As some have said, there's no employment contract between Grab and the riders so it is within Grab's rights to cut in half if they want. It is also the riders' right to stop taking the job from Grab (for some reason called strike in the media for this case). If Grab thinks what they're doing is right and will benefit their company, then they should stick to their gun. Let's see if there are 'many thousands' that will take over the former riders place. I personally foresee though that Grab will either return back to RM10 or change it again to placate the riders.

Maybe both lose also can happen.

Eh? Customer is not employer.

Well, as said, we will see what is Grab decision on this. Whether I paid or willing to pay RM10 or not is beside the point.

That was my point and I was replying to someone who thinks otherwise and thinks customer = employer. What's the point of your reply?

And yet you gave as example you paying coffeeshop as a customer. Does not make sense at all.

If you want to give a better example, how about this:

You own a house and ask a Bangla to cut your garden grass and offer RM50. The Bangla agrees. No contract but are you defined as an employer? By definition yes. One month later, you ask the same Bangla to cut your grass again but offer RM25. The Bangla refused. In this case, even though you had 'employed' the Bangla before, because there was no employment contract, there is nothing more both of you can do.

Take note that the point of my first reply to you is to state that customer is not employer and it is a bad example. Nothing else.

No, the point I made was that Grab has the rights to cut the payment from RM10 to RM5 and the rider has the right to not take the job. If Grab thinks its decision is good, it will stick with it and if not it will return the payment back to RM10 or change it again. That was my point. You saying whether I am willing to pay RM 10 or not is beside the point and makes no impact to what I have stated above.