Recently, multiple food delivery platforms in mainland China have announced one after another that they will contribute to social security for eligible delivery workers. However, due to the high mobility of delivery riders and other factors, industry insiders believe that this may not fully guarantee the rights of delivery workers. Many delivery workers are concerned that personal contributions may lead to a decrease in their income, and the fluidity of their work may result in insufficient payment years for social security, among other issues. Consumers are also worried that costs may be transferred to them.
According to state media reports, there are over 12 million registered online delivery drivers on various platforms in mainland China. These riders, due to the flexibility and high mobility of their work, often lack stable labor relationships and do not enjoy social security benefits.
On February 19th, JD.com announced that starting from March 1st, they will gradually contribute to the five social insurances and one housing fund for full-time delivery riders, and provide accident insurance and health coverage for part-time riders. On the same day, Meituan announced that they plan to start contributing to social security for full-time and stable part-time delivery riders from the second quarter of 2025.
Subsequently, Ele.me also stated that they have been piloting social security contributions for riders in some cities since 2023, with plans to expand to more cities.
Multiple mainland news outlets have reported on the above measures, noting that these actions aim to strengthen the labor rights and benefits of delivery workers. The term “the social security first year of delivery riders” has sparked public debate.
However, some delivery workers and experts expressed concerns that even with social security contributions, the flexible and mobile nature of delivery work may prevent full protection of their rights.
According to reports from Jiemian News, while there has been progress in policies, practical difficulties still need to be addressed.
Prior to this, most platform companies addressed the occupational injury protection issues of delivery riders by purchasing commercial insurance such as accident insurance.
Wang Zengwen, a lifelong professor at Wuhan University and head of the Social Security Research Office, pointed out that delivery riders work an average of over 10 hours a day, with a high rate of traffic accidents compared to other occupations. However, delivery riders face challenges in obtaining work-related injury recognition and have limited alternative protection options. The commercial accident insurance provided by platforms deducts an average of 3 RMB per day, but issues such as high claim thresholds, low coverage amounts, and limited scenarios for compensation exist.
Since the inception of the food delivery industry in 2009, the protection of delivery riders’ labor rights has been a major concern. However, the issue has not been effectively resolved due to the blurred nature of employment relationships. Wang Zengwen explained that platforms segment labor relationships through models such as crowdsourcing, labor outsourcing, and individual business registration, resulting in over 80% of riders being in a legal gray area.
Reports from Caijing suggest that due to the unclear labor relationships, flexible work nature, and unstable income of delivery workers, new measures and policies are needed to actively research, reduce barriers, provide insurance subsidies, and include them in the scope of social security coverage.
Zhang Chenggang, director of the China New Employment Forms Research Center, stated that current platforms have not yet introduced specific implementation details. Questions remain on whether delivery riders who meet social security thresholds but choose not to contribute will have the freedom to do so, and how their decisions will be managed. Effective approaches are needed to guide them in contributing to social security.
Many delivery riders are concerned that the personal portion of social security contributions will reduce their income, and their tangible investments may not yield returns. For instance, in Beijing, based on the minimum payment base for enterprise employees’ social security contributions in 2024, delivery riders would need to pay 716 RMB per month, while in Shanghai, the amount would be 775 RMB. Moreover, to receive basic retirement benefits after retirement, riders would need to contribute for at least 15 years.
Some delivery riders view this job as transitional and prioritize immediate income. They prefer immediate subsidies if given the choice.
From the perspective of platform companies’ costs, covering social security for a large number of flexible workers like delivery riders could lead to a significant increase in costs. Calculations by some organizations indicate that if social security contributions were made for all active riders, these platforms would need to pay a total cost of 17.299 billion yuan per year. Considering that their net profit for the whole of 2023 was 13.9 billion yuan, even using their annual net profit would not cover all the social security expenses for riders.
Given this background, concerns linger even if platforms pledge to contribute to delivery riders’ social security. Wang Zengwen pointed out that to control costs, platforms may still limit the scope and number of workers covered by social security contributions by “de-laborizing” the relationships.
Red Star News reported that Chen Bing, deputy dean of the Law School at Nankai University and researcher at the Nankai University Digital Economy Interdisciplinary Science Center, mentioned that the additional social security costs might be shared among various parties. Third-party companies partnering with platforms may be required to allocate some profits for riders’ social security contributions, and internal merchant partners may need to accept slightly lower subsidies or higher deductions, possibly leading to consumers bearing slightly higher delivery fees.
Some consumers acknowledge the efforts made by companies to care for delivery workers but also worry that the increased costs borne by companies may be passed on to consumers. They understand and support appropriate price increases to safeguard the rights of delivery workers but hope that consumers will not bear all the costs.