
DoorDash的首席執(zhí)行官徐迅(Tony Xu)猛烈抨擊社交媒體上流傳的一則傳言——某外賣平臺會依據(jù)司機(jī)的“工作迫切度”進(jìn)行打分評級。他明確表示,任何認(rèn)同此類做法的員工,將被立即解雇。
DoorDash(總部位于美國舊金山)的聯(lián)合創(chuàng)始人及首席執(zhí)行官分享了一張四天前來自Reddit平臺的未經(jīng)證實(shí)帖子截圖,匿名用戶自稱某外賣公司的開發(fā)人員,爆料了公司多項(xiàng)內(nèi)部操作。
該帖的真實(shí)性存疑:在社交平臺引發(fā)熱議后,科技與民主網(wǎng)站Platformer已經(jīng)認(rèn)定其為虛假信息。但在此之前,該帖已經(jīng)引發(fā)外賣行業(yè)頭部企業(yè)首席執(zhí)行官的關(guān)注與譴責(zé)。
這位Reddit用戶聲稱,某家未具名外賣平臺每周都會召開會議,產(chǎn)品經(jīng)理們在會上討論如何從“人力資產(chǎn)”(即外賣司機(jī))身上榨取更多價值。帖子中寫道:“他們談?wù)撨@些司機(jī)時,就如同在談?wù)撾娮佑螒蛑械馁Y源節(jié)點(diǎn),而非努力支付房租的父母。”
該用戶自稱已經(jīng)于近期辭職,并通過公共圖書館的臨時筆記本電腦發(fā)帖。他還指控,平臺會依據(jù)司機(jī)的工作表現(xiàn)評定“迫切度指數(shù)”,這一隱性指標(biāo)會標(biāo)記那些毫不猶豫接受低價值“垃圾訂單”的司機(jī),進(jìn)而阻止他們查看高價訂單。
其他未經(jīng)證實(shí)的指控包括:優(yōu)先訂單的配送速度并不比以往的常規(guī)訂單更快——普通訂單的配送時間被故意延遲5至10分鐘,借由對比凸顯優(yōu)先訂單的時效優(yōu)勢。帖子還稱“司機(jī)福利費(fèi)”這一表述被刻意模糊處理,使得用戶誤以為這筆錢是直接補(bǔ)貼給司機(jī)的,實(shí)則最終流入了“公司小金庫”。
這則以“我喝醉了,也很憤怒”作為結(jié)尾的帖子,引起了DoorDash首席執(zhí)行官徐迅的注意。他在X平臺轉(zhuǎn)發(fā)該帖截圖,并配文“這簡直荒謬至極”。
徐迅回應(yīng)道:“這簡直荒謬至極!這絕不是DoorDash的行事風(fēng)格,任何助長或縱容Reddit帖子中所描述的文化的員工都將被我開除。”
據(jù)《福布斯》(Forbes)報道,徐迅的個人凈資產(chǎn)高達(dá)27億美元。他接著說道:“外賣員絕非‘人力資產(chǎn)’”,并表示“設(shè)置‘迫切度指數(shù)’這類指標(biāo)的做法,簡直是一種罪惡”。他強(qiáng)調(diào)DoorDash從未設(shè)置過所謂的“司機(jī)福利費(fèi)”。
他總結(jié)道:“我們并非完美無缺,但每天都致力于優(yōu)化平臺服務(wù)體驗(yàn)。帖子中描述的行為令人震驚,倘若情況屬實(shí),相關(guān)人員應(yīng)感到羞恥。”
《財(cái)富》雜志已經(jīng)聯(lián)系DoorDash尋求進(jìn)一步置評。
近年來,外賣行業(yè)發(fā)展迅猛,相關(guān)立法也在逐步跟進(jìn)。以加利福尼亞州為例,一項(xiàng)新規(guī)將于2026年正式實(shí)施:外賣平臺不得用小費(fèi)或服務(wù)費(fèi)抵扣配送員的基本工資。
這項(xiàng)名為AB-578的法律還要求,外賣平臺必須向配送員準(zhǔn)確、清晰地披露訂單收入構(gòu)成,包括基本工資、小費(fèi)、促銷獎金等各項(xiàng)收入明細(xì)。(財(cái)富中文網(wǎng))
譯者:中慧言-王芳
DoorDash的首席執(zhí)行官徐迅(Tony Xu)猛烈抨擊社交媒體上流傳的一則傳言——某外賣平臺會依據(jù)司機(jī)的“工作迫切度”進(jìn)行打分評級。他明確表示,任何認(rèn)同此類做法的員工,將被立即解雇。
DoorDash(總部位于美國舊金山)的聯(lián)合創(chuàng)始人及首席執(zhí)行官分享了一張四天前來自Reddit平臺的未經(jīng)證實(shí)帖子截圖,匿名用戶自稱某外賣公司的開發(fā)人員,爆料了公司多項(xiàng)內(nèi)部操作。
該帖的真實(shí)性存疑:在社交平臺引發(fā)熱議后,科技與民主網(wǎng)站Platformer已經(jīng)認(rèn)定其為虛假信息。但在此之前,該帖已經(jīng)引發(fā)外賣行業(yè)頭部企業(yè)首席執(zhí)行官的關(guān)注與譴責(zé)。
這位Reddit用戶聲稱,某家未具名外賣平臺每周都會召開會議,產(chǎn)品經(jīng)理們在會上討論如何從“人力資產(chǎn)”(即外賣司機(jī))身上榨取更多價值。帖子中寫道:“他們談?wù)撨@些司機(jī)時,就如同在談?wù)撾娮佑螒蛑械馁Y源節(jié)點(diǎn),而非努力支付房租的父母。”
該用戶自稱已經(jīng)于近期辭職,并通過公共圖書館的臨時筆記本電腦發(fā)帖。他還指控,平臺會依據(jù)司機(jī)的工作表現(xiàn)評定“迫切度指數(shù)”,這一隱性指標(biāo)會標(biāo)記那些毫不猶豫接受低價值“垃圾訂單”的司機(jī),進(jìn)而阻止他們查看高價訂單。
其他未經(jīng)證實(shí)的指控包括:優(yōu)先訂單的配送速度并不比以往的常規(guī)訂單更快——普通訂單的配送時間被故意延遲5至10分鐘,借由對比凸顯優(yōu)先訂單的時效優(yōu)勢。帖子還稱“司機(jī)福利費(fèi)”這一表述被刻意模糊處理,使得用戶誤以為這筆錢是直接補(bǔ)貼給司機(jī)的,實(shí)則最終流入了“公司小金庫”。
這則以“我喝醉了,也很憤怒”作為結(jié)尾的帖子,引起了DoorDash首席執(zhí)行官徐迅的注意。他在X平臺轉(zhuǎn)發(fā)該帖截圖,并配文“這簡直荒謬至極”。
徐迅回應(yīng)道:“這簡直荒謬至極!這絕不是DoorDash的行事風(fēng)格,任何助長或縱容Reddit帖子中所描述的文化的員工都將被我開除。”
據(jù)《福布斯》(Forbes)報道,徐迅的個人凈資產(chǎn)高達(dá)27億美元。他接著說道:“外賣員絕非‘人力資產(chǎn)’”,并表示“設(shè)置‘迫切度指數(shù)’這類指標(biāo)的做法,簡直是一種罪惡”。他強(qiáng)調(diào)DoorDash從未設(shè)置過所謂的“司機(jī)福利費(fèi)”。
他總結(jié)道:“我們并非完美無缺,但每天都致力于優(yōu)化平臺服務(wù)體驗(yàn)。帖子中描述的行為令人震驚,倘若情況屬實(shí),相關(guān)人員應(yīng)感到羞恥。”
《財(cái)富》雜志已經(jīng)聯(lián)系DoorDash尋求進(jìn)一步置評。
近年來,外賣行業(yè)發(fā)展迅猛,相關(guān)立法也在逐步跟進(jìn)。以加利福尼亞州為例,一項(xiàng)新規(guī)將于2026年正式實(shí)施:外賣平臺不得用小費(fèi)或服務(wù)費(fèi)抵扣配送員的基本工資。
這項(xiàng)名為AB-578的法律還要求,外賣平臺必須向配送員準(zhǔn)確、清晰地披露訂單收入構(gòu)成,包括基本工資、小費(fèi)、促銷獎金等各項(xiàng)收入明細(xì)。(財(cái)富中文網(wǎng))
譯者:中慧言-王芳
DoorDash’s CEO has slammed social media claims that a food delivery service is rating its drivers based on their “desperation” for work, saying he would fire any individual who thought that was acceptable.
The co-founder and CEO of San Francisco-based DoorDash shared a screenshot of an unverified Reddit post made four days ago, in which an anonymous user claiming to be a developer for a food delivery company makes allegations about internal practices.
The legitimacy of the post is up for debate: Having gone somewhat viral on the social media platform, it was then declared a hoax by tech and democracy site Platformer. But by then, it had already garnered the attention and denunciation of one of the CEOs leading the pack in the food delivery space.
The Reddit user claimed an unnamed delivery service holds weekly meetings in which product managers discuss how to squeeze more out of “human assets”—their delivery drivers. “They talk about these people like they are resource nodes in a video game, not fathers and mothers trying to pay rent,” the post claims.
The user, who said they had recently quit their role and made the post on a burner laptop from a public library, alleges drivers are given a “desperation score” depending on their behavior at work. The hidden metric supposedly flags drivers who accept low-value “garbage” orders without hesitation, and then prevents them from viewing higher-paying orders.
Other unverified claims include that priority orders are no faster than timings on what were previously standard orders—regular orders were simply slowed down by five to 10 minutes so that priority seemed quicker by contrast. The post also alleges that the wording for a driver “benefit fee” is kept deliberately vague, so that users believe they are helping drivers when in fact the money is funnelled into a “corporate slush fund.”
The post, which ends: “I’m drunk and I’m angry,” caught the attention of DoorDash’s Tony Xu. On X, Xu reposted a screenshot of the thread captioned “holy fucking shit.”
Xu replied: “Holy fucking shit is right! This is not DoorDash, and I would fire anyone who promoted or tolerated the kind of culture described in this Reddit post.”
Xu—worth $2.7 billion, according to Forbes—continued “dashers are not ‘human assets'” and “having a metric like a ‘Desperation Score’ is an abomination.” DoorDash has never had a driver benefit fee, he added.
He concluded: “We’re not perfect by *any* stretch of the imagination, but we work every day to make our platform better for everyone who comes to it. What’s described here is appalling, and if true, whoever is operating in this manner should be ashamed.”
Fortune contacted DoorDash for further comment.
Legislation is slowly catching up to the pace at which food delivery services have taken off in recent years. For example in California, in 2026 it will now be unlawful for a food delivery platform to use tips or gratuity to offset the base pay of the person delivering the food.
The law, AB-578, also requires a food delivery platform to disclose to delivery drivers an accurate, clearly identified, and itemized breakdown of the pay received for a delivery, including the base pay, gratuity or tips, and any promotional bonuses.