YTO express franchisees said that they got a response from the general manager "Hidden Rules" company: relevant reports are still being verified.

Cheng Tao logistics company office area

Red Star Journalist | Liu Fa from Foshan, Guangdong

Editor | Guan Li Editor | Pan Li

In a tip-off letter sent to the Integrity Discipline Inspection Center of the courier company, Yan Die, the contractor of Shunde Express in Foshan, Guangdong Province, said that she was harassed by Huang, the general manager of Jiangmen, Foshan. The email and other judicial materials described that Huang had sent her hotel address to Yan Die on WeChat, hoping to meet alone, but Yan Die refused. Shortly thereafter, Huang unilaterally lowered the unit price of the delivery fee for town outlets from about 65,438+0.55 yuan/piece to about 65,438+0.65,438+02 yuan/piece. Yan Die said that the relevant adjustment caused her to make ends meet and was finally forced to leave the express delivery industry for 13 years. Huang said that these adjustments are not within his authority, but are determined by the policies of the headquarters. In September last year, Foshan Cheng Tao Logistics Co., Ltd., with Yan Die as the legal representative, took YTO Express to court on the grounds that it took advantage of the franchisor to unilaterally reduce the delivery fee for delivering documents to Hong Kong, which led to the plaintiff's "doubling" of operating costs. The first-instance judgment has been made in this case a few days ago, and the court did not support the plaintiff's above-mentioned claim. Regarding Yan Die's report on Huang, the person in charge of the area, the Express replied to Red Star News that the Integrity Discipline Inspection Center has been investigating for several months and is still verifying it.

↑ Yan Die sent a report letter to the public mailbox of Yu Huijiao, chairman of YTO Express.

Tong Yuan franchisee report:

"Hidden Rules" of District General Manager

Yan Die started to contact the express delivery industry at the age of 17 and worked in this field for 13 years. She and her husband started as customer service and salesmen in Tong Yuan, and later contracted express delivery outlets all over the country. After accumulating funds, they undertook YTO express business in Liule Town, Foshan, Guangdong. A few years later, they found that they were heavily in debt and "heartbroken".

Yan Die is from Tonglu County, Zhejiang Province. Tonglu belongs to Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province. In the last 20 years, she has stood out from the four founders of "Three Links and One Reach".

In a tip-off letter sent to the Express Integrity Discipline Inspection Center, Yan Die claimed that she was harassed by Huang, general manager of Jiangmen Branch of Express. E-mail and other materials show that Huang invited Yan Die to drink at Dalian Panda Bar in Shunde, Foshan on the evening of February 22, 2020, during which she "had to bear it". On June 5438+February 3, 20201,Huang sent her the address of Paalmann Hotel, No.2 Beizhen Road, Foshan, which she dared not ignore.

In some judicial materials, Yan Die said that because she refused some of Huang's demands, Huang "turned the power given by the headquarters into oppression of branches". Yan Die said that the regional policy formulated by Huang was "seriously mismatched" with the actual situation of the town she contracted, resulting in serious losses in logistics. She explained that YTO Express adopts a "one family, one policy" cooperation model for franchisees, and any policy adjustment is initiated by regional leaders and approved by the headquarters.

The headquarters of YTO Express is in Shanghai. Due to the epidemic situation, it was not until July last year that YTO Express Integrity Discipline Inspection Center sent people to Foshan, Guangdong Province to conduct on-the-spot verification of Yan Die's tip-off.

Huang replied to Red Star News 65438 on June 4th. He was investigated and talked by YTO High-speed Integrity Discipline Inspection Center for a long time, but his position has not changed at present. "She said I applied' hidden rules' to her, but there was no evidence. This is pure slander. She wants to ruin my personal reputation, and I will find time to sue her. " Huang explained that he was only the head of the area and had no right to adjust the policy, so "she finally sued the express headquarters."

Zeng Hai, director of the Discipline Inspection Department of YTO Express Integrity Discipline Inspection Center, is one of the inspectors. He replied to Red Star News that the Integrity Inspection Center attached great importance to Yan Die's report, but the relevant evidence was weak, which led to the slow progress of the investigation. "After all, the location of the hotel cannot directly explain any problems, so we are still verifying it at present."

Last month, Zeng Hai replied to Yan Die on WeChat that "there are still several people to deal with in a unified way". Zeng Hai said that YTO Express Integrity Discipline Inspection Center put forward a code of conduct for all employees and formulated corresponding reward and punishment regulations. "If it is verified, it will be dealt with seriously."

Franchisees sued Tong Yuan:

"Unilateral operation" leads to "multiple increase" in cost.

Yan Die, introduced by relatives, went to Liule Town, Shunde, Foshan on June 20 18, and spent120,000 yuan to purchase the operation right of the branch in YTO Express. 2065438+March 2009, Yandie signed a one-year contract with the head office in YTO Express, and then the two parties re-signed a three-year franchise contract, from March 9, 2020 to March 8, 2023, with the customer code of 757083.

↑ "Franchise Authorization Letter"

Cheng Tao Logistics, the legal representative of Yan Die, finally took YTO Express to court in September last year. According to Cheng Tao Logistics, since the Franchise Contract was signed with the defendant on June 20 18, the defendant has used the advantages of the franchisor to settle business expenses with the plaintiff by unilaterally increasing or changing the delivery fee for entering Hong Kong, the differential delivery fee and the unit price in peak season, which has doubled the plaintiff's operating costs and caused economic losses.

Cheng Tao Logistics requested the court to cancel the franchise contract signed by the original and the defendant, and ordered the defendant to pay and return the delivery fee for entering the factory, delivery fee for leaving the warehouse and peak season surcharge to the plaintiff, totaling about11542511yuan.

According to the "Import Data" of Cheng Tao Logistics, in April 2020, the single ticket price of YTO Express "Notes Payable and Average Delivery Fee" suddenly dropped from about 1.55 yuan/ticket to about 1. 12 yuan/ticket. This data comes from YTO express delivery system, which is the calculation standard of entry delivery fee and has been notarized. According to industry insiders, the inbound delivery fee is the fee for franchisees of YTO Express to transfer consignments to other franchisees, which will send them to the recipients and be collected by YTO Express Headquarters.

↑ Termination of Contract Express of Qiantao Logistics

Yan Die said that in order to retain employees, the delivery price paid by Cheng Tao Logistics to couriers is still the previous 1.20 yuan/ticket. From April, 2020 to July, 20021year, 16 months, Cheng Tao Logistics lost 2.9 million yuan only by delivering one item of expenses. Cheng Tao Logistics has branches in Liu Le, Shangjiang, Xincheng and Fuan. The cost of customer service, finance, drivers and rent is about 400,000 yuan per month, and its 60 couriers send and receive goods with an average of 6,543.8+0,000 tickets per day during the peak period.

"Liu Le Town is a famous small household appliance town. The delivered goods are often overweight, and the company is often fined. I have to borrow money to maintain operations. " She said that her current debt is about 8 million. Cheng Tao Logistics was criticized by YTO Express for its unpaid courier wages, which led to a large backlog of courier pieces, and both parties finally terminated the contract ahead of schedule.

Red Star News understands that Yandie is now protesting with many other franchisees who claim "serious losses" at YTO Express's Shanghai headquarters. Most of the reasons for the losses mentioned by franchisees are caused by the policy changes of YTO Express Headquarters. YTO Express believes that these franchisees have their own reasons for "poor management".

According to industry insiders, YTO Express has experienced a barbaric growth period due to the online shopping bonus, but the service standards are neither uniform nor standardized, and the policies are constantly changing, which makes it difficult for franchisees to adapt. In recent years, due to intensified market competition, some courier companies have been fined more and more, and some franchisees have been eliminated.

Court's first-instance judgment

The plaintiff's claim to return all the settlement fees is not supported.

Last month, the Putuo District People's Court of Shanghai made a first-instance judgment on this case. The judgment shows that the defendant YTO Express argued that the defendant informed the plaintiff to terminate the contract on August 4, 20021year, and the plaintiff did not raise any objection; The plaintiff has been operating normally since 20 18 and 10, and there is no dispute about a certain fee or fee standard. Therefore, there is no legal or contractual basis for the plaintiff to demand the return of relevant expenses.

↑ Yan Die v. Show the judgment of first instance.

According to item 1 1 of Article 9 of the Franchise Contract signed by both parties, the franchisee shall carry out express delivery business in strict accordance with national standards such as the Postal Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) and the existing and future updated Tong Yuan network management system of the franchisee, and the franchisee has the right to update the content of Tong Yuan network management system when it deems it necessary. On this basis, YTO Express believes that the plaintiff has the obligation to abide by and implement the updated Tong Yuan network management system, charging standards and other rules, so it disagrees with the plaintiff's claim to return all settlement fees.

The court said that the case involved the franchise of the express delivery industry, and the rights and obligations of both parties should be determined by the specific interpretation of the contract terms in addition to the existing laws, regulations and contractual agreements, combined with industry practices, performance forms and habits. The operation system of express delivery industry is huge, there are many franchisees, and the transaction content is highly repetitive and timely. The interaction between outlets is an important part of the whole operation system, which requires both franchisees and franchisees to perform in a time-saving, convenient and unified way. Therefore, in the express delivery industry, in addition to the contract, it is very common for franchisees to make and distribute various system specifications and rules manuals and constantly update their versions, or make announcements and notices on the unified platform as an important supplement to the contract, so as to continuously improve the unified operation.

The court held that the plaintiff did not fully prove that the defendant overcharged the above-mentioned money, nor did it prove that the terms and charging standards proposed by the defendant were unreasonable and unfair. The defendant's defense that the rules and regulations and charging standards were updated in time according to market changes, policy adjustments and other factors was reasonable, so the plaintiff's claim for the return of various settlement fees was not supported.

Hu Xiaole, the litigation agent of Cheng Tao Logistics, believes that in this case, YTO Express did not issue any oral or written notice before unilaterally reducing the calculation standard of the inbound delivery fee, but only targeted at Cheng Tao Logistics. This is not an industry practice, nor is it the time-saving, convenient and unified performance requirement of YTO Express for all franchisees. On the contrary, it is the behavior of individual executives of YTO Express to change the logistics contract in Tao Chang without authorization.

In the civil appeal filed, Logistics accepted and respected the harassment of Huang, the general manager of Jiangmen Branch of Express, and believed that Express reduced the unit price of the appellant's entry delivery fee from 1.55 yuan/ticket to 1. 12 yuan. It is not the adjustment of the national or South China regional business billing system, so it is suggested that the court change the judgment to YTO Express to pay Cheng Tao Logistics 210.5 million yuan of inbound delivery fee.