Delivery Platform Law Sparks Pay Calculation Dispute Just 16 Days After Enforcement! Taiwan Delivery Industry Alliance Urges FTC to Reject Grab's Acquisition of foodpanda Taiwan

The 'Delivery Rider Rights Protection and Platform Management Act' took effect on July 21. Just 16 days later, on today (7th), the Taiwan Delivery Industry Alliance held a press conference, stating that Uber Eats is allegedly calculating compensation by 'dividing the actual working time of overlapping orders by two,' which may violate the 'one-order-one-payment' principle and unfairly reduce riders' income.

Alliance spokesperson Su Po-hao pointed out that, according to union reports, when riders deliver two orders simultaneously, the platform appears to halve the actual working time for pay calculation. He argued that this practice violates the spirit of the dedicated law, which emphasizes 'one-order-one-payment,' and could lead to systemic wage disputes.

Su noted that the alliance has already reported the issue to the Ministry of Labor, which confirmed that if the allegations are verified, penalties will be imposed in accordance with the law. Each affected rider could be treated as a separate case. The alliance also announced a 'one-case-one-complaint' campaign, encouraging delivery riders to preserve data and file legal appeals to ensure the law's protections are effectively implemented.

In addition to rider rights, the alliance voiced opposition to the ongoing review by the Fair Trade Commission (FTC) of Grab's proposed acquisition of foodpanda's Taiwan operations. Su believes that if approved, the deal could further concentrate the delivery market, weaken competition, and negatively impact labor conditions and consumer rights.

Regarding the capital relationship between Uber and Grab, the alliance pointed out that Uber currently holds partial equity in Grab and recently announced the acquisition of Delivery Hero, foodpanda's parent company. It urged regulators to assess the overall market structure and competitive impact rather than relying solely on shareholding percentages.

The alliance cited a recent article by Professor Liao Yi-ming of National Kaohsiung University, emphasizing that international competition law practices focus on whether a company has 'substantial influence,' even without controlling stakes. Therefore, the FTC should fully consider the long-term impact of the transaction on market structure.

Furthermore, the alliance referenced Singapore's competition authority's past handling of cases involving Grab-Uber and GrabFood-foodpanda, noting that competition regulators can take preventive measures before a transaction is completed to avoid irreversible damage to market competition.

Su emphasized that the FTC rejected Uber Eats' direct acquisition of foodpanda Taiwan last year. Although Grab is now proposing the deal, the alliance argues that the market concentration effect remains unchanged—and may even be exacerbated by increasingly complex investment relationships among the involved companies—warranting greater scrutiny of impacts on competition and rider rights.

Finally, the alliance issued three demands: urging the Ministry of Labor to swiftly investigate and legally address Uber Eats' pay calculation dispute; calling on society to carefully consider 'conditional approval' frameworks; and requesting the FTC to reject Grab's acquisition of foodpanda Taiwan before the review deadline to protect fair market competition and delivery rider labor rights.