One of the most talked-about topics in the transportation industry today is the controversy surrounding commercial drivers' language proficiency. While recent efforts in the U.S. to enforce English-language requirements are making headlines, this focus is a distraction from the root cause of the industry's problems. The truth is, the real issue isn't a lack of language skills; it's a lack of standardized training and insufficient regulatory oversight that has been ignored for decades.
This is a problem that hits close to home in Canada, particularly when we compare our system to the proactive approach taken by the European Union.
A Tale of Two Systems: The EU vs. Alberta
The European Union has a clear, standardized system for commercial driver qualifications. Drivers must obtain a Driver Certificate of Professional Competence (Driver CPC), which involves rigorous training and exams. Crucially, these exams are administered in the official language of the country where the training is conducted. This process ensures that drivers are not only technically competent but also have a working knowledge of the local language necessary for safety and communication. This framework prevents what is known as "license shopping," where drivers obtain qualifications from countries with less stringent standards, sound familiar?
Now let's look at the contrast in Canada, using Alberta as a key example. While Canada has made strides and many provinces have implemented Mandatory Entry-Level Training (MELT), the system remains fragmented. In Alberta we have the Class 1 Learning Pathways but, the true gap appears in how carriers are created, regulated and monitored.
The "Chameleon Carrier" Problem
In the EU, opening a trucking company requires a specific license from the Ministry of Transport, along with registration with tax and social security agencies. The owner or manager is required to hold a Transport Manager Certificate of Professional Competence (TM CPC), which ensures they have formal training in transportation operations, financial management, and legal requirements. This ensures that new carriers are held to a high standard from the outset.
In Alberta, the process is starkly different. You can register a company, get a business number, and obtain an NSC number after one person completes a 6 – 8 hour online course and a in person knowledge test. A third-party review is required within a year, but it can be conducted remotely. This lenient system creates an environment ripe for what are known as "chameleon carriers" carriers who have been documented as unsafe in other provinces. Additionally trucking companies are often domiciled on paper in one province for insurance or lenient NSC enforcement but primarily operate in another, often skirting regulations.
This lack of strict, in-person audits and comprehensive pre-entry requirements contributes to this dumpster fire of a chaotic market, unqualified drivers and shady operators entering the industry with minimal barriers and allowed to operate unchecked.
A Closer Look at the Hours
The difference in standards becomes even more apparent when you look at the training hours. The EU’s Driver CPC program requires a minimum of 280 hours of training, while in Germany, a full vocational apprenticeship can last 1.5 to 3 years, providing a comprehensive education in all aspects of the trade, not just driving.
Contrast this with the Canadian standard. While Canada has tried to move towards a standardized system, the hours are a fraction of what is required in Europe.
Country/Region | Qualification Type | Duration |
Germany | Full Vocational Training | 1.5 to 3 years |
European Union (EU) | Driver CPC Qualification | 280 hours |
Canada (Alberta) | New Class 1 Learning Pathway | 103.5 hours |
The Fight for a National Standard
For years, organizations like the Private Motor Truck Council of Canada (PMTC) have been vocal advocates for a national standard to address these very issues. They and other industry groups have been pushing to have professional truck driving recognized as a Red Seal trade. However, despite these long-standing efforts, the results have been frustratingly slow. The industry is still grappling with inconsistencies in training hours and a lack of mandatory instructor certification across jurisdictions. Driver schools in Ontario have been given a extension to October 2025 for the requirement to have a written curriculum ffs! Would anyone pay tuition to go to a university or college class that didn’t have a written curriculum? This is the state of the world we are in. The industry is pleading for the government to "prioritize and expedite" a review of the training sector to put an end to the "unscrupulous" and "substandard" training schools that are undermining legitimate businesses and putting untrained drivers on the road. The problem is not the language drivers speak; it's the broken system that allows them to get on the road without the proper training and oversight.
It’s time to stop the lip service and demand a federal commitment to a more professional trucking industry for everyone.
Introduction:
Increasingly, carriers utilizing Electronic Logging Devices (ELDs) face challenges with unidentified driving events that can lead to violations during audits and investigations. However, by leveraging the exempt driver functionality within the ELD system, carriers may mitigate those unidentified driving events.
Understanding the Exempt Driver Functionality:
All ELD systems come equipped with an exempt driver function, allowing carriers to configure accounts for drivers who may be exempt from ELD usage. For instance, drivers operating under the short-haul exemption within 160 km of their home terminal can be designated as exempt. This designation enables the sharing of ELD-equipped commercial motor vehicles between exempt and non-exempt drivers seamlessly. The Technical Standard. 3.1.3 Configuration of user account exempt from using an ELD: As specified in 4.3.3.1.2 of the Technical Standard, an ELD must allow a motor carrier to configure an ELD for a driver who may be exempt from the use of an ELD. An example of an exempt driver would be a driver driving under the short-haul exemption under current HOS regulations (i.e. specified in regulation as within a radius of 160 km of the home terminal). Even though exempt drivers do not have to use an ELD, an ELD equipped CMV may be shared between exempt and non-exempt drivers and motor carriers can use this allowed configuration to avoid issues with unidentified driver data diagnostics errors.
Implementation and Training:
Drivers and administrators must be trained on how to utilize the exempt functionality in real-world scenarios. Administrators need to activate the exempt function when creating driver accounts, customizing it for specific drivers even if only a few will be using the exemption.
Compliance and Monitoring:
Drivers using the exempt functionality are not exempt from federal Hours of Service regulations but are excused from using a ELD to record the driver’s time. However, they still need to maintain alternative time records that meet regulatory criteria. Drivers must verify their exempt status periodically, as the ELD does not automatically maintain this status.
Challenges of the Exempt Driver Function:
Transitioning from exempt to non-exempt status can pose challenges, especially when the exemption ends, and ELD usage becomes mandatory. Drivers are required to enter time from paper logs or alternative records.
The Technical Standard 4.3.2.2.4 Indication of Situations Impacting duty-/driving-hour limitations: c) An ELD must provide the means to indicate additional hours that were not recorded for the current motor carrier during the current day or the required previous days specified in current HOS regulations:
(1) When this function is selected, the ELD must prompt the user to select one of the following
options:
i. Option 1: additional hours already recorded and reported in a RODS for another motor carrier.
ii. Option 2: additional hours not recorded since the driver was not required to keep a RODS immediately before the beginning of the day.
Conclusion:
The exempt driver functionality within ELD systems offers a valuable tool for carriers with drivers alternating between exempt and non-exempt status. While managing this transition may require additional effort from both drivers and administrators, the benefits of leveraging the exempt driver function for seamless operations and compliance monitoring cannot be overlooked. By understanding, training, and effectively implementing the exempt driver functionality, carriers may avoid unidentified driving events and avoid administrative penalties.