Hartford Business Journal

20 Hartford Business Journal • July 9, 2018 • www.HartfordBusiness.com OTHER VOICES Policymakers wrongly targeting small business truckers By Joseph R. Sculley S mall business trucking companies have so much money, it's like they are sitting on piles of cash and they don't know what to do with it. This must be what some leaders and policymakers in Connecticut, and elsewhere, are currently thinking. It's the only way to explain recent com- ments and policy proposals that target the trucking industry. The truth is that the trucking indus- try deals with high capital costs, thin profit margins, and many barri- ers to entry. Most trucking compa- nies, otherwise known as motor carriers, are small businesses. According to U.S. Department of Transporta- tion data, 91 percent of motor carri- ers operate six or fewer trucks. Yet, public policy in Connecticut has been favoring handouts to huge corpora- tions, while making it difficult for small businesses like motor carriers just to get by. The state Bond Commission recent- ly voted to loan or give $80 million in taxpayer funds to 16 companies to "re- tain jobs" in Connecticut. In a boom- ing economy, in which the national unemployment rate is 3.8 percent, some large corporations, including a defense contractor and a Fortune 500 company, were given taxpayer money for the unmeasurable purpose of "retaining jobs." To some, the natural next step is to target small businesses that have to fight hard for every dollar they earn. This targeting includes talk about higher tolls for trucks, or even tolls only for trucks. These proposals are based on unsubstantiated statements about trucks "tearing up our roads" and doing multiple times more damage to roads than cars. The only thing that is quite literally tearing up our roads is the combination of chemicals applied to them followed by plows scraping over them to clear snow. But that issue requires a separate discussion. Trucks are indeed heavier than cars, but they do not tear up our roads and bridges. There are already multiple laws and systems (and a litany of taxes and fees) in place to en- sure that trucks use roads and bridg- es responsibly. The federal bridge for- mula requires the weight of a truck's freight to be spread out properly over a required number of axles and over a required vehicle length. This ensures that a truck won't inherently damage a road or a bridge. Weigh stations ex- ist to enforce this. Motor carriers pay specific taxes and fees to fund this enforcement. If one wants to discuss simple wear and tear to roads and bridges, fine. That's the reason for the creation of interstate compacts that allow Connecticut to collect fuel taxes and registration fees from out-of-state trucks. Funds are collected based mostly on miles driven in the state, so Connecticut gets its fair share in order to maintain the roads and bridges the trucks drive on. Recent data show Connecticut received $26 million to $30 million annually from out-of-state trucks over the last couple of years from these systems. Additionally, when the Con- necticut diesel tax increases on July 1, Connecticut will collect even more tax revenue from out-of-state trucks. If policymakers do not value the funds generated by these systems, there is an alternative: Connecticut can leave the interstate compacts. Then Connecticut can get nothing from out-of-state trucks. Either way, let's stop picking on the small businesses that bring food to grocery stores, fuel to homes and gas stations, and medical sup- plies to hospitals and pharmacies, among other critical functions in our economy. Joseph R. Sculley is the president of the Motor Transport Association of CT, which represents small, medium and large companies with commercial vehicles traveling state roads. TALKING POINTS What Wells Fargo and Starbucks can teach firms about apologies By Andrea Obston F or Wells Fargo, Facebook, Starbucks and even Samantha Bee, apologies are in bloom. Folks are tripping all over them- selves seeking absolution for every- thing from selling our data to the high- est bidder to characterizing the First Daughter with a cringe-worthy word. Reputation recovery starts with au- thentic apologies. Here's what those look like: The human apology Too many corporate apologies sound like they were written by a machine. You take one phrase from column A: "We are sorry you had a disappointing experience." And one phrase from col- umn B: "Our thoughts and prayers are with the fami- lies." And throw in something like: "Feel free to get in touch with us." And there you have it — the soulless, not-credible and insincere apol- ogy. Contrast that with the one I recently received after a disappoint- ing stay at a Hyatt: "Please accept my sincere apologies for our failure to provide you with an outstanding experience … . Certainly, this is not the type of guest experience we are trying to provide, nor is it one I myself would want during a stay at a hotel." Okay, it's a little stiff and a little corporate, but making it personal (" … nor is it one I myself would want … ") made me want to give them another chance. Remember why you loved me Good apologies harken back to a time when we liked the company. Facebook's television spot, "Here Together" does that. Their ad reminds us of Facebook's beginnings: When friends reached out to friends with pictures of their kids' graduations; with stupid videos of our pets doing what they do; and with proclamations of our undying love of our spouses on wedding anniversaries. Some have criticized the spot be- cause it paints Facebook as a passive victim and does not outline what it plans to change. I believe it's a good start. You can't solve a massive sys- temic flaw with one TV spot. You can, however, throw out the first salvo — the thing that reminds us of who you were to us when we loved you. We've been a bad company A good apology starts with an indication that the company realizes what they did wrong. Such admis- sions clearly must be constructed in concert with the legal team. Take the case of Airbnb. In Dec. 2015, they came under fire for racial profiling and discrimination. Airbnb proactively addressed this problem. It started with an email from co- founder and CEO Brian Chesky that stated that such discrimination was in direct opposition to the company's founding principle of building com- munity. He outlined what they were going to do to prevent it in the future. The company commissioned a report that documented where Airbnb was falling short and suggested what they would change. Since it was released, the brand has launched a public cam- paign with the theme of inclusion. A public commitment to change Uber, Facebook and Wells Fargo have, in some form or another, men- tioned their wrongdoings and shown their willingness to change. Many crisis managers have faulted them for not going far enough, but I'm go- ing to give them props for trying. Uber started by ousting its founder, Travis Kalanick, who personally shaped their misogynistic frat-boy culture. Their new CEO Dara Khos- rowshahi is featured in ads that focus on what the company calls its "next chapter." And while the ads gloss over Uber's many scandals, Khosrowshahi promises that the company will strive to do the right thing. When Elton John wrote the song "Sorry Seems to Be the Hardest Word" he might have written the anthem for crisis managers. Admitting guilt, demonstrating what you learned and reiterating how you intend to move forward with substantive change is not easy for any company. It remains to be seen if Uber, Facebook and Wells Fargo are willing to do the work of rebuilding trust with the public. Andrea Obston is president of Bloomfield-based Andrea Obston Marketing Communications. Opinion & Commentary Joseph R. Sculley Andrea Obston

• Cover