laitimes

It was revealed that Meituan riders rebelled against the "overlord clause" and sold the number after receiving orders wildly, Meituan customer service: under verification

author:Crazy anti-554

The content of this article comes from the Internet, if it is inconsistent with the actual situation or there is infringement, please contact to delete.

On June 25, Flame Technology reported an unusual news about a Shenyang delivery rider who was dissatisfied with Meituan's overlord clause and took a bizarre way to express his dissatisfaction. The rider took 253 takeout orders, all of which were picked up and delivered in place.

This seemingly ordinary rider became a talking point overnight, but we don't know anything about why he took such drastic action, because no authoritative sources have yet revealed details of the incident. The total delivery distance of his 253 orders was 953 kilometers, a figure that made many people wonder how a rider could complete such a large amount of work in such a short time.

It was revealed that Meituan riders rebelled against the "overlord clause" and sold the number after receiving orders wildly, Meituan customer service: under verification

What is even more surprising is that this incident has been fermenting for two days, but Meituan has neither come forward to clarify nor officially respond to the matter. Although "Burning Technology" has repeatedly tried to contact Meituan's public relations department for verification, it has not received any response. This raises more questions, why is Meituan so silent, and are they also confused by this incident?

As of the 25th, Meituan's customer service staff told "Burning Technology" that the platform was verifying the incident, but they did not provide any more information. This makes the truth of the incident even more confusing.

The incident happened in the early morning of June 19, when Shenyang's Meituan rider Yang set an astonishing record, taking 253 orders in just 4 hours, becoming the local champion of the day. However, what is inexplicable is that the rider Yang did not deliver these orders to customers according to normal procedures, but clicked "delivery" in an Internet café, and then directly cancelled his Meituan account.

It was revealed that Meituan riders rebelled against the "overlord clause" and sold the number after receiving orders wildly, Meituan customer service: under verification

For Yang's behavior, some media described it as a "Shenyang rider rebellion incident", while others called it "the awakening of delivery workers". This incident has aroused the attention and discussion of a large number of netizens, and some people believe that his actions are illegal, because after all, he did not deliver as required by the order. However, some people said that they needed to understand the cause of the incident before making a judgment, and perhaps he had his own grievances.

According to Meituan's publicly released financial report, in 2020, the company's total revenue reached 114.8 billion yuan, an increase of 177% over 2019. Among them, Meituan's food delivery business contributed more than half of the revenue, reaching 66.3 billion yuan. In addition, according to public data, as of the end of 2020, Meituan Takeaway already had 9.5 million riders, who are an important part of this huge platform.

It was revealed that Meituan riders rebelled against the "overlord clause" and sold the number after receiving orders wildly, Meituan customer service: under verification

The truth of the whole incident is still confusing, Yang's behavior is incomprehensible, and the silence of Meituan is also full of doubts. This incident not only aroused the curiosity of the public, but also involved ethical and legal issues in the food delivery industry. We look forward to more information and explanations to unravel the truth of this mystery.

The above content and materials are derived from the Internet, relevant data, theoretical research in the Internet materials, does not mean that the author of this article agrees with the laws, rules, opinions, behaviors in the article and is responsible for the authenticity of the relevant information. We are not responsible for any issues arising above or in connection with the above and the author of this article do not assume any direct or indirect legal liability.