Editor’s note: This is a contributed commentary. It comes amid FMCSA’s ongoing revocation of registered ELDs over hours-of-service log manipulation and FreightWaves welcomes responses from other parties. An ELD connection has become an important part of how freight moves. Brokers use it tounderstand whether a carrier is operating, whether vehicles are associated with that carrier, andwhether the right truck is present for a load. Carriers use that connection to demonstrate theircapacity and gain access to freight. That makes the integrity of the provider behind the connection consequential. A technicalintegration cannot be treated as a universal endorsement of everything that provider does. Ithas to be governed by standards, reviewed as conditions change, and subject to action whenthose standards fail. Highway has worked with hundreds of ELD providers over nearly five years. We do not chargeproviders to integrate. FMCSA registration is a starting point, but it is not a blanket pass intoHighway. We maintain our own requirements for integrations and the data they contribute. Wecan decline an integration or end one that does not meet those requirements, and we haveended integrations with providers that remained on FMCSA’s registered list. We also examineproviders that reappear under a new name after a prior provider was revoked. A new label doesnot erase the underlying history. None of this means every carrier using a problematic ELD provider is doing something wrong. Asingle provider may serve hundreds or thousands of legitimate businesses. If concerns arise,brokers need a clear view of risk and a way to act on it, while good carriers need a fair path tokeep working. We can introduce appropriate controls around the carriers or transactions thatpresent concern as we establish the facts. When an integration must end, we work to givelegitimate carriers notice and a workable opportunity to change providers. Enforcement has toprotect the network without treating every customer of a provider as guilty. It is also important to be precise about what different data can establish. Highway does notreceive drivers’ hours of service records through these integrations or perform the safetyreviews assigned to FMCSA. Reports of manipulated logs warrant serious scrutiny. At the sametime, ELD telemetry is one input in a broader assessment of carrier identity and cargo risk. Itshould never be asked to carry a decision by itself. In nearly five years of operating Highway, we have not identified a successful cargo theft inwhich manipulated ELD data was relied on for a carrier hiring or tendering decision. Thatdescribes the losses we have investigated. It does not mean ELD manipulation is harmless orthat providers should face no consequences for it. It means the industry should distinguishhours of service enforcement from the particular question of whether a cargo decision wasdefeated by falsified ELD data. Both deserve accurate evidence and appropriate action. We are now building another layer of accountability through the Highway Certified PartnerNetwork program. Participating providers, in multiple categories, will make additionalcommitments to the integrity and reliable delivery of the data they contribute. Brokers andcarriers will be able to see which providers have made those commitments and make their owndecisions accordingly. Participation in certification is voluntary. Meeting Highway’s existingrequirements to maintain an integration is not. Certification creates a higher, visible standard; itdoes not replace enforcement of the baseline. This is not just about ELD providers. We startedthis with insurance agents and will extend that accountability requirement to anyone whocontributes data to a freight transaction and hiring decision. The real test of any standard is what happens when a transaction fails. Highway puts its ownbalance sheet behind qualifying loads with a Performance Guarantee of up to $100,000. Acrossroughly one million guaranteed loads, it has paid out once. We can make that commitmentbecause the guarantee is tied to a broader, enforceable assessment of the carrier and the load,rather than a single signal from a single provider. The freight market needs an ELD ecosystem in which a provider’s commitments are visible, itsdata can be trusted, and failures have consequences. Brokers should be able to set the bar forthe freight they move. Legitimate carriers should have a fair path when their provider fails it.Highway will keep enforcing the standard and standing behind qualifying loads that meet it. Questions will come. They should. But many of the loudest questions in this market come frompundits and competitors who attempt to demand an instant declaration without owning theconsequences of that declaration. They are free to ask. They are not the people to whomHighway is accountable. We answer to the brokers and carriers who trust us with decisions thataffect freight and livelihoods. We are their stewards, and we are proud of how we show up forthem. Theodore Roosevelt’s man in the arena comes to mind. The arena in freight is a load at risk, a legitimate carrier trying to keep working, and a customerwho needs someone to make a decision and own it. It is easy to call for a sweeping action fromthe stands. It is harder to establish the facts, apply a standard fairly, and remain accountable forwhat happens next. That is the work we have chosen. We have yet to see another carrier identity platform pair an enforceable standard with aperformance guarantee across this volume of freight, who “bear the brunt of the day”. We willwelcome anyone willing to meet that bar. Until then, we are back in the arena doing the work,correcting course when the evidence calls for it, and putting our own balance sheet behindqualifying loads. Our customers deserve nothing less. Michael Caney is Chief Commercial Officer of Highway, a carrier identity and fraud-prevention platform. Highway’s products, including its Certified Partner Network and Performance Guarantee, are discussed in this article. The views expressed are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of FreightWaves. The post ELD Data Needs An Enforceable Standard appeared first on FreightWaves.
Editor’s note: This is a contributed commentary. It comes amid FMCSA’s ongoing revocation of registered ELDs over hours-of-service log manipulation and FreightWaves welcomes responses from other parties.
An ELD connection has become an important part of how freight moves. Brokers use it to
understand whether a carrier is operating, whether vehicles are associated with that carrier, and
whether the right truck is present for a load. Carriers use that connection to demonstrate their
capacity and gain access to freight.
That makes the integrity of the provider behind the connection consequential. A technical
integration cannot be treated as a universal endorsement of everything that provider does. It
has to be governed by standards, reviewed as conditions change, and subject to action when
those standards fail.
Highway has worked with hundreds of ELD providers over nearly five years. We do not charge
providers to integrate. FMCSA registration is a starting point, but it is not a blanket pass into
Highway. We maintain our own requirements for integrations and the data they contribute. We
can decline an integration or end one that does not meet those requirements, and we have
ended integrations with providers that remained on FMCSA’s registered list. We also examine
providers that reappear under a new name after a prior provider was revoked. A new label does
not erase the underlying history.
None of this means every carrier using a problematic ELD provider is doing something wrong. A
single provider may serve hundreds or thousands of legitimate businesses. If concerns arise,
brokers need a clear view of risk and a way to act on it, while good carriers need a fair path to
keep working. We can introduce appropriate controls around the carriers or transactions that
present concern as we establish the facts. When an integration must end, we work to give
legitimate carriers notice and a workable opportunity to change providers. Enforcement has to
protect the network without treating every customer of a provider as guilty.
It is also important to be precise about what different data can establish. Highway does not
receive drivers’ hours of service records through these integrations or perform the safety
reviews assigned to FMCSA. Reports of manipulated logs warrant serious scrutiny. At the same
time, ELD telemetry is one input in a broader assessment of carrier identity and cargo risk. It
should never be asked to carry a decision by itself.
In nearly five years of operating Highway, we have not identified a successful cargo theft in
which manipulated ELD data was relied on for a carrier hiring or tendering decision. That
describes the losses we have investigated. It does not mean ELD manipulation is harmless or
that providers should face no consequences for it. It means the industry should distinguish
hours of service enforcement from the particular question of whether a cargo decision was
defeated by falsified ELD data. Both deserve accurate evidence and appropriate action.
We are now building another layer of accountability through the Highway Certified Partner
Network program. Participating providers, in multiple categories, will make additional
commitments to the integrity and reliable delivery of the data they contribute. Brokers and
carriers will be able to see which providers have made those commitments and make their own
decisions accordingly. Participation in certification is voluntary. Meeting Highway’s existing
requirements to maintain an integration is not. Certification creates a higher, visible standard; it
does not replace enforcement of the baseline. This is not just about ELD providers. We started
this with insurance agents and will extend that accountability requirement to anyone who
contributes data to a freight transaction and hiring decision.
The real test of any standard is what happens when a transaction fails. Highway puts its own
balance sheet behind qualifying loads with a Performance Guarantee of up to $100,000. Across
roughly one million guaranteed loads, it has paid out once. We can make that commitment
because the guarantee is tied to a broader, enforceable assessment of the carrier and the load,
rather than a single signal from a single provider.
The freight market needs an ELD ecosystem in which a provider’s commitments are visible, its
data can be trusted, and failures have consequences. Brokers should be able to set the bar for
the freight they move. Legitimate carriers should have a fair path when their provider fails it.
Highway will keep enforcing the standard and standing behind qualifying loads that meet it.
Questions will come. They should. But many of the loudest questions in this market come from
pundits and competitors who attempt to demand an instant declaration without owning the
consequences of that declaration. They are free to ask. They are not the people to whom
Highway is accountable. We answer to the brokers and carriers who trust us with decisions that
affect freight and livelihoods. We are their stewards, and we are proud of how we show up for
them.
Theodore Roosevelt’s man in the arena comes to mind.
The arena in freight is a load at risk, a legitimate carrier trying to keep working, and a customer
who needs someone to make a decision and own it. It is easy to call for a sweeping action from
the stands. It is harder to establish the facts, apply a standard fairly, and remain accountable for
what happens next. That is the work we have chosen.
We have yet to see another carrier identity platform pair an enforceable standard with a
performance guarantee across this volume of freight, who “bear the brunt of the day”. We will
welcome anyone willing to meet that bar. Until then, we are back in the arena doing the work,
correcting course when the evidence calls for it, and putting our own balance sheet behind
qualifying loads. Our customers deserve nothing less.
Michael Caney is Chief Commercial Officer of Highway, a carrier identity and fraud-prevention platform. Highway’s products, including its Certified Partner Network and Performance Guarantee, are discussed in this article. The views expressed are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of FreightWaves.
The post ELD Data Needs An Enforceable Standard appeared first on FreightWaves.
Source: FreightWaves
