← Back to Blog
Trucking News

Trucking News: September 10, 2026 — What Carriers Need to Know

Trucking News: September 10, 2026 — What Carriers Need to Know

Trucking is facing a difficult combination of higher operating costs, weak freight demand, and more regulatory uncertainty. Today’s news points to a market where small carriers need tighter cost control, better information security, and closer attention to compliance changes.

Fragmented AI Raises New Security Concerns for Trucking

Artificial intelligence is spreading across trucking through dispatch platforms, transportation management systems, accounting tools, camera systems, maintenance software, and customer portals. The problem is that many of these tools operate separately, often sharing sensitive information without a clear security strategy behind them.

For a small carrier, an AI-related security problem may not look like a sophisticated cyberattack. It could be an exposed customer list, altered payment instructions, stolen login credentials, or a system that gives an outside vendor more access than necessary. Carriers should inventory every software tool connected to operations and limit access based on job responsibilities. VAU0’s TMS resources can help carriers think through how technology fits into dispatch, documentation, and daily oversight.

AI can improve a carrier’s efficiency, but disconnected tools also expand the number of places where operational and financial data can be compromised.

Diesel Price Surge Puts More Pressure on Margins

Rising diesel prices are adding another layer of pressure for trucking companies already dealing with soft rates and inconsistent load volumes. Fuel is one of the few major costs that can move sharply in a short period, and small carriers generally have less purchasing power and fewer financial reserves than large fleets.

Fuel surcharges may not fully protect a carrier if they are outdated, poorly calculated, or disconnected from the actual cost of a trip. Owner-operators should review fuel burn by truck, route, and load rather than relying only on a national average. Carriers should also confirm that fuel surcharge language is clear before accepting contracted freight. Reducing empty miles, planning fuel stops, and avoiding unnecessary idling will matter more while prices remain elevated.

Soft Freight Market Continues to Affect Trucking Businesses

A soft freight market is keeping competition high and making it harder for carriers to maintain rate levels. When available loads outnumber trucks in a lane, brokers and shippers gain leverage, while carriers may feel pressure to accept freight that barely covers fuel, maintenance, insurance, and driver pay.

The answer is not simply to keep the truck moving at any price. Carriers should calculate a realistic operating cost per mile and establish a minimum acceptable rate for each type of work. That number should include deadhead, tolls, detention risk, repairs, and administrative overhead. A load that appears profitable on the rate confirmation may not be profitable after the full trip is complete. Better trip planning and documentation through a transportation management system can help identify weak lanes and reduce avoidable mileage.

Small fleets should also watch customer concentration. Losing one major shipper during a weak market can create a serious cash-flow problem. A balanced mix of direct customers, brokered freight, and dedicated opportunities may provide more stability than chasing the highest posted rate on every individual load.

FMCSA Teases a Flurry of Rules for 2026

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration is signaling that more regulatory activity may arrive during 2026. The details and timing of individual rules will determine their effect, but carriers should expect continued attention on safety performance, driver qualification, equipment, electronic systems, and enforcement standards.

Regulatory changes create more work for small carriers because compliance duties often fall on the owner or one office employee. Waiting until a final rule takes effect can leave a carrier scrambling to update policies, train drivers, or change recordkeeping procedures. Owners should monitor official notices, review their current operating procedures, and maintain organized records that can be produced quickly during an audit. VAU0’s compliance resources provide a practical starting point for reviewing core responsibilities.

Carriers should be careful with social media summaries and unofficial interpretations. A proposed rule is not the same as a final requirement, and effective dates can change. The safest approach is to track the rulemaking process and confirm requirements through official FMCSA guidance before spending money on new equipment or services.

FMCSA Emergency CDL School Closures Require Immediate Verification

Reports of emergency closures involving commercial driver’s license schools create a direct concern for current students, recent graduates, carriers, and fleets recruiting entry-level drivers. If a training provider loses authorization or closes unexpectedly, students may face questions about whether their training records, completion status, or testing eligibility remain valid.

Carriers hiring new drivers should verify documentation carefully rather than relying only on a candidate’s statement that training was completed. Confirm the school’s status, review the driver’s records, and make sure the applicant satisfies current licensing and entry-level driver training requirements. A hiring decision based on incomplete or invalid documentation can create compliance exposure later.

Students and drivers affected by a closure should keep copies of enrollment records, payment receipts, completion certificates, test results, and communications from the school. They should also contact the appropriate state licensing agency for guidance before scheduling another test or paying for replacement training. Carriers that recruit heavily from one school or region should build relationships with multiple qualified training providers.

What carriers should do this week

  • Review every software platform, user login, and vendor connection that can access dispatch, payroll, customer, or banking information.
  • Recalculate fuel cost per mile and confirm that fuel surcharge formulas and rate agreements still reflect current expenses.
  • Set a minimum rate based on total operating cost, including deadhead, maintenance reserves, insurance, and driver compensation.
  • Check FMCSA updates and audit driver qualification, training, and compliance files before new rules or licensing issues create a problem.
  • Keep copies of all CDL training and hiring documents, and verify school authorization when onboarding new drivers.
← 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 →