ELD Data Needs An Enforceable Standard

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providers that reappear under a new name after a prior provider was revoked.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.

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.