OOIDA, ATA clash over highway bill priorities

WASHINGTON — The trucking industry’s biggest lobbying groups have taken opposing sides on several key issues that lawmakers will take into account as Congress begins work reauthorizing funding for the next highway bill.

Among the biggest points of contention between the American Trucking Associations and the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association: Hair testing for drugs, allowing teen drivers to have interstate CDLs, and changes to independent contracting laws.

In its list of highway bill priorities sent to the U.S. Department of Transportation, ATA supports legislation requiring the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to accept truck drivers’ positive hair drug test results into the agency’s Drug and Alcohol Clearinghouse.

But such a requirement, OOIDA contends in its own list of highway bill priorities, “would set a dangerous precedent by bypassing necessary technical feedback … needed to answer critical questions about the accuracy of these tests,” including potential false positives due to contamination and variances in hair types.

“There is no shortage of research illustrating these concerns and that is why the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) refrained from mandating hair testing in their 2020 proposed guidelines,” OOIDA stated. “OOIDA remains opposed to any sort of hair testing mandate that would be initiated by Congress or HHS.”

The two groups also differ on allowing 18- to 20-year-olds to operate in interstate commerce, with ATA supporting a pathway to such operating authority that includes “appropriate training and technology guardrails.”

OOIDA agreed that it is “foolish” to prevent truck drivers who are under 21 from crossing state lines in certain instances. “But the solution to this problem is not permitting an inexperienced driver to cross the country without limitations, navigating terrain they find unfamiliar and have not been trained to handle safely,” the group stated in its priority comments to DOT.

OOIDA suggested that Congress should instead consider implementing a 150 air-mile radius within which younger drivers could operate that would allow them to deliver freight between areas that cross state lines.

“Not only would this help businesses shipping across state borders to improve their efficiency, but it would give inexperienced drivers better opportunity to improve their skills in familiar conditions while receiving more advanced training. Upon reaching 21 years of age, they can then enter the long-haul segment of our industry fully prepared for safe, productive careers behind the wheel.”

OOIDA also rejected claims that the Department of Labor’s 2024 worker classification rule, which made it more difficult for businesses to classify workers as independent contractors, was bad owner-operators.

“The 2024 rule has not jeopardized or limited any of our members’ ability to utilize the independent contractor model as owner-operators, and claims that this rule must be changed to protect the trucking industry, public safety, or the supply chain are unfounded,” OOIDA stated.

ATA, in contrast, urged lawmakers to support legislation introduced this year favoring employers in determining whether an individual is an employee, which ATA claims will “protect pathways to entrepreneurship for independent contractors in the trucking industry.”

Unified on truck parking, freight fraud

There are several issues that have the support of both large carriers and owner-operators, and addressing the truck parking shortage is one of the biggest.

OOIDA underscored the importance of the issue by threatening to “use every tool it has to ensure the [highway bill reauthorization] is defeated” if Congress authorizes money for new initiatives but fails to provide dedicated funds for truck parking.

ATA and OOIDA also prioritized legislation in the next highway bill that ATA noted would “provide DOT direction and resources to prevent, detect, and address fraud in FMCSA systems; combat organized cargo theft; address supply chain fraud; and mitigate registration fraud.”