Immediate comment: Don’t let online car-hailing drivers get trapped in the layers of commissions taken by aggregation platforms
2024-08-10
한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina
In recent years, the rapid development of aggregation platforms has added orders to many online car-hailing drivers. However, some aggregation platforms resell orders layer by layer, and each platform takes a commission, resulting in rising commissions and shrinking driver incomes. According to the Workers' Daily, a passenger actually paid 98.11 yuan, but the driver's end showed that the passenger paid only 71.46 yuan, and the driver actually earned 52.17 yuan. In this transaction, 26.65 yuan disappeared.
For one order, almost half of the payment is taken away by various small platforms. This is probably not just plucking feathers from a passing goose, but directly pulling off its wings and thighs. This also shows that the platform can easily clamp down on the drivers with its advantages in technology and information. How can such an unequal relationship be broken? It is still necessary to satisfy the basic right of drivers to know, and further clarify and make transparent the rules of commission and order acceptance.
In fact, as early as 2021, the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security, the Ministry of Transport and other eight departments issued the "Guiding Opinions on Maintaining the Labor Security Rights and Interests of Workers in New Employment Forms", requiring online ride-hailing platforms to set an upper limit on the commission rate and announce it to the public. Since then, the upper limits of the commission rates announced by major platforms have been roughly between 18% and 30%, and 30% has become an unwritten red line in the industry.
Looking back now, if some aggregation platforms charge commissions at various levels, resulting in the public commission ratio being different from the actual commission ratio, or even very different, does this kind of "lip service" involve fraud?
Many people who have taken online ride-hailing services have experienced this: Sometimes the driver will ask about the actual payment of the passenger, and then find that there is a big difference. Some platforms explain that the driver sees the commission after the commission is taken, but since the commission ratio is public, do drivers also have the right to know the actual payment of the passenger, and then compare it with their actual income to monitor the actual commission of the platform? Whether it is passengers or online ride-hailing drivers, their right to know should not be fooled.
Moreover, the act of reselling orders by aggregation platforms is a transfer of contract performance obligations to others, and drivers and passengers should be fully informed. It should be noted that such order transfers usually also mean the transfer of responsibilities. Once a traffic accident or other dispute occurs, the various platforms are likely to blame each other, making it more difficult for drivers and consumers to protect their rights.
It is worth mentioning that it is not just the resale of orders. There have been media reports that many small platforms do not have online car-hailing operating licenses, but rent or resell online car-hailing operating licenses at prices ranging from hundreds of thousands to millions or even tens of millions, and then provide taxi services through aggregation platforms. From reselling licenses to reselling orders, the chaos rampant in the online car-hailing industry is time to seriously rectify it.
At present, online ride-hailing drivers are considered to be a very important employment pool, with a certain employment guarantee and buffer function. When it comes to online ride-hailing drivers, the general impression in society is that they are "very hard-working" and "not easy". In this context, the extremely exaggerated commission rate of the aggregation platform is not only inconsistent with the principle of distribution based on market factors and contribution, but also difficult to accept from a rational point of view.
Furthermore, this is not only a question of how to distribute income, but also a question of who has the right to distribute it. The platform provides information about both drivers and passengers and is the "matchmaker" of orders, so it should receive a certain amount of compensation. However, the platform should not have absolute distribution rights, which is not in line with the principles of market transactions and cooperative management. In particular, the aggregation platform only plays the role of a middleman and has no subordinate relationship with the drivers. How can it be said that it can get as much as it wants?
We should also realize that the aggregation platform resells orders and takes commissions at every level, which leads to a decrease in the average income of drivers. They can only stabilize their income by increasing the volume, which in turn leads to longer working hours, induces risks such as fatigue driving, and brings safety hazards. Aren’t online car-hailing drivers trapped in a system of commissions at every level, just like food delivery riders? The costs are transferred to drivers and passengers, and the risks are transferred to society. There shouldn’t be such a “good thing” in the world.
The Paper’s Chief Commentator and Returnee
(This article is from The Paper. For more original information, please download the "The Paper" APP)
