OOIDA calls BUILD America 250 Act ‘pro-trucker’

Calling it the most pro-trucker highway bill in recent memory, the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association expressed support for the BUILD America 250 Act.

Earlier this week, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee unveiled a 1,005-page highway bill that aims to invest $580 billion in infrastructure and safety programs.

Of note to truckers, the highway bill provides truck parking funding and restroom access while prohibiting predatory lease-purchase agreements.

OOIDA sent a letter of support to committee leaders on Tuesday, May 19.

“First, OOIDA thanks the Committee for including substantial investment in expanding truck parking capacity across the country,” OOIDA President Todd Spencer wrote. “We also applaud you for ensuring truckers’ access to restrooms at facilities where they pick up and deliver freight. The prohibition of predatory lease-to-own schemes is also a major victory for drivers, who are targeted by these scams with the empty promise of becoming owner-operators.”

Truck parking funding, restroom access and predatory lease-purchase agreements are three issues that OOIDA has prioritized in recent years.

The lack of truck parking across the country reached crisis levels years ago. According to research from OOIDA and the American Trucking Associations, there is only one truck parking space for every 11 truck drivers. This poses safety concerns for truckers and for the motoring public.

To help address the problem, OOIDA assisted Rep. Mike Bost, R-Ill., in crafting the Truck Parking Safety Improvement Act, which would dedicate $755 million to adding truck parking spaces. The BUILD America 250 Act essentially includes Bost’s bill, as it would provide $150 million for truck parking for five years.

When the pandemic hit in 2020, reports of truckers being denied restroom access at shipping and receiving facilities increased dramatically. That’s why Rep. Troy Nehls, R-Texas, introduced the Trucker Bathroom Access Act. Nehls’ bill requires shippers and receivers that already have a restroom for employees or customers to make it available to truck drivers who are working at the facility. What seems like a slam-dunk proposal has struggled to find traction as a standalone bill. OOIDA is hopeful that having the provision included in a larger highway bill package will help it cross the finish line.

The Truck Leasing Task Force found that motor carrier lease-purchase agreements default at least 90% of the time and that hundreds of thousands of truck drivers have been negatively affected. In such agreements, truck drivers have reported receiving no compensation or even owing money to a carrier after working a full pay period.

Under the BUILD America 250 Act, within two years, the transportation secretary would be required to issue regulations prohibiting motor carriers from using predatory commercial motor vehicle lease-purchase programs.

The highway bill includes numerous other provisions that were on OOIDA’s wish list for lawmakers:

Strengthen new motor carrier entrant standards and oversight
Strengthen broker standards
Crack down on freight fraud and other scams in trucking
Strengthen entry-level driver training standards
Make critical improvements to the DataQ system
Crack down on non-compliant CDL schools
Take steps toward addressing cabotage
Improve the ELD certification process
Make electric vehicles contribute to the Highway Trust Fund

Although OOIDA is mostly supportive, the Association voiced opposition to specific provisions, including allowing autonomous vehicle manufacturers to self-certify. OOIDA also opposes a provision to promote a controversial Beyond Compliance program. Small-business truckers contend that the program favors large motor carriers who can afford to buy a bunch of gadgets rather than rewarding real safety.

“While we consider the bill to be the most pro-trucker surface transportation reauthorization proposal in recent history, there are provisions that concern us,” Spencer wrote. “Providing autonomous vehicle manufacturers the ability to self-certify their technology for deployment on public roads is very troubling, and the Committee’s inclusion of the controversial Beyond Compliance initiative is problematic, though we do appreciate the addition of driver training and experience as factors to be considered in the program.”