Truckload Authority

Dear Wikipedia: Since you have become perhaps the most widely Googled “encyclopedia” in the United States with the disappearance of the best-known printed volumes (R.I.P., World Book Encyclopedia and Encyclopedia Britannica), I want to call your attention to a shortcoming in your article on electronic logging devices (ELDs). Since you encourage readers to improve your articles, I want to do just that. You accurately say an ELD is “electronic hardware that is attached to a commercial motor vehicle engine to record driving hours. An ELD monitors a vehicle’s engine to capture data on whether the engine is running, whether the vehicle is moving, miles driven, and duration of engine operation.” Your shortcoming is found in the fact that you do not mention how the trucking industry is using the data created by an ELD to improve the industry in many other arenas, such as visibility into driver behavior and safety, GPS truck tracking, vehicle diagnostics, route analysis, and accident detection. I hope the information below will help add to your article. It comes from two executives based on interaction with motor carrier executives. Sincerely, A grateful trucking stakeholder. “Wow. Where do I begin? First and foremost, in its very basic state, [ELDs] track compliance with the hours of service, but it does so, so much more,” said David Heller, vice president of government affairs at the Truckload Carriers Association. “Where the value comes in is getting everybody onto a digital platform,” said Doug Schrier, vice president of product and innovation at Transflo, which offers a portfolio of mobile, telematics, and business process automation software for the transportation industry. “You have the ability to automate more than 120 different activities from the time a driver leaves the house until they return.” Put simply, ELDs provide motor carrier executives and state and federal regulators a glimpse into the day of a driver. In fact, Heller said information from ELDs are directly responsible to forging hours of service rules. “For instance, if you look at the reason for the new HOS rule that goes into effect September 29, that rule is based on data that was generated through ELDs,” Heller noted. “By looking at that data and interpreting that data, we obviously have developed a rule that makes more sense for today’s drivers. What’s more, a new HOS rule based upon data generated by ELDs can not only benefit the driver, but also benefit the nation because these drivers can be safer because they’re afforded flexibility to operate in a safe space.” “Yeah, absolutely,” Schrier said when asked if he felt ELD data influenced the development of the new HOS rule, pointing to the flexibility for the driver to use different sleeper berth combinations and the ability to stop the clock for adverse conditions. “Think about it,” he said. “You’re running into Chicago. You’re going to hit the perimeter of Chicago at 4 o’clock and you need to deliver a load the next morning. You have some really tough decisions to make because of the lack of flexibility with the current rule. I’m either going to have to sit in traffic today and fight it tonight to get inside the city before I take my 10-hour break and hopefully, I can find parking or I hang outside the city.” Now, the driver has the option of extending the 14-hour window. Both Heller and Schrier are hopeful that ELDs can help develop a regulation dealing with driver retention, an issue that ranks high on the American Transportation Research Institute’s Top 10 List of Industry Concerns. It’s a problem drivers often complain about when talking with their driver manager, both men say. “Detention is something that has been bought off by auditing companies or the freight payer,” Schrier said. “With an ELD, pretty much every second of a truck’s movement is tracked, and it shows you were in the proximity of the yard at your appointment claim,” helping to refute the shippers’ and receivers’ claim that detention was the fault of the driver. Solving the detention issue with the help of ELD data is a safety issue, too. “Studies show drivers drive faster after getting out of a detention event,” Heller said. Carriers tend to forget how they can use ELD to enhance fuel consumption through better utilization of routes, Schrier said. “Of course, the ELD will give them the route they took, and we work with commercial navigation systems to produce the data,” Schrier said. “One of the safest miles is a mile never driven. The ELD will help do two things. First, it will make sure the driver has the correct route, and second, that it is the optimal route. You don’t want to have a driver have an accident on a road they shouldn’t have been on. You hear about these unnecessary accidents all the time.” Heller said utilization of ELD data could be expanded into other areas, such as driver training. “Think of the expanded training opportunities that you can provide the drivers,” he said. “ELDs coupled with cameras through a telematic-typed base system with cameras can record hard braking, lane-departure incidents, or even more so, what the driver’s viewpoint is out the window. Coupled with ELDs, these systems can give a roadmap of sorts to show what kind of driving aspects you may need to freshen drivers up on.  Twenty years ago, I don’t think anybody ever thought these things would ever be possible. But here we are in a world where we can provide the training techniques to drivers to improve upon their performance. It will take time, but the industry will get better at using ELD as an opportunity to reduce accidents on our roadways. “We’ve only reached the tip of the iceberg when it comes to using ELD-produced information to better our industry,” he concluded.

No one would deny that liability insurance for bodily injury and property damage is a necessary part of any trucking business. Controlling the cost of such insurance, however, is a struggle for carriers of every size. The struggle is harder when politicians get involved, as some did this year with the INVEST in America Act, a five-year, $494 billion funding plan to maintain and improve transportation infrastructure put forth by Democrats in the House of Representatives. Before the act left the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, an amendment proposed by Rep. Jesus G. “Chuy” Garcia (D-IL-4) to increase the minimum financial liability requirement for motor carriers to $2 million was voted into the bill. The bill, with the liability requirement, was subsequently passed on to the full House, where it was incorporated into the $1.5 trillion Moving America Forward (MAF) Act. That bill was passed by the House on July 1 and sent to the Senate. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky made it clear that the MAF Act was going nowhere. “It will just join the list of absurd House proposals that were only drawn up to show fealty to the radical left,” he said on the floor of the Senate chamber. In the meantime, insurance costs for carriers continue their upward trajectory. “Insurance premiums have been rising through the roof,” said Truckload Carriers Association Vice President of Government Affairs David Heller.  “Usually, there will be at least a few carriers that see their premiums go down,” he explained. “This year, if you’ve seen a decrease, you’re kind of a unicorn.” Heller cited an informal poll of TCA membership that asked for the percentage of premium increase they had experienced this year. “That poll shows an average premium increase of 15% this year,” he said. “Of course, it’s been going on like this for years.” A national research study, released in June, noted that liability insurance premiums had increased 35% to 40% for carriers deemed an “average to marginal” risk. Despite significant investment in Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) collision-mitigation and lane-departure warnings, as well as in-cab video-recording systems, many carriers face the annual dilemma of budgeting for the latest round of liability insurance increases. This year, while carriers struggle to remain solvent during the economic collapse resulting from COVID-19 pandemic shutdowns, slowdowns, and restrictions, the timing of a demand to further increase insurance costs seems questionable at best. “It’s not the right time to force this on the industry,” added Heller. “We support minimum liability insurance requirements, but what that number is appears to be open to discussion.” That’s the other part of the financial responsibility argument. What is the right amount? The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) prompted a discussion on the topic when it published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in November 2014. The notice only said that the agency was “considering” an increase in minimum levels of financial responsibility and was seeking comments. In the 90-day comment period, 2,182 comments were submitted. Most of the responses were from small trucking companies or single truck owner-operators, who were overwhelmingly opposed to any increase. A comment by the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) pointed out that the organization’s Risk Retention Group reported that 98.6% of the carriers insured were already insured at a level of $1 million, rather than the required $750,000 minimum. The OOIDA submission contained another statistic that was also mentioned in several other comments: Approximately 98% of insurance-related cases settle before trial at the current minimum levels of financial responsibility. In other words, the minimum liability requirements often serve as a cap for litigation settlements, assuring plaintiffs, and their legal representation, a sizeable award without the risk of going to trial. It’s no wonder that many of the comments submitted in favor of increased minimum liability requirements were from trial attorneys or attorney associations. Several comments came from insurance brokers or associations, including a letter from the 1,400-member National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies (NAMIC). An increase in the minimum financial liability requirements would put many of their members at risk, the letter explained, because of the potential for increased payouts. After considering the comments and available data, the FMCSA withdrew its proposal for an increase in June 2017, citing “insufficient data” as the reason. It should be noted, however, that the proposal, published during the Obama administration, was withdrawn during the Trump administration, under a different set of political appointments. Garcia’s attempt to move the issue through legislation has at least reignited the discussion over liability requirements. That debate, however, must include more than simply raising the amount, according to Heller. “Any discussion on increasing minimum liability requirements should include something on tort reform or addressing the nuclear verdicts the industry is being hit with,” he explained. The aforementioned recent national study pointed at “nuclear verdicts,” unreasonably large jury awards against carriers, as a reason for a 51.7% annual increase in award amounts between 2006 and 2019, while the annualized inflation rate for the same period was 1.7%. “Runaway verdicts are increasing in both size and numbers,” said Clay Porter, a partner in the Cincinnati law firm of Porter Rennie Wood and Kendall. “The study documents a frequency in excessive awards that, while not surprising, tells us that the trial system has gotten completely off track.” As July came to a close, a coalition of more than 60 trucking trade associations, led by OOIDA and including 20 individual state associations, sent a letter to leaders and members of the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation expressing their disapproval of any increase in required minimum financial liability amounts as it considers its own infrastructure legislation. If any action is taken this year on minimum financial limits, it isn’t likely to be tied to an infrastructure bill. “It won’t get done, due to the ever-increasing struggle to dig out of the virus and economic firestorm,” added Heller. A continuing resolution to extend the provisions of the current FAST Act is the most likely outcome. “Between MAP-21 and the FAST Act, there were 13 continuing resolutions issued,” he said. “I think that’s what will happen with FAST, and they’ll try to get a deal done when the new Congress comes in.” Before that happens, carriers will need to brace for another round of liability premium increases.  

The year 2020 has been a strange year for several reasons, but there’s one factor that is as normal as can be. Political posturing and bickering in Washington haven’t slowed down at all, even while Congress was shut down over the COVID-19 pandemic. Hopes that Congress would pass an election-year highway funding bill to replace the FAST Act that expires on September 30 are dwindling as legislators continue to battle over another round of economic stimulus payments. But Truckload Carriers Association Vice President of Government Affairs David Heller isn’t surprised. “Between MAP-21 and the FAST Act, there were 13 continuing resolutions issued,” he explained. “I don’t see an infrastructure program getting done before the election.” Both parties have expressed concern over America’s crumbling infrastructure. President Donald Trump claimed the issue during his presidential campaign and has made several attempts to stimulate infrastructure legislation. “Infrastructure Week,” an annual period designated by Trump to focus on the issue, has turned into a “‘Groundhog Day”-style fever dream doomed to be repeated,” the New York Times said in a May 22, 2019 article. The same article states, “Long ago, the political and pundit class began to recognize any mention of infrastructure-themed events as a catchall joke symbolizing any substantive — if pie-in-the-sky — policy objective destined to go nowhere.” The need to address infrastructure is clear. The most recent “Report Card” from the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) claimed that it would take $420 billion to bring current roads up to acceptable standards, plus another $123 billion for needed bridge repairs. That’s $543 billion, just to fix roads and bridges. That was in 2017. The next Report Card will be published in 2021. The last few attempts at an infrastructure bill have indeed gone nowhere. That will also be the fate of the most current attempt, the massive $1.5 trillion Moving America Forward Act passed on a partisan vote by the House of Representatives on July 1. It was the Democratic response to an attempt by Senate Republicans to include a $287 billion infrastructure initiative in the first COVID-19 economic stimulus package. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman John Barrasso (R-WY) attempted to get his bill (S. 2302) added as an amendment to a stimulus bill that had already been passed by the House. This move was opposed by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY). The Moving America Forward Act, on the other hand, started as a $494 billion infrastructure bill in the Highways and Transit Subcommittee of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. Dubbed the Investing in a New Vision for the Environment and Surface Transportation in America Act, or INVEST in America Act, the bill quickly gained support from trucking industry organizations. During the markup phase in committee, where amendments are considered, the committee voted to add an amendment that would increase minimum financial responsibility levels for motor carriers from the current $750,000 level to $2 million. The amendment passed, and industry groups began pulling their support for the Act. TCA’s Heller questioned the $2 million amount. “We looked at $2 million, and we wonder where that comes from,” he said. “If we’re looking at the Consumer Price Index (CPI) since 1984, the amount should be $2.3 million, so we wonder why they rounded down.” Heller also said that any discussion of increasing minimum financial responsibility limits should include a discussion on tort reform or some limits on “nuclear” jury verdicts. Before that discussion could take place, House Democrats folded the INVEST in America Act into the much larger Moving America Forward Act. The enlarged bill includes $100 billion for school building and improvements at high-poverty schools, another $100 billion to build or repair existing low-income housing, $100 billion for broadband internet infrastructure, $65 billion in water infrastructure, $70 billion to expand renewable energy in the nation’s electrical grid, $30 billion for hospitals, and $25 million for the U.S. Post Office to acquire a zero-emissions fleet. Also included are $100 million for transit projects, slanted toward zero-emissions equipment and $29 billion for Amtrak. House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard Neal (D-MA-1), in a June 18 address, touted the bill’s ability to “create new green, good-paying union jobs.” He said, “An investment of this magnitude has been necessary for years, but it’s more urgently needed than ever as we work to recover from the COVID-19 crisis.” Addressing Republican opposition, he said, “We fully expect them to meet us at the table and get this groundbreaking legislation signed into law.” Representative Bill Pascrell, Jr. (D-NJ-9), a co-sponsor of the legislation, said this after the bill cleared the House: “Our roads are cracked, our bridges are crumbling, our water mains are exploding, and our planet is warming at unprecedented speeds. The legislation we passed invests in American transportation and energy with a keen eye on the future.” Pascrell also touted the inclusion in the larger bill of his “Incentivizing Offshore Wind Power Act,” which has failed to gain passage in every session of Congress since 2009. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) wasn’t as enthusiastic. “House Democrats appear addicted to pointless political theater,” he said. “So naturally, this nonsense is not going anywhere in the Senate. It will just join the list of absurd House proposals that were only drawn up to show fealty to the radical left.” McConnell claimed the legislation was a “thousand-page cousin of the Green New Deal, masquerading as a highway bill.” Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY), chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, slammed the House bill, saying, “There’s nothing bipartisan about it. It’s completely partisan.” A June 29 letter to the House of Representatives from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce lamented the partisan nature of the bill, pointing out that “other congressional committees have demonstrated that bipartisan consensus is possible on surface transportation reauthorization.” He called the addition of proposals beyond core surface and water infrastructure programs “subtraction through addition.” On June 29, the White House issued its opinion of the bill in a statement of administrative policy. “This bill is problematic for several reasons. It is heavily biased against rural America. It also appears to be entirely debt-financed. And it fails to tackle the issue of unnecessary permitting delays, which are one of the most significant impediments to improving our infrastructure.” The statement also said the bill “is full of wasteful ‘Green New Deal’ initiatives.” Trump gave a clear message that the bill will be vetoed if it crosses his desk. In response to White House claims that the legislation is entirely debt-financed, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA-12) said, “With the interest rates where they are now, there’s never been a better time for us to go big.” The White House noted that Trump has repeatedly called on Congress to send him bipartisan infrastructure legislation. “Unfortunately, H.R. 2 is not a serious proposal and fails to answer his call,” the statement concluded. The size and scope of an infrastructure bill to replace the FAST Act may well depend on who controls Congress and the White House after the November elections. Chances of anything getting done before then are fading fast.

Ed Nagle was talking with a reporter about trucking and the lack of respect shown to the industry and especially its drivers, who are the face of the industry. “I’m a little biased, OK?,” he said. The voice of the president of Nagle Toledo is filled with passion. “I’m an outspoken advocate for drivers and the honorableness of their profession. So, if the conversation starts to go awry with respect to that person’s perspective of the industry and especially the drivers, I correct them quickly. I don’t even give them the opportunity to go down the wrong path before I start educating them,” he stated. “I can tell you that for the past 30 years we’ve been competing with farming every year for the lowest job status in the country because people take us for granted. People said we were an inconvenience to them,” Nagle exclaimed. Nagle was speaking in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic that resulted in grocery shelves being stripped bare by Americans who feared they might not be able to find food to feed their families and stock their homes with necessities of life — especially toilet paper and hand sanitizer. It didn’t take long for the average citizen’s attitude toward trucking to change dramatically. Instead of constantly reading about trucks being involved in wrecks and causing road congestion, trucking was treated to headlines extolling virtues of the industry. “Truckers step up as coronavirus pumps demand for necessities…” read a March 28 headline in the influential Washington Post. “Truckers brave coronavirus outbreak to deliver goods: ‘If we stop, the world stops,’” was the headline in the nationally distributed USA Today. “‘Risking My Life’ to ‘Truck In Milk, Wine and Hand Sanitizer,’” read a headline in the New York Times touting the story of trucker Joseph Morales, who puts on a mask and gloves while making deliveries but worries about coming in contact to an unmasked person who coughs on him. “Now all of a sudden you were starting to see news stories, Facebook and Twitter posts. People were highlighting the virtues of trucking. People were making lunch bags for drivers who couldn’t find a place to eat,” shared Nagle. “It was really nice to see people really start to wake up.” Even the White House took note, holding two events extolling the heroes of trucking. “In the war against the virus, America’s truckers are really the foot soldiers that are carrying us to victory,” President Donald Trump said at a gathering in mid-April. “Truckers are playing a critical role in vanquishing the virus, and they will be just as important as we work to get our economic engine roaring.” The industry was even hoping that the rising public opinion of trucking might slow the growing number of “nuclear verdicts,” those large jury awards against the industry that have been increasing in both frequency and size. While in 2006 there were only four cases with awards in excess of $1 million, in 2013 there were more than 70, according to a published national trucking research report. There was a 235% increase in cases with verdict sizes of at least $1 million between 2005 to 2011 and 2012 to 2019. From 2017 to 2018 alone, the average size of verdicts grew by 483%. Unfortunately, people tend to have short memories, said Nagle. “Once the supply crisis passes, and I think it’s almost to this point now, people are getting back to taking us for granted,” he added. “They fail to recognize how important trucking is to our way of life. A month ago, they were singing our praises. Now they’ve forgotten about us.” How can the industry build on the “positive press” it received in the early weeks and months of the COVID-19 crisis — which has now extended to almost half a year — and keep trucking front and center? Promoting the industry has to become a way of life regardless of the medium or venue, said Nagle, who admits to being the biggest cheerleader for trucking. He encourages those that have the financial resources to do so consider paid promotion. Don’t focus on how much money a driver can make, but rather emphasize the humanness of the industry by pointing out how important trucking is to the quality of life in America. Nagle likes the idea of more community outreach efforts such as Trucker Buddy International. And, he said, it’s going to take everyone involved in the industry working collaboratively to promote trucking and thus sustain a momentum of positive imagery. “You don’t have to go around citing a bunch of statistics,” he said. “Just proactively talk about the benefit of trucking to our way of life and our standard of living. It’s not that hard.” Unfortunately, many in the industry are just “doing a job” and don’t care much about promoting the industry, he believes. “But when you are passionate about trucking because you believe in the value of our industry to our way of life, then you should jump on it and don’t ever stop,” he stated. “It has to be on our consciousness 24 hours a day, whether you are sitting in your office or whether you are playing golf with your buddies,” he said. “If a derogatory statement comes up about trucking, jump in there and defend the industry and put a stop so such talk.” And do it passionately, he quickly added.