← Back to Blog
Trucking News

Trucking News: October 6, 2026 — What Carriers Need to Know

Trucking News: October 6, 2026 — What Carriers Need to Know

ATA Roundtable Puts Small-Carrier Issues in Front of Congress

American Trucking Associations Chairman Derek Leathers hosted Congressman Ronny Hern for a trucking roundtable in Oklahoma today. The meeting gave carriers a chance to discuss the issues affecting freight operations at ground level, including regulatory pressure, operating costs, infrastructure, and the difficulty of finding and retaining qualified drivers.

For small fleets and owner-operators, the value of these meetings depends on whether policy discussions turn into workable rules. Carriers should watch for movement on proposals that affect equipment requirements, compliance paperwork, fuel costs, and access to the workforce. A rule that is manageable for a large fleet can create a major burden for a carrier operating only a few trucks.

It is also a reminder that carrier owners should communicate with trade associations and elected officials before rules are finalized. Keeping accurate records of detention, insurance, maintenance, fuel, and compliance costs gives you something concrete to bring to those discussions. VAU0 carriers can also use a centralized transportation management system to organize the operating data needed to measure how policy changes affect the business.

Side Guards Renew Debate Over Truck Safety and Retrofit Costs

A trucking industry veteran is pushing for life-saving side guards on every truck, arguing that the equipment can reduce the severity of crashes involving pedestrians, cyclists, and other vulnerable road users. Side guards are designed to limit the chance that a person or smaller vehicle slides beneath the side of a trailer or truck.

The safety argument is straightforward, but nationwide adoption would raise practical questions for small carriers. Equipment availability, installation standards, ground clearance, weight, damage during loading or off-road operations, and inspection requirements all matter. A carrier running urban routes may face a different risk profile than one hauling long-distance freight between distribution centers.

Owners should not wait for a mandate to review the issue. Ask trailer suppliers and maintenance shops what approved systems are available, how they affect inspections, and what the expected repair costs are after a minor impact. If a customer requires side guards or similar equipment, document the requirement in the rate and equipment planning process rather than absorbing the cost without discussion.

California Diesel Prices Continue to Squeeze Trucking Margins

Rising diesel prices in California are putting additional pressure on trucking companies, particularly carriers that operate heavily in the state or cannot consistently pass fuel increases through to customers. Fuel is one of the fastest-moving costs in trucking, and even a modest price change can erase the margin on a short-haul load.

California carriers also face a difficult operating environment where fuel expenses interact with traffic delays, equipment rules, insurance, and higher labor costs. For an owner-operator, the impact shows up immediately in take-home pay. For a small fleet, the risk is multiplied when trucks run empty miles or when fuel surcharges do not match actual pump prices.

Review every customer’s fuel-surcharge formula and compare it with your real fuel spend by lane. Quote loads using current fuel assumptions, track gallons and miles by truck, and avoid treating fuel cards as a substitute for cost analysis. A basic dashboard in your TMS can show which lanes, customers, and trucks are producing acceptable margins after fuel.

FMCSA Signals a Busy 2026 Regulatory Agenda

FMCSA is teasing a flurry of trucking rules for 2026, giving carriers another reason to monitor the federal regulatory agenda closely. The announcements do not necessarily mean every proposal will become an immediate requirement, but they indicate that carriers may see several rulemakings advance during the year.

For small carriers, the challenge is not simply understanding a final rule. It is planning for implementation, updating driver and maintenance procedures, training employees, and budgeting for equipment or technology changes. A carrier that waits until an effective date is published may have little time to make corrections without disrupting operations.

The most important takeaway is that regulatory planning needs to become an operating routine, not a last-minute response to a compliance deadline.

Owners should maintain a calendar for proposed rules, comment periods, final rules, and effective dates. Assign someone to review official updates and translate them into specific actions for drivers, dispatchers, and maintenance staff. VAU0’s compliance resources can help carriers keep required documentation and review tasks organized as rules develop.

Top FMCSA Rules to Watch in 2026

FleetOwner’s review of FMCSA’s 2026 regulatory agenda highlights the number of trucking rules that could demand attention from fleets. The agenda may include changes involving safety standards, driver qualification and training, electronic records, equipment, and enforcement practices. The important point for carriers is that several separate proposals can create a cumulative administrative burden.

Small carriers should distinguish between a proposal, a final rule, and an effective requirement. Industry headlines often compress those stages, but the compliance response is different at each step. A proposed rule may be an opportunity to submit comments; a final rule may require policy changes; and an effective rule may require documented proof that the company has already implemented the change.

Review your driver files, inspection records, maintenance documentation, accident procedures, and training records before new requirements arrive. Make sure responsibilities are clear when a driver, dispatcher, or third-party service provider is handling a compliance task. Strong records will not eliminate regulatory costs, but they can reduce confusion and help demonstrate good-faith compliance during an audit.

What carriers should do this week

  • Review fuel-surcharge agreements and recalculate margins on California and other high-cost lanes.
  • Set a recurring weekly check for FMCSA rulemaking updates, proposed rules, and effective dates.
  • Audit driver qualification, inspection, maintenance, and training records before new requirements take effect.
  • Ask trailer and equipment vendors about side-guard options, installation standards, weight, and repair costs.
  • Record operating-cost examples and share them with trucking associations or elected officials during policy discussions.
← 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 →