Legal aspects of the trucking industry are in a constant state of flux. Whether it’s executive level decision-making, broker concerns, or safety compliance, trends in laws related to motor-carriers concern all employed by the industry. This is particularly important in a period of re-establishment of directives to agencies that regulate trucking.
The number and scope of legal issues facing the industry are broad. Issues range from towing charges, leasing regulations, and the liability of brokers and shippers to the shift of power from regulatory agencies to the courts.
In 2025, two major legal issues impacting both executives and drivers are English language proficiency requirements and determinations related to misclassification of drivers as employees versus independent contractors (ICs).
In September, the Truckload Carriers Association (TCA) addressed these topics in a webinar titled “Legal Landscape,” part of the association’s Online Leadership Series.
English Language Proficiency (ELP)
Truck driving attracts individuals from a variety of backgrounds, and the number of drivers from foreign countries or who speak English as a second language is increasing. In response — and in the name of law enforcement and safety — the Trump administration issued an executive order requiring drivers to be able to communicate in English at an acceptable level.
While the general public may think of this as a new requirement, it’s actually an issue that dates back nearly a century.
“The guts of this requirement dates back to 1936,” said Prasad Sharma of the Scopelitis Law Firm. “It was not intended to be enforced on the roadside, but it was the employer’s responsibility to determine if a driver was proficient in the context of their duties.”
It took another 60 years for the U.S. Department of Transportation to consider rulemaking, an effort abandoned by concerns of discrimination. While the question came up periodically in the early 2000s, it was not until this year that the issue was settled.
One concern arising from the new law is that the definition of proficiency — “sufficient to converse with the general public” — is vague. The ambiguity is being argued in court cases to place more liability on a driver or carrier than might be considered reasonable.
“It’s a highly subjective standard — and highly subjective standards are difficult to prepare for,” said Sharma, in reference to defending against an accusation of lack of English proficiency.
Currently, two tests are used to determine if a driver is considered proficient enough to operate a commercial vehicle:
- First, drivers must be able to communicate the basics of their operation. They must be able to tell inspection officers what they are carrying, their destination and other basic facts about their loads.
- Secondly, drivers must be able to pass a road sign test. Can they identify various road signs and explain what they mean?
Failure to pass either test can place a driver and vehicle out of service.
The ELP requirement raises numerous questions related to compliance, discrimination, liability, and Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) audits and penalties. As more related cases move through the courts, whether the definition of English proficiency currently in use is sufficient will be determined.
Employee Classification
A second legal issue facing the industry is the difference between an employee and an IC as related to drivers. Existing guidelines delineate the criteria to qualify an individual as an IC, but as the issue relates to taxes, insurance and liability, a closer look at guidance is necessary.
Several factors are associated with determination of employee versus IC. Right of control is a primary issue, with recent court rulings indicating that “forced dispatch” does not apply to ICs. Likewise, the ability of the driver to choose routes and set schedules is a factor. For an IC, schedules are customer-driven rather than carrier-driven.
The opportunity for profit and loss is also an issue closely associated with ICs.
“Load and route selection are inextricably intertwined with profit and loss decisions in the case of contractors,” said Gregory Ferry, president and managing partner of the Scopelitis Law Firm.
Ferry notes that the issue ties closely to another related to IC status — skill and initiative. For ICs, managerial decisions are made at the driver level. ICs display more decision-making ability than employees, who rely on managers for guidance.
In the case of permanency of the relationship, under employee status, an individual is considered permanent in their position barring separation related to policy and procedures. Conversely, ICs normally work under term contracts, often a year in length. While the contracts are often renewed, either the carrier or driver has the right to end or renegotiate when it terminates.
Two issues remain to muddy the waters of the employee versus IC question. In terms of investment in equipment, carrier programs such as lease to buy and fronting expenses like licensing and registration create problems when attempting to classify drivers as ICs.
And, when the question of performing work integral to the company’s business arises, carriers have difficulty classifying a driver as an IC. After all, a carrier is in the business of transporting cargo from one point to another, and a driver is a necessary component of that effort.
“I’m not saying that the (integral to the business issue) is not winnable, but we conceded that issue to a plaintiff, and it established credibility,” Ferry said.
If you’re keeping score, recent cases related to the employee/IC issue have favored the carrier by a 4-2 margin. That is, carriers have generally prevailed in cases when IC status has been challenged by drivers believing they have been misclassified.
Tip of the Iceberg
The legal issues facing the trucking industry are many, and this overview covers cursory information related to only two of them. These are just the tip of the iceberg, as the saying goes.
Issues of tort reform, leasing and permissive use of equipment, environmental protection and many others currently flow through the courts.
It is incumbent on all in the trucking industry to remain abreast of news related to legal issues as it occurs. The alternative is to be left out in the cold when you believe you are faced with a decision that case law has already decided for you.
For more information about TCA’s Online Leadership Series, visit truckload.org/leadership-series or contact Elizabeth Nicholson at [email protected].
This story originally appeared in the November/December 2025 edition of Truckload Authority, the official publication of the Truckload Carriers Association.
Since retiring from a career as an outdoor recreation professional from the State of Arkansas, Kris Rutherford has worked as a freelance writer and, with his wife, owns and publishes a small Northeast Texas newspaper, The Roxton Progress. Kris has worked as a ghostwriter and editor and has authored seven books of his own. He became interested in the trucking industry as a child in the 1970s when his family traveled the interstates twice a year between their home in Maine and their native Texas. He has been a classic country music enthusiast since the age of nine when he developed a special interest in trucking songs.
