The American Trucking Associations (ATA) have long been vocal about the so-called “drivers shortage,” constantly advocating for new policies and programs to address the issue. However, a closer look reveals that their current push for increasing capacity in an already over saturated market is more about catering to mega carriers than actually solving a real problem.
Recently, ATA President Chris Spear testified before the Senate Commerce Committee, reiterating the organization’s claims about a critical driver shortage and making the case for lowering the interstate driving age from 21 to 18. This suggestion, while not new, has resurfaced in light of current market conditions, and it’s important to dissect what’s really going on here.
Is There Really a Driver Shortage?
Before we dive into the specifics, let’s ask the most fundamental question: Is there really a shortage of drivers in the trucking industry? The answer, despite what you may hear from the ATA or other industry insiders, is no. In fact, many seasoned professionals in the industry would agree that the true issue lies elsewhere not in a lack of drivers but in the challenges posed by hiring, retaining, and insuring them.
Breaking Down Chris Spear’s Testimony
During his testimony, Chris Spear made a bold statement, claiming that “driver pay doesn’t go up 19% during a freight recession unless there is a shortage of qualified drivers.” This argument is misleading, and here’s why.
The pay increase Spear references is indeed real, but it’s not the result of a driver shortage. It’s a consequence of changes in the insurance market, which was severely impacted during the COVID boom. When the industry experienced an influx of new drivers many of whom lacked sufficient experience insurance companies took on more risk. As a result, they had to raise premiums and impose stricter requirements to cover potential losses.
For smaller carriers, this meant their pool of eligible drivers became significantly smaller, not because of a shortage, but due to these tightened insurance restrictions. Most insurers today are unwilling to cover drivers with less than two years of continuous experience or a perfect driving record, further narrowing the pool of available talent.
This is where the so-called driver shortage myth gains traction. Carriers, particularly smaller ones, find it difficult to hire because their hands are tied by insurance policies. Therefore, companies began offering higher pay to attract qualified drivers hence the 19% increase.
The Impact of Lowering the Interstate Driving Age
One of the central points in Spear’s testimony was the push to lower the interstate driving age from 21 to 18. According to the ATA, this move would help expand the career pipeline for younger drivers and alleviate the “long-term” driver shortage. While the intent may seem noble on the surface, the reality is more complicated.
First and foremost, allowing 18-year-olds to drive interstate raises serious concerns regarding safety, experience, and insurance. Small and medium-sized carriers are unlikely to be able to insure young drivers due to the high risk involved. Most insurers have stringent requirements for experience and clean driving records, making it near impossible for smaller companies to hire inexperienced drivers, let alone those under 21.
On the other hand, mega carriers those that the ATA predominantly represents are self-insured, which means they don’t have to worry about meeting the same strict insurance requirements. They can easily absorb the risk of hiring younger drivers, but this does not address the core issues faced by smaller carriers. Rather, it creates an even greater divide between large, well-funded carriers and the smaller businesses that are the backbone of the trucking industry.
The Real Issue: Retaining Drivers, Not Hiring More
The real issue with the ATA’s driver shortage narrative is that it conveniently sidesteps a more pressing concern driver retention. Mega carriers may be able to hire new drivers quickly, but they also face an incredibly high turnover rate, often exceeding 90%.
Instead of addressing the underlying problems of driver retention, such as low pay, poor working conditions, and lack of respect for drivers, the ATA continues to push for more drivers to enter the system. This doesn’t solve the retention issue and ultimately leads to a revolving door of drivers who are quickly replaced and never given the opportunity to build long-term careers.
A Hidden Agenda?
It’s worth noting that some insiders have pointed out a rather interesting correlation: As the number of trucks on the road increases, so does Chris Spear’s salary. A post by Craig Fuller in July highlighted this connection, noting that there seems to be a strong positive relationship between the increase in truck counts and Spear’s compensation. While this may be a speculative observation, it raises questions about the real motivations behind the ATA’s push for more drivers.
A Call for a More Thoughtful Approach
While the ATA’s efforts to “solve” the so-called driver shortage may seem well-intentioned, their approach lacks a deeper understanding of the challenges faced by smaller carriers. Lowering the interstate driving age and pushing for more drivers to enter an already saturated market will not solve the fundamental issues plaguing the industry issues such as insurance restrictions, retention, and the need for fair compensation.
Ultimately, what’s needed is a more comprehensive solution one that addresses driver retention by improving pay, working conditions, and respect for drivers. Pushing for more drivers through policies like lowering the driving age is a shortsighted fix that could create more problems than it solves.
The real question isn’t how to add more drivers; it’s how to create a sustainable, healthy industry where both large and small carriers can thrive, and where drivers are valued for the essential work they do.
