← Back to Blog
Trucking News

Trucking News: September 18, 2026 — What Carriers Need to Know

Trucking News: September 18, 2026 — What Carriers Need to Know

Diesel Prices Hit Trucking Hard as Crude Surges

The biggest immediate story for trucking is the sharp rise in diesel prices, driven by surging crude oil. Reports from KFOX and Transport Topics describe diesel reaching record levels, putting fresh pressure on fleets that were already operating with narrow margins. Fuel is one of the few major operating costs that can move dramatically in a matter of days, leaving carriers exposed when rates do not adjust as quickly.

Small carriers and owner-operators will feel the impact first. A few cents per gallon can materially change the cost of a regional run, while long-haul operators may be spending hundreds of dollars more per week. Fuel surcharges help, but they often lag behind retail prices or fail to cover the full increase. Carriers should review fuel surcharge tables, accessorial language, and minimum rate requirements rather than assuming the market will correct itself.

Fuel planning also matters more in a high-price environment. Routing around reliable truck stops, reducing unnecessary deadhead, controlling idle time, and tracking fuel economy by tractor can protect cash flow. A TMS such as VAU0’s transportation management platform can help carriers compare route costs, monitor miles, and make better dispatch decisions before a load is accepted.

When diesel moves this quickly, the most dangerous load is not always the one with the lowest rate—it is the one accepted without calculating the fuel-adjusted margin.

Congress Moves on Trucker Appreciation Week Legislation

Congressional legislation discussed by Congresswoman Harriet Hageman is drawing attention across the trucking industry because it would formally recognize truck drivers during a national appreciation week. The measure is largely symbolic, but recognition matters in an industry that keeps freight moving through weekends, holidays, severe weather, and long periods away from home.

For small carriers, the practical value will depend on whether appreciation turns into stronger recruiting, retention, and working conditions. Public recognition alone will not solve parking shortages, detention, insurance costs, or the challenges of finding dependable wages and home time. Still, a formal observance can give carriers a useful opportunity to communicate the importance of professional drivers to customers, shippers, and local communities.

Owners can use the week to recognize drivers in concrete ways: publish safe-driving milestones, provide a useful meal or bonus, ask drivers what equipment or scheduling changes would help, and thank them directly. Recognition is most credible when it is paired with improvements that drivers can feel in their daily work.

Non-Domiciled CDL Rule Faces Court Pressure

FMCSA’s restrictions involving non-domiciled commercial driver’s licenses are facing a significant challenge in court, according to Overdrive. The legal developments create uncertainty for drivers, employers, and state licensing agencies that need to understand whether the rule can be enforced as written while litigation continues.

Carriers should avoid treating headlines or social-media summaries as final guidance. The status of a driver’s license, work authorization, medical qualification, and state records still needs to be verified through the proper channels. A carrier that moves too quickly—either by removing qualified drivers or assigning a driver whose documentation has not been confirmed—could create unnecessary operational and compliance risk.

Small fleets should document every verification step and keep a clear record of updates received from official agencies, counsel, and licensing authorities. Review the compliance procedures on VAU0’s compliance resources, but use current government guidance for decisions involving an individual driver. Until the court process and agency instructions are clearer, conservative documentation is the safest approach.

FMCSA Tests a Pause Option for the 14-Hour Clock

FMCSA is testing a concept that would give truck drivers more control over the 14-hour on-duty window, FreightWaves reports. The idea is aimed at situations where a driver is forced to wait during a long shipper or receiver delay and then loses usable work time even though the truck is not moving.

This is a test or policy-development effort, not a reason to change logbook practices today. Drivers and carriers should continue following the current hours-of-service rules unless and until an approved change becomes effective. Any future pause option would likely come with eligibility requirements, documentation standards, and limits designed to prevent misuse.

If the concept advances, it could be especially valuable for small carriers that cannot absorb repeated detention. Better control of the clock could reduce late deliveries, unnecessary pressure to rush, and the number of loads that become unprofitable after hours of waiting. Carriers should track detention duration, missed appointments, and resulting service failures now. That data can help demonstrate where a clock-pause policy would provide real operational value.

What These Developments Mean for Small Carriers

Today’s stories share a common theme: operating conditions are changing faster than many small fleets can adjust. Fuel costs are rising immediately, while regulatory and legislative changes remain uncertain. Carriers need disciplined decision-making rather than relying on a single market forecast or assuming that a proposed rule is already in effect.

That means calculating the true cost of every load, keeping driver communication open, and maintaining a compliance process that can respond to changing guidance. Technology can help, but only when the underlying information is current and the people using it understand the rules. VAU0’s tools are designed to help carriers organize dispatch, documentation, and performance data without losing sight of the practical realities on the road.

What carriers should do this week

  • Recalculate lane profitability using current diesel prices, realistic fuel economy, tolls, and deadhead miles.
  • Review fuel-surcharge formulas and renegotiate weak or outdated customer agreements.
  • Verify driver licensing and employment documentation through official sources, especially where non-domiciled CDL rules may apply.
  • Continue following current hours-of-service requirements while tracking detention and appointment delays for future planning.
  • Recognize drivers with specific, useful support—not just public messaging—and ask what operational changes would improve retention.
← 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 →