In recent months, news stories and discussions on Reddit threads, Facebook groups, and industry publications have illuminated a growing crisis within the Canadian transportation industry. The issue is not just about on-road safety or the rate crisis anymore—it's about the financial instability plaguing commercial carriers across Canada and the United States. Every day, companies are declaring bankruptcy, leaving behind millions of dollars in unpaid wages, truck leases, and taxes. Yet, transportation regulations and safety codes often ignore these issues, focusing solely on a carrier’s road performance.

Take, for instance, a house-moving company in southern Alberta that has recently caught the attention of the Alberta Government's Red Tape Reduction department due to allegations of financial mismanagement and incomplete work. Or the case of Pride Group, a major Ontario-based trucking company that recently went bankrupt, leaving behind enormous debts. These are not isolated incidents—they’re part of a growing trend in the transportation industry, and it's time we addressed the broader implications.

The Gap in Transportation Oversight

During my time in public sector investigations, I’ve seen firsthand the fallout from these financial crises. Over the years, I’ve handled countless complaints from employees who were left without wages. Despite these concerns, transportation regulations in Canada, such as the National Safety Code (NSC), don’t include provisions for monitoring a carrier's financial health.

Alberta Transportation & Economic Corridors, Traffic Safety Services Division, Monitoring & Compliance Branch, Investigations & Enforcement Section monitors on-road performance with the non-functional carrier profile system but, there is no obligation to consider over-all carrier health that is not safety related. This leaves a massive gap in regulatory attention. For instance, the house-moving company mentioned earlier currently holds a "Satisfactory" Safety Fitness Certificate (SFC). A citizen conducting due diligence before selecting a carrier may view a Satisfactory rating as including overall performance and compliance to the regulations. However, the reality is that financial instability in transportation companies can lead to deteriorating safety standards. Carriers in financial trouble don’t pay the bills, the drivers, or for expensive truck maintenance. Tires are expensive and if a carrier is at the point of not paying wages or completing work already paid for you know those tires are bald and the ABS light is on.

The Consequences of Ignoring Financial Health

When we overlook the financial well-being of carriers, we're putting more than just paychecks at risk—we're endangering lives. Commercial carriers facing bankruptcy aren’t just skipping wages or taxes; they're skimping on truck repairs, neglecting safety checks, and pushing drivers to operate under less-than-ideal conditions. These are ticking time bombs on our roads, and yet, there is no requirement in Alberta’s Transportation Ministry Business Plan for 2023–2026 to address this issue.

The Alberta Transportation Ministry Business Plan for 2023 – 2026 stated, The ministry ensures a robust legislative and regulatory framework is in place to protect Albertans. Legislation and regulations are reviewed and refreshed to align requirements with emerging transportation related best practices, issues and technologies. The ministry’s focus is on ensuring "a robust legislative and regulatory framework" that protects Albertans, but the framework is incomplete. The National Safety Code and provincial regulations focus solely on road safety and compliance. They ignore critical factors like financial health, which can directly impact safety. Without a complete picture of a company’s stability, it's impossible to truly gauge its ability to operate safely in the long run.

Conclusion: The Need for a New Approach Transportation is a vital part of the economy, and the financial instability of carriers is an issue that can no longer be ignored. To protect both the public and industry workers, regulatory bodies must start evaluating the overall health of carriers. The stakes are too high to focus only on road performance. It’s time for the leadership group of Alberta Transportation & Economic Corridors, Traffic Safety Services Division, to take an interest in the industry they monitor. Read the news, follow some public Facebook groups, get Redditt. It cannot always be about the Economic Corridors part of Transportation and Economic Corridors, transportation needs some attention also.

The issue of chameleon carriers is a persistent and significant problem in Canada’s transportation industry. These carriers circumvent safety regulations and penalties by closing and reopening under new names, posing risks to road safety, drivers, and the public. Despite ongoing discussions among industry stakeholders and government bodies, there remains a lack of decisive action to tackle this problem, exacerbating challenges for road safety and fair competition.

What is a Chameleon Carrier?

According to the CVSA Inspection Bulletin 2021-03, a chameleon carrier refers to a company that shuts down and reopens under a different name or registration number (USDOT/NSC/CVOR/NIR) to avoid penalties, fines, or enforcement actions. This illegal practice undermines regulatory efforts and allows dangerous carriers to continue operations. Chameleon carriers often hide ownership by registering the business under the names of family members or using complex shareholder structures. Although this makes it difficult to trace, it is not impossible if regulators have the political will to act. Chohan for example stated in the news that the new company in Alberta was owned by the same family as the BC company that was booted out of BC for hitting too many bridges and a house. This highlights the problem of weak government oversight, allowing repeat offenders to re-enter the market under a different guise.

Regulatory Gaps in Canada

Unlike the United States, where the FMCSA (Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration) uses a unified registration system to identify and shut down chameleon carriers, Canada lacks a national system. Each province and territory handles the safety and monitoring of commercial carriers within its jurisdiction through the Safety Fitness Certificate (SFC) system. Although the National Safety Code (NSC) standard 7 requires provinces, territories, and North American neighbors to share enforcement data, significant gaps remain in enforcement and coordination.

In Alberta, the carrier profile system is flawed and the Third-Party Auditor (TPA) program, which is meant to ensure compliance, is ineffective, see my blog Don’t Look Behind the Curtain, Unveiling the Alberta Transportation Safety Scam. This lack of comprehensive monitoring and enforcement allows chameleon carriers to operate undetected, as no one is thoroughly overseeing their activities. As a result, public safety is compromised, and responsible carriers face higher insurance premiums.

Limited Reforms Post-Humboldt

Following the tragic Humboldt Broncos bus crash, changes were made to driver training and new carrier entry rules. However, these reforms did not address the chameleon carrier crisis. In Alberta, for instance, when a company applies for an SFC, there is a checkbox asking if they previously held an SFC in another province and were deemed unsatisfactory. Yet, the penalty for providing false information is only $1,000—an insufficient deterrent.

The regulations permit the Registrar to cancel an SFC for false information, but enforcement is lacking, and there is no political will to take necessary action.

Strengthening Enforcement and Collaboration

To address the chameleon carrier issue, Alberta needs to enhance its enforcement mechanisms. The International Registration Plan (IRP) requirement for an “Established Place of Business” could be a vital tool for identifying chameleon carriers. The IRP mandates that carriers maintain a physical structure within Alberta, staffed during business hours. This could serve as an additional layer of verification to ensure that rogue operators cannot easily hide or relocate.

Collaboration between regulatory bodies like Alberta TEC and Alberta Prorate is essential to cracking down on chameleon carriers. By working together, these organizations could create programs, potentially secure funding, and demonstrate the political commitment needed to clean up the industry.

Conclusion: Urgency for Reform

The ongoing problem of chameleon carriers demands comprehensive regulatory reform and robust enforcement. The current lack of coordination and weak oversight allows these carriers to endanger public safety, harm the livelihoods of drivers, and skew competition within the transportation industry. It's time to restore trust and integrity to the Canadian transport network. Canada does not need a federal transportation program to replace the existing jurisdictional model. The jurisdictions just need to do their jobs, fix the Carrier Profile system and start communicating and collaborating.

In my blog, Tampering 86(3) and Table 4, I reviewed the Data Diagnostic Events and Malfunctions from the Technical Standard Table 4 and the troubleshooting to mitigate these events. Data Diagnostic Events and Malfunctions are a continuous source of annoyance for ELD administrators and drivers. Without an interpretation guide from Alberta Transportation industry is flying blind and most carriers do not know how Data Diagnostic Events and Malfunctions are treated in a hours of service review in a NSC Audit.

There are ongoing efforts to revise the Technical Standard and allow Data Diagnostic Events to self-clear when the underlying issue is resolved. This would greatly benefit drivers and administrators by simplifying the process and reducing the burden of manual entries by the driver to clear these events.

These changes are urgently needed but, the wheels of government turn slowly. First, the proposed Technical Standard changes have to be adopted and a new Technical Standard written. The ELD providers will have to write new code, new programming needs to be tested and recertified. All of the ELD providers are either recently re-certified or are in the process of getting recertified. No ELD provider wants to pay for re-certification halfway through a 2-year certification term. The ELD certification process is already a massively expensive debacle (think ArriveScam). These ELD changes (if adopted) are at least a couple of years out.

In the interim I suggest using the NSC Standard 9 Hours of Service, Malfunctions section 78 (1) as the interpretation guide for Table 4 in the Technical Standard. NSC Standard 9 was developed by the CCMTA and endorsed by Transport Canada, Standard 9 focuses on the resulting Malfunctions rather than Data Diagnostic Events, aligning with the proposed revisions to the Technical Standard.

By following this strategy, carriers and ELD administrators can have a clearer understanding of how to interpret ELD-generated data while waiting for the necessary changes to be implemented. This interim solution offers a regulatory-supported approach to managing Data Diagnostic Events and Malfunctions effectively.