. Its possible with such an ocean nexus, where the cargo movesthat shippers will have to wait for a better case to t hel ogiC ofi ns torer etUrns intermodally under one bill of lading, and Hapag iscome along before they can be confident that dis-According to a recent report from Inmar Intel- responsible for the improper storage charges of itsputesoverrailstoragechargescomeunderFMC ligence,adataplatformcompany,Omnichannelsubcontractor, CSX.purview. Its also possible that Hapags waiver of its retailersshouldaskforitemstobereturnedin- The FMCs action in accepting the case doesown detention and demurrage charges will motivate store. Sixty percent of shoppers prefer to make in- not suggest any independent jurisdiction over railthe FMC to rethink its assertion of jurisdiction over store returns, according to that report, where theyfees that were not related to a through movementCSXs rail storage charges as the case proceeds.receive a refund or store credit on the spot. Armedcontractedwithanoceancarrier.ByproceedingIts still too early in the case to understand all with fresh funds, theyre likely to make new pur- with the case, the FMC apparently understands thatof its implications. As of early February, an answer chases while theyre there. it has jurisdiction over the CSX charges by way ofto the complaint had yet to be filed. If the M.E. Dey AccordingtodatapublishedinForbeslastits regulatory power over the ocean carrier.matter does proceed to a decision, the FMCs final October, consumers now rank in-person box-freeOtherwrinklesaddadditionaltexturetothedetermination is expected in early 2024. returns, such as an in-store return, as the number onepreferredmethodforonlinereturns,while mail-in returns have dropped to the fourth-ranked position.In-storereturnsalsorepresentamore sustainable reverse logistics solution, according to Inmar, since those facilities are already integrated into the companys supply chain and logistics.Thelargenumberofreturnsfromonlinepur-chasescomeswithconsiderablecoststoretailers. Reverse logistics has become costly mostly due to an inefficient process with inventory that might not be able to be resold, said Lasater, as well as the obligation to provide a cost-free online return policy.Implementing technology is one solution to theGUANGZHOU PORT GROUPproblems associated with reverse logistics. In the first place,innovativetechnologieslikeartificialintelli- THE FASTEST GROWING PORT IN SOUTH CHINAgence and machine learning can serve to obviate many returns. AIandmachinelearningcanreducereturns24.8M TEUS IN 2022!by offering sizing recommendations, said Lasater, as could virtual fitting rooms. Retailers can also5TH LARGEST PORT GLOBALLYuse technology on the backend to determine which products need to be sent back to which location. BecausethereverselogisticsprocessaddstoPORT OF NANSHA (GUANGZHOU PORT GROUP)costs, theres also the question of whether to send aNew On Dock Rail (connecting theNew Terminal (4th) Fully Automatedreplacement product or grant a refund without requir-ing the return of the unwanted item. It is importantHinterlands + Europe) Open 24/7/365to know exactly how much it costs to return an item,New Cold and Dry Warehousing16+ Berths, 70+ Cranes and Deep from incoming freight to liquidation, said Lasater,Facilities with Air-Sea + Rail EnablingWaterso you know the best way to manage returns. Ecommerce Shipperst hed eCisiont ok eeP orl iqUidateAccording to the Inmar report, returns manage-ment systems will eventually answer the return-or-keep question based on configurable rules engines. Fac-tors that they will consider will include customer value,shopperreturnshistory,andSKUhistory. Sustainabilitymeasures,optimalvaluerecovery, speed-to-resale, and costs can further augment the decision to return or keep, said the Inmar report. Such a system might determine, for example, thataproductshouldbeslatedforliquidation because returning it to stock would be cost prohibi-tive. Or it might recognize the customer as a first-timer and recommend to let the newbie collect a refund without a return in order to establish good-will and trust. Lasater agrees that return policies should be simple and favorable to the customer. If you are worriedaboutgivingtoomuchtothecustomer, dont be, she said. The number of satisfied cus-tomers will outnumber those who abuse the policy. S.CHINA PORT WITH N.AMERICA AND Butabuseoftheprocessisarecognizedrisk. Inmar cautions that return-less refunds could inviteEU/UK REPRESENTATIONbad actors into your shopper base and that the prac-tice could backfire. Shoppers told to keep an inex- FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT US ATPORTOFNANSHA.COMpensive item may try to return higher-priced items, to (CENTERcontinued on page 24)'