← Back to Blog
Trucking News

Trucking News: October 17, 2026 — What Carriers Need to Know

Trucking News: October 17, 2026 — What Carriers Need to Know

Trucking’s attention is split this week between leadership changes, driver pay, regulatory enforcement, and the industry’s continuing debate over English proficiency. For small carriers and owner-operators, the practical takeaway is simple: policy discussions in Washington can become hiring, payroll, and compliance issues on the road faster than expected.

ATA Names Mark Colson as Next President and CEO

The American Trucking Associations has named Mark Colson as its next president and CEO. The change comes as the industry faces several high-impact issues, including driver qualification standards, insurance costs, workforce shortages, infrastructure, and the future of federal trucking regulation.

For smaller carriers, a national trade association leader matters because ATA helps shape the industry’s positions before Congress, federal agencies, and the courts. Carriers should watch how Colson’s leadership affects advocacy on regulations that directly influence operating costs and daily administration. It is also a reminder that small fleets should stay engaged with their state associations and industry groups rather than waiting for rules to be finalized.

The most important question for carriers is not simply who leads ATA, but whether the industry’s national agenda reflects the operational realities of small fleets: tighter margins, limited staff, and little room for compliance mistakes.

Fleets Target Driver Pay Raises in Select Markets

Some fleets are focusing on driver pay increases in selected markets rather than applying broad, nationwide raises. That approach reflects the uneven freight market: compensation pressure is typically strongest where carriers compete for drivers, where living costs are higher, or where certain freight lanes require more experience and flexibility.

For owner-operators and small carriers, the development creates both pressure and opportunity. A carrier may not be able to match a large fleet’s wage package, but it can compete through dependable home time, transparent deductions, consistent miles, detention policies, and faster pay. Before changing rates, review the full cost of recruiting and turnover. A modest pay adjustment may be less expensive than repeatedly replacing drivers and losing productivity during onboarding.

Carriers should also compare compensation by lane and job type instead of relying on one companywide number. Use a TMS to review revenue, miles, accessorials, and driver productivity by market. That data can help identify where a pay increase is justified and where a scheduling or dispatch problem is being mistaken for a compensation problem.

Trucking Leaders Gather in Charlotte for ATA’s 2026 MCE

Trucking executives, suppliers, and industry leaders are gathering in Charlotte for ATA’s 2026 Management Conference & Exhibition. Events like MCE give carriers a look at the issues likely to dominate the next year, including technology adoption, safety, labor, equipment costs, and regulatory policy.

Large carriers often have teams attending these events, but smaller fleets can still benefit from following the discussions and product announcements. The key is to separate useful operational tools from expensive technology that does not solve a measurable problem. Before buying a new platform, identify whether the real need is better dispatch visibility, maintenance tracking, driver communication, document management, or compliance reporting.

For a small carrier, technology should reduce office work and improve decision-making, not create another system that employees must maintain manually. VAU0’s logistics technology approach is built around that practical goal: connecting daily transportation operations with the information carriers need to manage loads, paperwork, and performance.

CVSA Issues Regulatory Update for October 16

The Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance has published its latest regulatory update. CVSA updates are worth reviewing because they help carriers track changes, interpretations, and enforcement-related information affecting commercial motor vehicles and drivers across North America.

Small fleets should treat these updates as an early-warning system. A regulatory change may not create an immediate roadside issue, but it can affect driver files, inspection preparation, equipment records, drug and alcohol program administration, or internal policies. Waiting until a driver is placed out of service is an expensive way to discover that a procedure is outdated.

Use the update as a prompt to review your compliance program and confirm that responsibilities are assigned. Check that required records are easy to retrieve, corrective actions are documented, and drivers know what the company expects during inspections. Carriers should also confirm that dispatchers and managers are working from the same current policies.

Trucking Group Pushes FMCSA on Stronger English Proficiency Rules

A trucking group is urging the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to adopt stronger English proficiency requirements for commercial motor vehicle drivers. The issue centers on whether drivers can understand and communicate in English well enough to safely perform their duties, interact with inspectors, follow traffic and safety instructions, and respond during emergencies.

For carriers, the debate carries both safety and operational consequences. A clearer standard could make expectations easier to enforce, but it could also increase screening responsibilities during hiring and onboarding. Companies should avoid making assumptions based on accent, nationality, or fluency in casual conversation. The relevant question is whether a driver can understand required safety information and communicate effectively in situations connected to the job.

Until federal guidance changes, carriers should review their current qualification and onboarding process. Keep records showing that applicants received and understood safety policies, inspection procedures, emergency instructions, and other required information. A consistent, job-related process is easier to defend and more useful than an informal judgment made during a rushed interview.

What carriers should do this week

  • Review driver compensation by lane, market, and job type, then compare the cost of raises with the cost of turnover.
  • Read the latest CVSA regulatory update and assign someone to document any policy or recordkeeping changes.
  • Audit driver onboarding materials for clear English-language safety instructions and consistent qualification procedures.
  • Use TMS and payroll data to measure revenue per mile, accessorial recovery, driver pay, and unproductive time.
  • Follow ATA’s MCE discussions, but evaluate new technology against a specific operational problem before spending money.
← 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 →