There’s gold for the ATA in the driver shortage

The American Trucking Associations win. Trucking and its people lose. The problems remain. And, as Sonny and Cher once said in a song, the beat goes on.

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration has announced details of a pilot program that will put as many as 3,000 under-age-21 truck drivers on the road as apprentices, most likely in the truckload sector, most likely with big carriers, where the youngsters will pass through a brief period of employment like water through a bucket with a great big hole in the bottom.

The ATA got what it wanted – more recruits in the bucket. In a grossly misleading effort over decades, the ATA convinced enough lawmakers, news editors, and citizens that a dire shortage of qualified truck drivers will sink the economy. According to the ATA, the industry was approaching a cliff.

For a brief moment, it seemed like we might be about to work on that big hole instead of just pouring in more recruits.

On Jan. 12, U.S. DOT Secretary Pete Buttigieg told the Transportation Research Board that driver pay and retention were problems in the industry.

His statement seemed to agree with a study from the Bureau of Labor Statistics that found the problem was turnover, not a shortage of drivers.

Ah, the Bureau of Labor Statistics report of March 2019.The ATA didn’t like that report, so they shoved their staff economist into the spotlight to refute what was irrefutably true.

But the Bureau of Labor Statistics report came and went.

Nobody seemed to care – especially in Congress, where a bill had just been introduced to address the nonexistent driver shortage.

The idea was to pour more recruits into the driver bucket by lowering the age for interstate truckers from 21 to 18. Despite well-documented, tragic experiences with younger drivers over decades, the bill was called the DRIVE-Safe Act – one monumental snow-job of a title. The ATA maintained its driver-shortage drumbeat and turned up the volume.

The ATA publicity machine is a wonder to behold. When it comes to reporting on trucking, every media outlet goes to the ATA first.

So, for more than two years, the ATA’s driver-shortage story appeared in national and local media from time to time.

All that coverage, all that PR work, paid off for the ATA.

A watered-down version of the DRIVE-Safe Act was rolled into the huge, bipartisan infrastructure bill that made it through Congress and was signed into law on Nov. 15.

The truth, of course, is that 18-year-old truck drivers are even less likely than older drivers to stick with grueling truckload jobs. Even when the apprenticeship pilot program ends and the job is open to all 18-year-olds, there will be no substantial difference in turnover rates as a result.

But that’s all beside the point.

In January, even Buttigieg told Transport Topics, the ATA newspaper, that while the U.S. DOT was interested in driver turnover, he recognized the need to pour more recruits into that awful bucket.

The ATA won big time.

Yet, the drumbeat goes on. The ATA still promotes the driver shortage. Why?

Well, there is still more on the table in Washington, D.C.

For example, the U.S. Department of Labor spends more than $800 million on various job training programs, including tuition support for CDL schools. According to Time Magazine, “California paid $11.7 million to truck driving schools in the state in 2020.” Most of it is federal money. The Labor Department also provides tax credits for employers who participate in apprenticeship programs. Will that include the big carriers that pushed for 18-year-old drivers? If not, you can bet they’re working on it. Why not get the feds to pay for training the industry should be paying for itself?

There may be no actual driver shortage, but the perception of one is pure gold for big carriers and their representatives in D.C., the ATA. LL