Last Updated: June 29, 2026 | For platform rules, bonuses, and real-time updates, please refer to the official app or announcements.
Legislation for a law specifically addressing food delivery riders is drawing closer. According toReport by TechNews, Food delivery platforms such as Uber Eats and foodpanda have recently called on the government to strengthen communication with the industry before formal legislation is enacted, expressing concern that a hasty implementation of the policy could disrupt existing delivery operations.
Having worked as a food delivery rider for several years, I actually have mixed feelings about this news. For a long time, the legal status of food delivery riders has been ambiguous—they aren’t considered traditional employees, but they aren’t purely independent contractors either. Issues like national health insurance, labor insurance, and workers’ compensation claims only come up for discussion whenever an incident occurs, and then gradually fade back into the background. Having a law specifically tailored to this group is, in theory, a good thing.
But when industry players talk about “strengthening communication,” I think it’s worth giving this a second thought. The core of the platform’s business model is flexibility—logging in and out at any time, with no fixed schedules and no guaranteed base salary—which is also one of the reasons many people choose to work as food delivery riders. Once a dedicated law requires platforms to provide more labor protections for delivery riders, the most likely reaction from the industry won’t be to accept these requirements outright, but rather to adjust bonus structures, raise the thresholds for accepting orders, or reduce the frequency of order dispatches during peak hours. In the end, those most directly affected are often the riders out on the road.
There are two issues that really concern me. First is the recognition of workplace accidents. Currently, when a food delivery rider is injured, they often have to rely on the commercial insurance provided by the platform to file a claim, leading to back-and-forth disputes over whether the rider should be considered an employee—a determination made by the employer or the Ministry of Labor—and leaving the question of liability unclear. Second is the issue of work hour records. There’s a significant discrepancy between the “online time” calculated by the platform and the actual time spent on the road. If there were clear regulations in this area, it would actually provide a layer of protection for delivery riders—not just a restriction that benefits the companies.
As for the industry’s call for more communication with the government, my interpretation is that they are hoping to secure a longer grace period and greater autonomy—which is, after all, part of any negotiation over interests. The key question is whether delivery riders have a genuine representative at the negotiating table—or whether it’s just the companies and the government trading barbs, while those of us who deliver orders day in and day out, come rain or shine, can only wait for the final decision to be made. For more updates on related policies, followTakeout News SectionOngoing coverage.
This article is a compilation of general information and personal observations. For the actual content of legislation, as well as the specifics regarding labor rights regulations and protections, please refer to the official announcements and the latest regulations issued by the Ministry of Labor and relevant authorities.