Some delivery platforms in Taiwan claim that they have a “contractual” relationship with their couriers so that they do not have to pay for the couriers’ national health insurance. This means that couriers would not receive any compensation if they have an accident in the course of their work. It leaves them with no safeguards as workers.
Many people do delivery work as a full-time job. It is unreasonable for delivery platforms, which profit handsomely from the couriers work, to completely shirk their responsibility when accidents occur.
The Uber Eats platform in the US takes out accident insurance for its couriers. Each courier’s accident insurance activates as soon as the customer places an order.
In Japan, Uber Eats pays for insurance coverage of up to ￥100 million (US$922,100) in compensation for vehicles and accident victims if their couriers have traffic accidents while delivering food.
Uber Eats in Japan has announced that it provides health insurance for its couriers. Now, couriers who are injured in accidents could receive insurance benefits of up to ￥250,000 for medical treatment. If they die, their dependents could receive a death benefit of up to ￥10 million.
Taiwanese laws have not caught up with the emerging gig and platform economies. The government should step up with substantial measures, such as stipulating that platforms must pay for accident insurance for couriers. Taiwanese authorities should not allow food delivery companies to evade the consequences of couriers’ occupational accidents or permit them to reduce their operating costs by passing the financial burden on to the public.
Companies that reap a “bonus dividend” from the sharing economy must bear their social responsibility. It should not be thought of as a business burden, but rather as the paramount value of business ethics.
Dino Wei works in the information industry.
Translated by Julian Clegg
“Testy,” “divisive,” “frigid,” “an exchange of insults” were some of the media descriptions of last month’s meeting in Anchorage, Alaska, between US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan and their Chinese counterparts. Council on Foreign Relations president Richard Haass said that, rather than the “deft handling” needed in US-China relations, this encounter was “mishandled, a terrible start [with] way too much public signaling.” Yet, contrary to conventional wisdom, the acrimonious encounter with Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) and Chinese Central Foreign Affairs Commission Director Yang Jiechi (楊潔篪) was a great success for US diplomacy
A meeting between US and Chinese officials in Anchorage, Alaska, last month, showed that the US-China struggle will no doubt continue during the administration of US President Joe Biden. The struggle between democracies and authoritarian regimes is likely to last decades, because it stems from the fundamental difference in the two value systems — a difference that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) sees as an existential threat. The CCP fears that Chinese might someday demand the protection of individual liberties, and has therefore waged a years-long “total war” to undermine democracies, which eventually prompted the US to fight back. Within the
Minister of Transportation and Communications Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍) offered his resignation to Premier Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) in the aftermath of Friday last week’s fatal Taroko Express No. 408 crash. Su declined, asking him to stay for the time being and deal with the response, as that was the responsible thing to do. The complex question of responsibility for the tragedy will be answered more fully after investigations and reviews have been completed. It is right that Lin offered to take the fall, and just as right that Su asked him to stay to oversee the response. While neither are completely