Sou Hu Cai Jing·2025-04-21 08:57Core Viewpoint - JD.com has publicly criticized a competitor for enforcing a "choose one" policy that restricts delivery riders from accepting orders from JD.com, resulting in a 16-25% decrease in rider income. The company expresses sympathy for the riders and condemns these practices as illegal and unethical [3][4]. Group 1: JD.com's Response and Measures - JD.com has launched emergency assistance measures to support delivery riders and ensure their income stability in light of the competitor's actions [3]. - The company has apologized to users for delays in delivery caused by the sudden enforcement of the "choose one" policy, promising to waive fees for orders that are over 20 minutes late [6]. - JD.com has established an emergency response team to address delivery speed issues within the week [6]. Group 2: Public Reaction and User Experience - The public response to JD.com's open letter has been mixed, with many praising the company's stance, while others have reported difficulties in getting their orders fulfilled, leading to frustration among users [6][11]. - Users have shared experiences of long wait times for deliveries, with some stating they had to resort to other platforms like Meituan for timely service [7][11]. Group 3: Competitor's Denial and Market Context - Meituan has publicly denied the allegations of enforcing a "choose one" policy, labeling the claims as rumors and asserting that they do not restrict riders from working on multiple platforms [13]. - The "choose one" practice is described as a potential abuse of market dominance, which could harm competition and consumer interests, as outlined by legal experts [15][16].