Who, what and why of ELDs

We know the when of electronic logging devices (ELDs)—drivers must switch from paper logs or logging software to approved ELDs by the end of 2017. Those already using some type of approved automatic onboard recording device get two more years to begin the switch to ELDs, which are more narrowly defined as devices automatically synchronizing with a truck’s engine to capture driving times.  The more interesting and important questions are who’s already using ELDs, why have they made the move ahead of the deadline, and what are they using them for aside from basic hours-of-service logging?

There’s been a lot of speculation about those questions over the last year, some of it informed and some of it more like Chicken Little’s prediction, but there is finally a bit of clarity that seems better grounded in reality.  A recent survey of some 2,000 carriers by the major 3PL company Transplace offers some insights into current ELD use by fleets of all sizes and expectations once the mandate is in full force.

On the question of who’s adopting ELDs quickly, size counts. Roughly two-thirds of the fleets responding operate 250 or fewer trucks, with two-thirds of those at 50 trucks or under.  Only 33% of those fleets have fully transitioned to electronic logging, and another 29% have begun the move. The remaining 38% said they have no immediate plans to even begin the switch.  By contrast, 81% of fleets with more than 250 trucks reported they have already completed the transition, and the other 19% said they’re working on it.

Why do larger fleets have a more positive response to ELDs?

Smaller fleets seem to be focused on the potential negatives of abandoning paper logs for automated electronic ones. The majority—64%—expect ELDs to decrease equipment utilization with a third of those predicting a 10% drop. About one-third of the larger fleets expect no impact on utilization, and among the 56% who do, the majority put that drop at under 5%.

Just over half of all the fleets indicated that they’d lost drivers or expected to lose them with ELDs tracking hours of service.  The survey results I saw didn’t break down that result by fleet size. But looking at the carrier remarks published along with the statistics, it appears to me that smaller fleets are again more pessimistic about the impact, while the larger ones with more ELDs in place are experiencing only small numbers of driver defections.

So why do the larger fleets have a more positive response to ELDs? First, 84% of them report “a significant reduction” in HOS and logging violations with ELDs. That number is only 56% for the relatively lower percentage of small fleets already using the devices.  Also, a third of the surveyed fleets are either realizing or expect to see real benefits from ELD adoption.  One-third cite better monitoring for improved service, 22% see better equipment and driver utilization, and 10% note improved driver convenience.

The one ELD negative everyone seems to agree on is the financial hit. When you add up the initial cost of buying an ELD, installing it and training a driver to use it, 45% of the surveyed fleets said meeting the mandate costs more than $700 per truck, and 18% put that figure at $500 to $700.  Only 18% said it could be done for $100 to $300.  And that figure does not take into account any lost equipment utilization.

The question is, where do you fall on the ELD adoption timetable?  Do you wait until the last minute and risk falling behind competitively while others exploit the benefits, or do you bite the rather expensive bullet now and get ahead of the issue while there’s still time to fine-tune the right ELD strategy for your operation?

Sorry, but there’s no easy answer.