Is Highway Building a System That Has Too Much Say in if a Carrier Succeeds or Fails
When small carriers struggle because of the system we have in place, it begs the question, “Is Highway building a system that has too much say in if a carrier succeeds or fails?” Some carriers are concerned. Nowadays, you need to document every single decision and follow Highway’s policy to the T if you want to succeed in trucking.
Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II isn’t an old decision, but its impact can now be felt across the trucking industry. They were unanimous, nine to zero. Brokers who choose carriers negligently will face massive fines. This removes the FAAAA preemption shield that protected them previously.
Some say third-party vetting platforms like Highway now hold massive power over who will succeed and who will fail. The argument is that rather than following a basic compliance guideline like before, Highway has now become a gatekeeper. Some argue the system that we hold now may give them too much power.
At Trucker Social, we’re going to look at both sides of the argument and let you make up your own mind.
The Case for Highway: The Shield Needed to Battle Fraud
Some say that vetting platforms like Highway hold the line in the battle against a massive fraud problem. Some estimates put the fraud at $18 million per day. This has led to organized crime rings being able to flourish in criminal schemes like identity theft, phishing, and fake carrier authorities who steal high-value cargo.
Because Highway verifies their identity, their tracking equipment, and their real-time data, it prevents double brokering.
It operates on the KYC (Know Your Carrier) framework. You have three critical elements that it verifies:
User authenticity
Authorization
Physical capability
By applying the above principles, they believe that they have combatted the issue of fraud. The approach mirrors what you see being done in the banking industry.
Last year, over 914,000 fraud attempts were blocked. While it can be an annoyance to brokers and trucking carriers, the argument is that it is successfully stopping fraud.
The Case Against Highway: Too Much Power?
Giving them all of this power has to do with them trying to prevent fraud, but some say this power has prevented some of the smaller carriers with fewer resources from succeeding.
While Highway often traps legitimate fraud attempts, many small owner-operators have been caught in the crossfire. They’re legitimate operators and they argue they’re at the mercy of a system that can stop them from getting a load for a simple and non-malicious reason.
They argue that Highway has made the relationship between brokers and carriers one-sided. They can pull your contact information, your lanes, your specs, and use it however they want. The argument is there’s no accountability even when it gets mishandled.
There are even allegations of them selling, storing, and snooping on driver ELD data. We emphasize, these are allegations until proven otherwise. However, some carriers claim that even when they had a history of solid loads, they’ve been denied loads. Highway has denied this.
Highway says that the reason is because they built their platform on subscriptions for brokers. There was no monetization of ELD data. They went on to say that they do not collect:
Hours of Service (HOS)
Engine diagnostics or fault codes
Driver-related information
Record of Duty Status (RODS)
Safety Events (Collisions, harsh braking, etc.)
Still, not everyone believes it, and they think there’s a one-sided relationship that has been created where carriers are getting the short end of the stick.
What Do You Think?
At Trucker Social, we would love to hear your thoughts on Highway and their system. Do you think it’s a fair system? Do they have too much power over which carriers succeed and which ones fail? Please let us know and like and share our article with others. Maybe you see a solution. Let us know in the comments.
