← Back to Blog
Trucking News

Trucking News: October 3, 2026 — What Carriers Need to Know

Trucking News: October 3, 2026 — What Carriers Need to Know

Trucking Navigates a Chaotic Freight Market

The freight market continues to send mixed signals. Some lanes and customers are producing better opportunities, while others remain oversupplied with trucks, slow to pay, or unwilling to accept higher rates. That combination makes planning difficult for owner-operators who need consistent revenue and for small carriers trying to keep equipment moving without sacrificing margin.

The practical takeaway is to manage by lane and customer rather than relying on broad market predictions. Review loaded-mile revenue, deadhead, detention, fuel expense, and payment speed before accepting a load. A simple transportation management system can make those comparisons easier; tools such as the VAU0 TMS help carriers organize load information and make decisions from actual numbers instead of guesswork.

In a chaotic freight market, the best protection for a small carrier is disciplined load selection—not simply keeping the truck moving.

Cargo Theft Case Highlights Risk of Fraudulent Carrier Operations

A Los Angeles jury convicted two people in a nationwide cargo theft operation valued at roughly $2 million. Prosecutors said the group used purchased trucking companies as part of the scheme, showing how criminals can exploit legitimate-looking business structures, carrier identities, and transportation paperwork.

Small carriers are vulnerable because brokers and shippers increasingly expect fast onboarding, electronic documents, and remote communication. Those same processes can be abused through identity theft, altered banking details, fake drivers, or loads booked under a company name that appears legitimate. Carriers should protect their own identity while also verifying every new customer and broker before accepting freight.

Use a documented verification process: confirm the counterparty through independently sourced contact information, review rate confirmations carefully, check for last-minute changes to payment instructions, and require clear pickup and delivery records. Keep access to dispatch, accounting, and email systems limited to people who need it. Strong procedures are especially important when using outside dispatchers or factoring relationships.

Ohio Trucking Companies Feel the Pressure From Higher Diesel Costs

Ohio carriers are facing a familiar but serious problem: diesel costs can rise faster than freight rates. For a small fleet, fuel is one of the largest controllable expenses, but it is also difficult to avoid. A truck that runs empty, waits in line, or takes a poorly planned route can erase the profit from an otherwise acceptable load.

Carriers should calculate fuel impact before accepting freight, including expected empty miles, terrain, weather, and delivery constraints. Fuel discounts help, but they do not replace good planning. Review idle time, tire pressure, preventive maintenance, and routing regularly. When negotiating with customers, use fuel surcharge language that explains how adjustments are calculated and when they apply.

Ohio-based operators should also watch local demand and avoid assuming that a short regional trip is automatically more profitable than a longer haul. Compare revenue after fuel, tolls, maintenance, and unpaid time. VAU0’s operations and compliance resources can help carriers build more consistent processes as costs remain unpredictable.

Marijuana Rescheduling Does Not Automatically Change DOT Rules

Possible federal marijuana rescheduling continues to create confusion for transportation employers. A change in marijuana’s federal classification could affect certain areas of employment law and medical research, but it does not automatically make marijuana use acceptable for safety-sensitive commercial driving positions.

DOT-regulated employers must continue following the applicable drug and alcohol testing rules unless and until the Department of Transportation formally changes them. Marijuana remains a compliance issue for drivers subject to federal testing, regardless of state legalization or a physician’s recommendation. Employers should avoid making policy changes based on headlines alone.

Review written drug and alcohol policies, supervisor training, pre-employment procedures, random testing practices, and return-to-duty requirements. Drivers should understand that off-duty use can still create professional consequences. Keep current records and use qualified compliance support when interpreting new federal guidance. The VAU0 compliance resources can help carriers keep policies organized, but official DOT requirements remain the controlling authority.

California and FMCSA Fight Over Non-Domiciled CDL Restrictions

California and FMCSA are arguing in court over a halt involving non-domiciled commercial driver’s licenses. The dispute adds another layer of uncertainty for carriers that employ drivers with licenses issued under non-domiciled rules, particularly fleets operating across state lines or hiring from a national labor pool.

Until the legal process produces a final and effective result, carriers should not assume that a driver’s current credential will be accepted without additional review. Check license status, expiration dates, medical certification, employment eligibility documentation, and any state or federal notices that affect the driver’s qualification file. Do not rely solely on a driver’s claim that a renewal or transfer is pending.

Small carriers should identify affected drivers now and create a contingency plan for dispatch coverage, renewals, and equipment assignments. Keep qualification files current and document every verification. If a driver becomes ineligible, dispatching that person before the issue is resolved can create significant insurance, safety, and regulatory exposure.

What carriers should do this week

  • Review every active lane using revenue after fuel, deadhead, tolls, maintenance, and unpaid waiting time.
  • Strengthen broker and customer verification procedures, especially for new accounts and changes to payment instructions.
  • Audit drug and alcohol policies and remind drivers that DOT marijuana rules remain in effect unless officially changed.
  • Check qualification files for drivers affected by non-domiciled CDL developments and document all credential reviews.
  • Track fuel usage, idle time, tire pressure, and maintenance trends so rising diesel costs do not go unnoticed.
← 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 →