Controversies
Controversies tied to this brand in public sources. A listing is not a finding of fault.
Back to profile2 entries
2022
JD Logistics affiliate and JD Express Beijing headquarters fined over epidemic control and sorting violations
In July 2022, Tianyancha information showed that Tianjin Jingbangda Supply Chain Technology Co., Ltd., wholly owned by a JD Logistics affiliate, and its Wuqing No. 2 branch were fined RMB29,000 and RMB10,000 respectively and ordered to rectify because employees failed to wear masks as required and were suspected of failing to sort according to rules. Previously, when the Beijing Postal Administration inspected the JD Jinchun Shidai outlet in Mentougou District, it found that couriers were not wearing N95 masks and that once-daily nucleic acid testing was not implemented, and imposed an administrative penalty on JD Express’s Beijing headquarters. Impact and handling: consecutive penalties in multiple places within a short period raised outside questions about its outlet compliance management. Progress: administrative penalty. Entities involved: Tianjin Jingbangda Supply Chain Technology Co., Ltd. and JD Express Beijing headquarters. Scope: JD Logistics affiliated outlets (Tianjin and Beijing); does not represent the entire network.
2021
JD home appliance delivery worker, unpaid and deducted wages, recovers pay after three-year lawsuit
According to Workers’ Daily, Wang Dong (pseudonym), a Beijing courier who delivered large home appliances for JD, had worked since 2015 for more than 10 hours a day without a labor contract or social insurance, and had wages deducted and penalized due to user complaints; after some complaints were withdrawn, the deductions were still not refunded. After leaving in 2017, he defended his rights; in August 2020, the Fengtai Court at first instance found that he had a labor relationship with the labor service company Jinlongxiang and ordered payment of RMB8,800 in unpaid wages and RMB2,500 in deducted wages; the second instance ended in mediation, and he received RMB11,300 in January 2021. Impact and handling: the case reflects deduction and social insurance problems in JD delivery outsourcing employment; the responsible entity was the outsourcing company. Progress: court judgment. Entity involved: Jinlongxiang (the outsourcing employer for JD home appliance delivery). Scope: JD large-item delivery outsourcing employment; the directly responsible entity is the outsourced labor company.