Article/Luo Qingxuan, All media reporter of Yangcheng Evening News
Figure/Provided by respondents
Master Zhang has been driving online car hailing for 8 years. Recently, he found in an order that there was a big gap between the amount actually paid by passengers and the amount displayed on the driver's side. The proportion displayed on the platform was 25%, but the actual amount was nearly 40%. This phenomenon is not unique. Many drivers have posted on social media to reflect similar situations. Why do two different bills appear for the same order? Where does the invisible commission flow? Experts pointed out that orders have been transferred many times in the online car hailing platform, and the amount of "disappearing" is the revenue of each platform in the process of transfer.
It is worth noting that although there is no law explicitly prohibiting "resale of orders" at present, this behavior may lead to the proportion of multi platform overlapping drawing exceeding the 30% hidden red line set in the national "Sunshine Action". However, as "Sunshine Action" is only an initiative, the regulatory authorities are often difficult to deal with even if they face excessive commissions.
The problem is expected to be improved. Recently, the Ministry of Transport released a practical work plan for people's livelihood in 2024, which requires online car hailing platform companies to publicly draw the upper limit of the proportion, and ensure that complaint reporting channels are unblocked and subject to social supervision.
complaint
"Yin and Yang Bill" at driver end and passenger end
The proportion of platform superposition is nearly 40%
Zhang Shifu, a car hailing driver of Guangzhou. com, told reporters that in April this year, he accidentally found in an order that the driver side showed that the passenger paid 58.03 yuan, his income was 43.04 yuan, and the platform proportion was 25.83%; However, passengers said that they actually paid 71.55 yuan. If calculated based on this amount, the actual proportion of the platform was as high as 39.84%.
Why did 13.52 yuan disappear? Master Zhang was puzzled. Usually, he would not ask the passengers about the actual payment. Unexpectedly, there would be a price difference between them.
Master Zhang said that he registered several online car hailing platforms to receive orders, and this order was received through the "timely car use" platform. The passenger said that he placed the order on "Baidu Maps", and the order interface showed that the service was provided by "Yuexing Chuxing". In view of this confusion, Master Zhang contacted the customer service of "timely use", who told him that this was actually an order provided by the third party "Dibo Travel".
That is to say, an order from Baidu Maps arrived in the hands of Master Zhang, who used the car in time, after "Yuexing Chuxing" and "Dibo Chuxing". Master Zhang analyzed that "Baidu Maps" first distributed the orders to the following small and medium-sized platforms, which then distributed the orders to specific drivers. This series of distribution processes would generate some additional costs, which ultimately led to less money received by drivers.
In fact, this phenomenon of "order resale" is not unique. On social media, many drivers have posted complaints about this phenomenon.
Gu Dasong, Executive Director of the Research Center for Traffic Rule of Law and Development of Southeast University, also paid attention to this problem last December. A group of order screenshots released by Gu Dasong show that a passenger actually paid 98.11 yuan for his trip, while the passenger paid 71.46 yuan for the driver's side, and the driver's actual income was 52.17 yuan. In this transaction, 26.65 yuan disappeared, which is more than half of the driver's actual income. After his analysis, he found that this order had been transferred many times, and the 26.65 yuan that disappeared in the middle was the revenue of each platform in the process of transfer.
Many passengers have experienced similar situations. Online friend Xiao Li commented that she also noticed that the display fee on the driver's side was inconsistent with the amount paid by herself. "I usually see a difference of two or three yuan, but every little makes a mickle. I don't know how much the platform has earned me."
present situation
Order resale or hidden rules in the industry
Aggregated travel platform participation share
In fact, the phenomenon of "order resale" emerged with the development of the aggregation platform. The reporter learned that the online car hailing industry is currently divided into three development modes: a purely self operated travel platform that fully owns and manages its own vehicles and drivers. At present, this mode is relatively rare in the online car hailing market in China; Self operation plus aggregation travel platform, which combines self operation and aggregation, such as "Caocao Travel" and "Shouqi Taxi"; The pure aggregation travel platform does not own vehicles and drivers, but matches passengers with driver resources through technical means to provide travel services, such as "Meituan Taxi".
The aggregation mode rose around 2018. The aggregation platform usually relies on large Internet companies, such as map software, meal ordering software, ticketing platform and search engine, and uses its huge user traffic base to quickly complete the matching between passengers and drivers.
In the above case of Master Zhang, "Baidu Maps" and "Yuexing Chuxing" both provide aggregation services, while "Timely Car" directly takes orders. As for the price difference, "Baidu Maps" customer service responded that the reason for the discrepancy between the driver's and passenger's amounts was that the third-party service platform was involved. "There will indeed be a problem of three parties taking a cut, because (Baidu Maps and the third party) is a cooperative relationship, and there should be a cut." When a reporter asked whether this phenomenon is common, the customer service said it was not clear.
As for the phenomenon of order transfer, the reporter also contacted Yuexing Travel. Its staff said that as long as the price publicity was clear and in line with relevant regulations, this practice did not constitute a major problem. He stressed that the price of the service provided by his platform is publicly announced and the platform operation is in compliance with the regulations, which are the most critical points. "Others, if there is any transfer to a third party, we understand that there is no big problem." When the reporter continued to ask whether the transfer of orders is a common phenomenon or an example, the other side said: "This industry will have."
The phenomenon of order resale may be a hidden rule in the industry, but there are no specific regulations explicitly prohibiting such behavior at present. The staff member of Guangzhou Passenger Transport Management Office said: "In January this year, we had a meeting with them (the aggregation platform), asking them not to resell orders layer by layer, but to ensure the income of drivers." However, the staff member said that because laws and regulations did not explicitly prohibit, it is often difficult for regulatory authorities to intervene. "If they do this, we will generally stop them." He said frankly, but due to technical and other reasons, it is difficult to verify such behavior.
For the order of Master Zhang, the staff said that they had launched an investigation.
difficulty
30% drawing into the red line is only an initiative
It is difficult for drivers to safeguard their rights, and it is difficult for officials to supervise them
The online car hailing aggregation platform market is growing rapidly. According to the data released by the online car hailing supervision information interaction system, a total of 891 million orders were received in March this year, including 241 million orders from the aggregation platform, up 29% month on month.
In order to standardize the platform contribution behavior, in 2022, the Ministry of Transport will carry out "Sunshine Action" for the platform enterprises in the new business type of transportation, requiring major platform companies to do a good job in opening pricing rules, reasonably set the upper limit of contribution ratio and make it public. At that time, the upper limit of proportion announced by major companies was mostly between 18% and 30%. Since then, 30% has become the invisible red line of the industry. "All platforms in Guangzhou have joined this initiative," said the staff of Guangzhou Passenger Transport Management Office.
However, since "Sunshine Action" is only an initiative rather than a regulation, even if the resale of orders leads to a draw of more than 30% of the red line, it is difficult for the management department to punish it.
This may lead to the problem of protecting drivers' rights when facing the problem of high fees. Liao Jianxun, a senior partner and public welfare lawyer of Guangdong Guoding Law Firm, believes that, first of all, drivers' rights protection in the platform is often ignored, "if you make a claim on the platform, the platform may not accept it." Second, if the driver chooses to file a lawsuit, he may face higher costs of time, money and so on.
On the Black Cat complaint platform, there are many drivers who complain about this. Xiao Hu, the driver, reported that the proportion of a certain order was more than 50%. He fed back on the platform that customer service had never provided a substantive solution, "they just lied to me again and again, always repeating the sentence, 'The platform promised to draw no more than 30%'."
Another driver, Xiao Xu, found that a certain order was awarded 48%, so he called the local 12345 hotline for help. The staff replied that there was no complaint channel for the platform to earn high fees, and suggested that if he was not satisfied, he could not use the platform to receive orders.
lawyer
Market monopoly may exist behind the high draw
Call for effective supervision and restraint
Order resale not only increases the opacity of transactions, but also may infringe the interests of drivers and passengers. Liao Jianxun said that this action infringed on consumers' right to choose. "Consumers hired cars on one platform, but they sent cars from another platform, which is suspected of infringing consumers' rights and interests." He mentioned that the market supervision department has the right to investigate and punish such acts.
This practice may also damage the working power of the "actual carrier" in the industry, and adversely affect the long-term healthy development of the industry. Gu Dasong said that although some platforms do not directly provide online car hailing services, they gain profits because they can obtain orders, even higher than the actual carrier. "What is the attribute of this income? Is it information fee? If the income of information fee between platforms is higher than that of the actual carrier, who is willing to be the actual carrier?" he questioned.
Liao Jianxun further pointed out that a high bid may indicate that the competition between platforms is insufficient and there is a possibility of market monopoly. In this case, the competent department of the industry should carry out certain supervision and restriction.
Gu Dasong believes that it is of positive significance for the regulatory authorities to issue guidance on proportion, which is conducive to protecting the rights and interests of online taxi hailing drivers; However, on the other hand, the restriction of profit may affect the autonomy of enterprises. Therefore, it is necessary to balance the interests of various parties to maintain the overall health of the industry.
According to the data released by Guangzhou Transportation Bureau, the income of online car hailing platform drivers is declining. In January 2022, the average daily revenue of online car hailing in Guangzhou will be about 395.28 yuan; Two years later, in January 2024, the value will become 336.49 yuan.
It is worth noting that the situation of high commissions and poor complaint channels is expected to be improved. Recently, the Ministry of Transport announced five practical work plans for people's livelihood in 2024, including "carrying out actions to improve the quality of travel services in new transport formats". It clearly requires that by the end of April, the competent departments of urban transportation should organize the implementation of the deployment, consolidation and reduction of excessive fees for online car hailing platform companies operating in local areas, and urge online car hailing platform companies operating in local areas to take the initiative to announce the upper limit of fees to the public. By the end of June, all provincial transportation authorities should urge all online car hailing platform companies to implement the upper limit of the proportion of the announcement, open up complaint reporting channels, and accept social supervision.
Editor: Zheng Jianlong