Fruit and Vegetable Dispute Resolution Corporation

1
Fruit and VegetableDispute ResolutionCorporation
Canada ? Mexico ? United States
2
History

• 1994 NAFTA Treaty Calls for PACA-Type
  Protections, YukongtYucatan
• 1997-
• 1999 Tri-national Task Force
• 2000 DRC Established

Canada Mexico United States
3
Framework

• Private, Non-Profit Corporation
• Voluntary Membership
• Mandatory Dispute Resolution
• Procedures between Members
• Enforceable in all 3 Countries
• (and in 133 Others around the
• World)

Canada Mexico United States
4
DRC Dispute Resolution System


Canada Mexico United States
5
Membership

• Canada 813 68
• USA 325 28
• Mexico 37 3
• Associates 16 1
• TOTAL 1,191

Canada Mexico United States
6
File History

• 835 Files Opened
• 823 Files Closed
• 12 Files Pending

Canada Mexico United States
7

• Closed Files
• 121 Arbitrations
• Average Days 193
• Average Value - 11,561
• 714 without Arbitration
• Average Days 47
• Average Value - 18,692

Canada Mexico United States
8
Complaints By Jurisdiction
9
Why Transportation?

• Not Covered by PACA or CFIA
• Critically Important to the Success of all Other
  Elements within the Produce Industry
• Produce is not a Cargo of Choice for Carriers
  Claims System is a Big Reason
• Good Fit with Current DRC Competencies
• Compatible with DRC Membership

Canada Mexico United States
10
Transportation Timeline

• Survey of Produce Transporters 09-2004

Canada Mexico United States
11
Transportation Timeline

• Carriers and Intermediaries Believed the Current
  Dispute Resolution Options Dont Work
• -- 1,200 HQ Transportation Companies in the Blue
  Book
• -- Survey of these companies ?
• 88 involved in recent disputes
• 67 dissatisfied with current system
• 63 very interested in the proposed DRC
  system

Canada Mexico United States
12
Transportation Timeline

• Survey of Produce Transporters 09-2004
• Transportation Task Force 10-2004

Canada Mexico United States
13
Transportation Task Force

Canada Mexico United States
14
Transportation Timeline

• Survey of Produce Transporters 09-2004
• Transportation Task Force 10-2004
• Survey of DRC Membership 04-2005

Canada Mexico United States
15
Transportation Timeline
Compatibility with Current DRC Membership gt
Membership-wide electronic survey gt 76
of respondents very involved in arranging
transportation for their produce transaction
gt 77 involved in transportation disputes
to some degree gt 92 endorse
DRC expansion into transportation disputes
Canada Mexico United States
16
Transportation Timeline
Bottom Line from DRC Membership Current DRC
members were willing to sacrifice some control
over settlement of transportation disputes,
provided -- This brings more trucks back into
the produce trade, and -- The new system is
fair to all parties. Current DRC members were
confident the DRC system would meet both of
these requirements.
Canada Mexico United States
17
Transportation Timeline

• Survey of Produce Transporters 09-2004
• Transportation Task Force 10-2004
• Survey of DRC Membership 04-2005
• Transportation Standards 04-2005
• Board/Membership Approval of Transportation
  Service 12-2005

Canada Mexico United States
18
Relationship Building

• Transportation Intermediaries Association
• American Trucking Associations -- Agriculture
  and Food Transporters Conference
• Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association
• Produce Marketing Association
• Canadian Produce Marketing Association

Canada Mexico United States
19
Additional Considerations

• 1. Both parties must be DRC members before the
  fight breaks out
• 2. No trust provisions
• 3. Each country continues to apply its own
  definition of Good Delivery Standards
• 4. Intermediaries need to be responsible to
  carriers for payment, and to cargo interests for
  performance.
• 5. Members agree that all disputes will be
  submitted to the DRC for full and final
  resolution
• 6. If carrier and intermediary are both DRC
  members, carrier required to subrogate on initial
  complaint.

Canada Mexico United States
20
www.fvdrc.com
Canada Mexico United States