← Back to Blog
Trucking News

Trucking News: September 22, 2026 — What Carriers Need to Know

Trucking News: September 22, 2026 — What Carriers Need to Know

High Diesel Prices Are Squeezing Minnesota Trucking

Minnesota trucking companies are feeling the impact of higher diesel prices in a market that was already difficult for small carriers. Fuel is one of the largest variable expenses in a truck’s operating budget, and every increase cuts directly into the margin on a load. Regional carriers and owner-operators with limited negotiating power are especially exposed when rates do not rise as quickly as pump prices.

The practical problem is not limited to the fuel receipt. Higher diesel costs affect deadhead decisions, empty miles, driver compensation, maintenance planning, and whether a marginal load is worth accepting. Carriers operating in Minnesota should review lane-level profitability rather than relying on average weekly revenue. A load that looked acceptable a month ago may now lose money after fuel, tolls, detention, and equipment costs are included.

When fuel costs move faster than freight rates, the fastest way to protect a small carrier is to measure profit by load and by mile—not revenue by truck.

Climbing Diesel Costs Raise Pressure Across the U.S.

KSN-TV reports that rising diesel costs are putting broader pressure on the U.S. trucking industry. This is a national issue, not just a regional one: long-haul trucks consume substantial quantities of fuel, so even a modest price increase can erase a meaningful portion of a carrier’s weekly operating margin.

Small carriers generally have fewer tools to absorb the increase than large fleets. They may have less leverage to negotiate fuel surcharges, fewer opportunities to buy fuel at contracted prices, and less cash available to cover a prolonged period of weak margins. Shippers and brokers may also continue quoting rates based on older market conditions, leaving carriers to decide whether to reject freight or accept work at a loss.

Carriers should verify that fuel-surcharge schedules are current and that accessorial charges are being billed consistently. Dispatch and accounting teams should also compare actual fuel expense with the surcharge collected on each lane. A transportation management system such as VAU0’s TMS tools can help organize load, mileage, fuel, and settlement data so pricing decisions are based on current numbers.

North Dakota Operators Face the Same Fuel-Margin Problem

KFYR-TV reports that rising diesel costs are affecting the trucking industry in North Dakota. The state’s long distances and widely spaced freight markets can make fuel exposure particularly important. A truck may travel many miles between productive loads, and a small increase in fuel cost can compound quickly when a trip includes repositioning or empty miles.

For owner-operators, this makes route planning and reload discipline critical. Before accepting a load, calculate the complete trip: loaded miles, likely deadhead, fuel stops, permits, tolls, and the probability of finding a reload. Rural markets may require accepting a lower-paying outbound load to get positioned for better freight, but that decision should be deliberate rather than automatic.

Fuel purchasing also deserves attention. Drivers should compare approved fuel locations, card discounts, and route efficiency without making unnecessary detours. Saving a few cents per gallon is not worthwhile if it adds miles, waiting time, or a missed appointment. The goal is the lowest total trip cost, not simply the lowest posted pump price.

FMCSA Waives HOS Rules for Certain Fuel Haulers

Overdrive Online reports that the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration has waived hours-of-service requirements for certain carriers hauling gasoline and diesel. The purpose of an emergency waiver is to support fuel availability during an unusual supply disruption or emergency, but a waiver does not automatically apply to every fuel load or every carrier.

Fuel haulers should confirm the exact effective dates, covered commodities, jurisdictions, and operating conditions before relying on the exemption. Drivers should carry a copy of the applicable notice or other required documentation and continue complying with all conditions that remain in force. A waiver of specific HOS provisions does not eliminate obligations involving safe operation, vehicle inspection, licensing, cargo securement, or controlled-substance and alcohol rules.

Carriers should also document why a trip qualified for the waiver. Dispatch records, bills of lading, fuel-hauling instructions, and electronic logging device annotations may become important if a roadside inspection or audit questions the operation. The VAU0 compliance resources can help carriers keep regulatory documents and review procedures organized, but the official FMCSA notice should control the final decision.

CVSA Regulatory Update Highlights the Need for Ongoing Review

The Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance’s September 4 regulatory update is a reminder that compliance requirements continue to change throughout the year. Regulatory updates can affect inspections, enforcement priorities, driver qualification, equipment standards, and the way carriers document compliance. Waiting for an annual policy review leaves too much room for a new requirement to be missed.

Small carriers should assign responsibility for reviewing updates and translating them into action. That may mean revising a pre-trip checklist, updating a driver handbook, confirming that required records are accessible, or briefing drivers before their next dispatch. The goal is not to create paperwork for its own sake; it is to ensure the company can demonstrate that its procedures match current rules.

Carrier owners should review the CVSA update directly and compare it with their existing policies. Pay special attention to items that can lead to out-of-service conditions, violations, or preventable crashes. A short monthly compliance review is usually less expensive than correcting a problem after an inspection or audit.

What carriers should do this week

  • Recalculate the break-even rate on active lanes using current diesel prices, realistic deadhead, driver pay, maintenance, and insurance costs.
  • Confirm that fuel-surcharge formulas and accessorial billing match current contracts and actual miles.
  • Review the FMCSA fuel-hauler waiver carefully before dispatching under it, and keep supporting documents with the load records.
  • Read the latest CVSA regulatory update and turn any applicable changes into written checklist or training updates.
  • Use dispatch, fuel, and settlement data to identify unprofitable lanes before accepting additional freight.
← Back to Blog For Carriers →
Why We Built ESSE Instead of Buying Another TMS | ESSE Blog
Our Story

Why we built ESSE instead of buying another TMS

In 2022, we were running a small fleet and spending approximately $400 per truck per month on software. TMS license, ELD subscription, e-sign service, separate accounting integration. Four different logins. Four different monthly invoices. Four different support teams to call when something didn't work.

None of it talked to each other without manual data entry.

The software evaluation that changed everything

We spent three months evaluating every major TMS and fleet management system on the market. AscendTMS, McLeod, Motive, EZLogz, KeepTruckin, TruckingOffice, Axon. We signed up for demos, trials, and in two cases, paid for actual subscriptions to test them properly.

What we found was consistent across almost all of them: the software was built by people who had never dispatched a truck. You could tell immediately. The terminology was slightly wrong. The workflows assumed steps that no real dispatcher would take. The ELD and TMS were always separate systems that "integrated" — meaning they sometimes shared data, if you configured things correctly, and the configuration broke whenever either vendor pushed an update.

"The best way to evaluate trucking software is to use it under real pressure. Not in a demo. Not in a test environment. On a real load, with a real deadline, when a broker is calling every 30 minutes for an update."

The specific things that were broken

Without naming specific vendors: one major TMS required five screen transitions to update a load status. Not five clicks — five full page navigations. On a mobile browser from a truck stop, that meant 45 seconds to tell a broker the truck was loaded. Another system had beautiful analytics dashboards but couldn't tell you, in real time, how many hours of drive time your driver had remaining without navigating to a separate compliance module.

The ELD market was worse. Most ELD systems were designed to satisfy FMCSA's technical requirements — which they did — while making the user experience as painful as possible. Drivers hated them. When drivers hate their tools, they find workarounds. Workarounds create compliance risk.

The moment we decided to build

The decision was made on a Tuesday afternoon when our dispatcher spent 40 minutes re-entering data from a rate confirmation PDF that our ELD had already captured in a different system. The information existed. It was digital. It lived in three different places that didn't talk to each other, and a human was manually transferring it between systems.

That's not a technology problem. That's a lack of ambition problem. Nobody had decided to solve it because the existing systems were profitable enough without solving it.

What we decided to build instead

One platform. ELD and TMS as the same system, not integrations. AI that reads rate confirmation PDFs so dispatchers don't have to. A dispatcher — eventually an AI dispatcher — that covers nights and weekends so loads don't get missed. E-sign built in, not bolted on.

And priced at zero through 2026, because the goal was to prove the product worked before asking carriers to pay for it.

Two years in: did it work?

The Rate Con AI has a 95%+ accuracy rate on standard broker formats. ERETH ELD passed FMCSA's technical certification. Our AI dispatchers book real loads for real carriers after hours. The carrier dashboard still occasionally has a minor bug — we fix them the same day they're reported.

Would we have been better off just using an existing system and focusing on freight? Financially, in the short term, probably yes. But we would have kept paying $400 per truck per month for software that we knew was mediocre. And we would have missed the opportunity to build something that actually works the way the industry needs it to work.

We don't regret it.

← Back to Blog Next: Our first AI broker call →