Uber’s €825m ‘robo-firing’ fine signals next gig economy battle, DRA warns

Drivers Representation & Advocacy (DRA) has warned that a €825 million fine imposed on Uber in the Netherlands should serve as a warning to gig economy platforms using algorithms to make decisions affecting workers’ livelihoods.

The Dutch Data Protection Authority found infringements relating to Uber’s use of automated systems to suspend and deactivate drivers. Uber disputes the regulator’s findings and has said it intends to appeal.

DRA said the case raises a fundamental question about where responsibility sits when software decides whether a driver can continue working. The organisation argued that platforms cannot exercise control through automated systems and then distance themselves from decisions when drivers suffer financial consequences.

For private hire drivers, losing access to an app can mean an immediate loss of income if they are out attached to any other operators. DRA said drivers may spend years completing thousands of journeys and maintaining strong ratings before being locked out following an automated assessment or passenger complaint.

Yaseen Aslam, founder of Drivers Representation & Advocacy and lead claimant in the Uber BV v Aslam Supreme Court case, said: “This is much bigger than an €825 million fine. This is about who is actually in control of people’s working lives.

“For years, drivers have been told that they are independent, that they are simply using an app and that the platform is only a marketplace. Yet that same platform can monitor you, decide what work you are offered, determine what you are paid, control your access to customers and potentially decide whether you can work at all.

“You cannot exercise that level of control and then blame the algorithm when something goes wrong. An algorithm does not write itself. People design it, companies choose how to use it and companies must take responsibility for the consequences.

“I’ve been organising drivers since 2014 and I’ve watched this industry become increasingly dependent on technology that drivers cannot see into and cannot challenge. The technology may have changed, but the power imbalance has not.”

Get FREE WhatsApp news updates here

DRA said its concerns extend beyond account suspensions and what campaigners have described as “robo-firing”. Algorithms can also influence which journeys drivers receive, the fares shown to passengers, the amount paid to drivers and where workers are directed.

The organisation linked those concerns to Uber’s shift from traditional fare structures towards Dynamic or Upfront pricing. It said many drivers report that their earnings have become less predictable, while the information used to calculate fares and distribute journey offers remains difficult for workers to scrutinise.

DRA is preparing a proposed collective legal challenge involving UK drivers over algorithmic management, access to driver data and Uber’s approach to pay. It is developing its legal strategy with PersonalData.io and the French organisation Force Ouvrière INV.

According to DRA, complaints made by French drivers played an important role in bringing Uber’s automated decision-making practices to the attention of the Dutch regulator. The group has also been working with PersonalData.io founder and data scientist Paul-Olivier Dehaye, alongside driver organisations and campaigners in France.

Aslam said: “Driver data has become one of the most valuable assets in the gig economy, but the driver is often the last person to know what is being done with it.

“Companies can use data to build increasingly sophisticated systems that manage drivers, predict their behaviour and influence what they earn. The driver is expected to accept the decision without being allowed to see how it was reached.

“That cannot be the future of work. If you are going to make decisions about someone’s livelihood using their data, that person has a right to understand what is happening and a genuine opportunity to challenge it.”

DRA said any driver information collected for its proposed action would be obtained with explicit consent and used only for the stated legal purpose. The group argued that a campaign seeking greater transparency from platforms must also explain why data is needed and who will be able to access it.

Aslam said: “We don’t want drivers to move from one system where their data is being exploited into another system where they don’t know what is happening to it.

“If we ask a driver for their data, they should know why we need it, what we intend to do with it and who will have access to it. That’s basic transparency.

“Our fight is not simply against one company. It is about the future of work. We have to make sure technology works for people rather than people becoming raw material for technology.”

DRA is inviting UK drivers affected by suspensions, deactivations, Dynamic Pricing, changes to pay or concerns about the use of personal data to register an interest in the proposed action. The organisation said further information would be provided as its legal strategy develops.

Uber’s planned appeal means the Dutch findings remain contested. However, the scale of the penalty and the issues raised look likely to intensify scrutiny of how ride-hailing platforms use automated systems to manage workers across different jurisdictions.