7 risks for employers paying less than $26 per application for transportation jobs

When employers in the transportation industry pay less than the standard $26 per application, they risk attracting candidates who may not have the necessary qualifications, certifications, or experience required for these roles. Transportation jobs often demand specialized skills such as operating commercial vehicles, maintaining safety standards, and adhering to strict regulations. Lower-cost job boards or platforms may bring in a high volume of applicants, but many of them may not meet these essential requirements. This creates inefficiencies as hiring managers spend more time filtering through unqualified candidates, delaying the process of filling critical roles that keep the supply chain moving and businesses running smoothly.

Additionally, paying below the market rate for transportation applications can distort recruitment metrics by inflating application volume without delivering quality candidates. In an industry where safety, punctuality, and expertise are key, hiring unqualified candidates can lead to costly mistakes, regulatory violations, and even accidents, which can have severe financial and legal consequences. The initial savings from lower application costs are often outweighed by the long-term risks of hiring the wrong people, making it essential to invest in high-quality candidates who can uphold the industry’s demanding standards and keep operations running efficiently and safely.

Data gathered from hundreds of job boards shows that the effective cost per application when employers advertise a job is $26 if the job function is Transportation. What quality and other risks do employers face if they pay a small fraction of the going rate to a vendor for these leads? Here is what seven thought leaders have to say.

• Risk of Unqualified Candidates
• Higher Turnover Rates
• Compromised Candidate Quality
• Impact on Employee Morale
• Sacrificing Quality for Quantity
• Long-Term Costs of Poor Fit
• Avoiding Headaches and Wasted Resources

Risk of Unqualified Candidates

Regulatory requirements in transportation can be quite strict and often quite changeable, so when employers underpay for transportation job leads, they risk attracting candidates who may not meet those regulatory requirements. It can be as simple as not properly vetting that the applicant has the appropriate commercial driver’s license or something less formal, such as a lack of experience with specific types of vehicles.

Transportation is a highly regulated industry, and the risks of hiring unqualified candidates can lead to safety issues, legal liabilities, and costly compliance violations.

Dragos Badea, CEO, Yarooms

Higher Turnover Rates

When employers pay significantly less for job leads, they risk lower-quality candidates and higher turnover rates. Cheap vendors may use questionable methods to generate leads, resulting in unqualified or uninterested applicants. This often leads to increased turnover, as less-engaged candidates may apply to multiple positions, diluting the hiring process and undermining overall recruitment efforts.

Mohammed Kamal, Business Development Manager, Olavivo

Compromised Candidate Quality

Paying a fraction of the going rate for job application leads carries significant risks, including compromising the quality of candidates. Lower costs might attract candidates who do not have the qualifications or experience prevalent in the transportation industry. This results in spending more time and resources sifting through applications that are not viable. Moreover, unreliable vendors could provide outdated or irrelevant candidate information, causing delays in the hiring process. There is also the risk of a smaller talent pool, as reputable sources may not be used, which diminishes the diversity and potential of the applicants. Relying on low-cost vendors may suffer from a lack of personalized service that ensures the needs of a business are understood and met effectively.

Valentin Radu, CEO & Founder, Blogger, Speaker, Podcaster, Omniconvert

Impact on Employee Morale

I would point out that if a company consistently hires poor-quality candidates due to cheap lead sourcing, it can affect the morale of existing employees. Colleagues may have to take on additional work to cover for the new hires’ lack of skills or deal with turnover disruptions, which can impact overall team performance and job satisfaction.

I once worked with a company that tried to save money by using low-cost lead-generation vendors for their transportation positions. They ended up hiring individuals who did not have the necessary qualifications or experience to perform the job well. This resulted in increased training and onboarding costs, as well as lost productivity due to having to constantly replace underperforming employees.

There is also a potential risk of legal issues if these cheap leads turn out to be unqualified or misrepresented. This could result in lawsuits from candidates who feel they were not given a fair chance or from employees who may have to cover for the mistakes of underqualified new hires.

Daniel Cook, HR / Marketing Executive, Mullen and Mullen

Sacrificing Quality for Quantity

If employers pay a small fraction of the going rate for job leads, they risk sacrificing quality for quantity. Cheaper leads often mean candidates who aren’t fully qualified or aligned with the role, which can lead to higher turnover and wasted time filtering through unfit applicants. Additionally, low-cost vendors may not have the same screening processes or industry-specific targeting, resulting in a pool of candidates that lack the necessary skills or experience. In the long run, cutting corners on quality can cost more in terms of time, and resources, and even damage to the company’s reputation if roles remain unfilled or filled with underqualified hires.

Hyacinth Tucker, Owner and CEO, The Laundry Basket LLC

Long-Term Costs of Poor Fit

I’ve witnessed teams struggle with cohesion after rushed hires, which is why at Spaciously, we emphasize quality connections. Cheap vendor leads might save money initially, but the long-term costs of poor cultural fit and decreased productivity can be devastating for transportation companies.

Hanna Kanabiajeuskaja, Founder, Spaciously

Avoiding Headaches and Wasted Resources

As someone with over a decade of experience in CRM and marketing operations, I’ve seen the risks of buying cheap leads firsthand. At one agency, we sourced transportation leads at a bargain, only to find most were unqualified, fabricated, or had been sold to multiple buyers.

The costs to vet and follow up on these poor-quality leads far outweighed any savings. We wasted time on candidates with no knowledge of or interest in the roles. Some vendors cut corners to boost volume, not caring if leads match specs. I’ve found the only way to avoid headaches, wasted resources, and brand damage is to do thorough research, ask for samples and references, pilot test, and pay fair-market rates.

Bargain-hunting often means more work, not less. One client thought they were getting a “deal” on lead generation but ended up with an inbox full of unvetted, unqualified contacts. I had to step in to fix their inefficient follow-up process and lead scoring to focus sales efforts on viable opportunities. We turned it around, but not without extra hours of work to undo the damage.

At my current agency, we’ve found sponsoring local events builds goodwill and boosts our visibility in the community. The key is finding unique ways to support causes we care about. Our recent event sponsorship led to a 23% traffic increase and revenue boost. But we went in with realistic expectations, understanding community outreach is a long-term strategy. There are no shortcuts to establishing brand trust and improving your reputation.

Ryan T. Murphy, Sales Operations Manager, Upfront Operations