that FIATA objects to introducing surcharges for paper documentation.

~~While relations between IATA and FIATA have been strained for over a decade, tensions may have once again reached their boiling point.
     Case in point: IATA’s recent effort towards pushing not just the idea, but also the implementation of e-freight. A closer look reveals that IATA has apparently failed to get one of their most important stakeholders properly on board the e-freight bandwagon:
     In a special newsletter —e-flash 81 dated September 3rd, 2014—FIATA has reached out to their members to support FIATA’s stand against IATA-led paper Air Waybill surcharges.
     While FIATA makes it clear that they “support e-Commerce and e-Air Waybill implementation in the air cargo supply chain (and subsequently) encourage implementation, through creating value for forwarders and carriers alike (as well as) recognizing the costs that the originator of the information incurs, to enter and transmit data,” they object to “the intention of air carriers to implement a Paper      Air Waybill Surcharge, for non e-AWB export shipments” and urge “the forwarding community to voice their objection to carriers who seek to apply yet another surcharge, and create yet another revenue stream, under the guise of supporting IATA’s e-Freight initiative.”
     In simple words, while FIATA supports the idea and implementation of e-freight, they have no qualms saying out loud to anyone who will listen that FIATA objects to introducing surcharges for paper documentation.
     FIATA points out that although e-freight is on the rise—in particular on trade lanes where support by the national governments is strong, such as the UAE (Emirates Airlines; EK), Singapore (Singapore Airlines Cargo; SQ), and Hongkong (Cathay Pacific Airlines; CX), it is far from being accepted everywhere.
     Thus, forwarders should not be penalized for not going electronic where electronic means of communication is either unavailable or not permitted.

Handicapping e-Feight Potential?

    Whether or not e-freight is possible mainly depends on the regulatory framework of the departure, transit, and destination states permitting it, as well as forwarders and airlines having the capability to carry out the required messaging.
     But as everyone now knows so far, e-freight implementation has seriously fallen behind the schedule IATA once envisioned.
     The e-AWB agreement enacted back in 2010 that was endorsed by FIATA and adopted by the IATA Cargo Service Conference as well as being approved by several governments—including the U.S. DOT—was forecasted for 100% e-AWB by the end of 2014 by IATA.
     IATA’s latest communications calls for 22 percent e-freight penetration by end of 2014, while current figures indicate falling significantly short of that modest goal.
     Right now e-freight implementation stands at slightly above 17 percent.
     Even at that 17 percent figure, the situation is not as clear as the figures seem to indicate.
     The FIATA position suggests that surcharges levied on paper documentation may not be the best way to increase the use of e-freight and that incentives are probably a better means of achieving a higher penetration of electronic documentation within the industry, such as providing a discount to those forwarders who indeed offer e-freight.

Who Benefits?

    Currently, e-freight is popular among the big forwarders who realize sizeable benefits, even on the limited number of trade lanes it is currently available, and even considering the required investment in IT equipment and staff training.
     But one issue among many that requires sorting from both sides is how the smaller and financially-stretched members of both IATA and FIATA can be expected to cover e-freight related investments.
     Here’s an idea: Why don’t IATA, FIATA, Global Air Cargo Advisory Group (GACAG), representatives of The International Air Cargo Association (TIACA), and the Global Shippers’ Forum (GSF) conduct a high level meeting somewhere to advance e-freight issues like surcharges instead of launching another battle royal in the media?
     A really good tension convention can lead to discovering how business partners can chart a better path forward.
     And yes, don’t forget the shippers.
     After all, surcharges levied by carriers, are paid by forwarders, who pass them on to shippers.
Jens/Geoffrey