Taxi Driver Online

Uber Drivers Launch Legal Action Over ‘Robo-Firing’ By Algorithm

A UK-based union that represents gig economy workers has filed legal action against Uber over the use of an algorithm to dismiss drivers.

App Drivers & Couriers Union (ADCU) has filed the action against the “robo-firing” in the Netherlands, where Uber’s international headquarters are, in relation to four drivers – three in the UK and one in Portugal.

The drivers said that they were dismissed from driving for the ride-hailing giant after an algorithm detected "fraudulent activity" and were given no grounds to appeal before being dismissed.

After this piece was published, Uber stated that the drivers were removed "after manual reviews."

The union is arguing that the dismissals violate GDPR, specifically a provision to protect people from unfair automated decision making. It has launched a crowdfunding campaign for pay for costs and is supported by the International Alliance of App-based Transport and the Worker Info Exchange in the action.

The drivers are based in London, Birmingham and Lisbon. The four said that they were informed by Uber that they were being dismissed after certain activity was detected by the company’s system.

One driver was told the system detected "irregular trips associated with fraudulent activities" related to his work while another was informed of "the installation of and use of software which has the intention and effect of manipulating the Driver App". The drivers said they weren’t given an opportunity to appeal the decisions.

ADCU references Uber’s community guidelines on misuse which includes declining work offered or logging in and out of the app to hit times of surge pricing.

"As such, the ADCU believes that Uber seeks to undercut its obligation to driver’s [sic] worker rights by concealing performance related dismissals as ‘fraud’ related dismissals," it said in a statement. "In London, drivers who are dismissed by Uber are automatically reported to TfL who then may take licensing action against them."

This is not the first time that ADCU has challenged Uber’s use of data and algorithms. In July it acted on behalf of drivers seeking to lift the hood on Uber’s algorithms to disclose how it processes data in relation to decisions made about drivers.

"Uber has been allowed to violate employment law with impunity for years and now we are seeing a glimpse into an Orwellian world of work where workers have no rights and are managed by machine. If Uber are not checked, this practice will become the norm for everyone," Yaseen Aslam, president of the ADCU, said.

Since this piece was published, Uber responded to the case with the following statement:

"Uber provides requested personal data and information that individuals are entitled to. We will give explanations when we cannot provide certain data, such as when it doesn't exist or disclosing it would infringe on the rights of another person under GDPR. As part of our regular processes, the drivers in this case were only deactivated after manual reviews by our specialist team."

_________________
IDFIMH

considering the amount of stories we see on here of complaints for being taken the wrong journey or soiling charges etc there must be quite a few out there manipulating things. So it's no surprise Uber has such software BUT

NO APPEALS PROCEDURE

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector

Interesting terms being used in the article.
By definition, if you have been dismissed from your job, you must have been employed. Surely if you are self employed you can't be dismissed, the company would just tell you that you can no longer receive work from them.

_________________
Grandad,

I suspect they are getting their claim in in the hope of the Supreme Court giving them workers rights.

_________________
IDFIMH

The same applies if you are employed on a zero hours contract. No following the laid down legal procedure, you are just not offered any further work, no appeal, nothing.

This sort of mess needs sorting out and quickly.

Since we have started to employ our drivers they have the protection of a proper contract of employment, the 2 drivers that we still have who are still self employed have been offered the option to become employees but so far they don't want to. Sooner or later I can see the day when we advise them to either become employees or they will have to work for a different company and I think that that day may well be April 5th 2021.

_________________
Grandad,

British Uber drivers take company to court over secret algorithms

British drivers for ride-hailing company Uber are taking their employer to court in the Netherlands in order to access secret performance data the company collects on them.

According to the legal challenge the drivers say Uber determines how to allocate rides and fares based on information it generates about drivers' performance, behaviour and other personal traits it infers through the app they install on their phones.

They are demanding full access to this information and to details on how Uber's algorithms work, claiming that the it ultimately decides how much money they can earn.

"Uber should offer total transparency," lawyer Anton Ekker told Reuters at the District Court in Amsterdam, where Uber's international head office is located.

In response, Uber said it had shared all the information it was required to with its drivers, but that sharing any more could impact passengers' privacy.

"It's extremely dangerous for the privacy of passengers if we share all data about specific rides," said Uber's lawyer Axel Arnbak said.

"This is very sensitive information. For a driver, it simply says they went from A to B, but it tells much more about a passenger," Mr Arnbak added.

The company said that rides are primarily allocated based on driver locations, routes and fare preferences - and that drivers were excluded from giving rides to passengers who had previously given them the lowest possible rating.

However, it added that individual ratings, complaints and other feedback could not be shared with the drivers for privacy reasons.

The District Court in Amsterdam said it would make a decision on the claim by 11 Februrary 2021.

_________________
IDFIMH

Dutch court rulings break new ground on gig worker data rights

An Amsterdam court has ordered Ola to be more transparent about the data it uses as the basis for decisions on suspensions and wage penalties, in a ruling that breaks new ground on the rights of workers subject to algorithmic management.

James Farrar and Yaseen Aslam, who won a landmark victory against Uber in the UK’s Supreme Court last month, led the action by a group of UK drivers and a Portuguese driver, who brought three separate cases against Ola and Uber seeking fuller access to their personal data.

In the case against Ola Cabs, the Amsterdam District Court found that the car-booking app had used an entirely automated system to make deductions from one driver’s earnings — a finding that attracts greater legal protection.

Anton Ekker, the lawyer representing the drivers, said that to his knowledge, it was the first time a court had found that workers were subject to automated decision-making as defined in Article 22 of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation — thus giving them the right to demand human intervention, express their point of view and appeal against the decision.

The court said Ola should give drivers access to anonymised ratings on their performance, to personal data used to create their “fraud probability score” and to data used to create an earnings profile that influences work allocation.

Ola did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In a separate ruling, the court said Uber should give two drivers accused of fraudulent activity access to the data it had used as a basis for blocking them from the app. It also said Uber should give drivers access to anonymised individual ratings on their performance, rather than providing a rolling average of the rating on many trips.

But the court rejected drivers’ claims that Uber had suspended their accounts without meaningful human oversight. It did not award any compensation nor require Uber to give fuller information on how prices were calculated or notes added to drivers’ profiles, saying the claimants had failed to specify what data were missing.

Uber said: “This is a crucial decision. The court has confirmed Uber’s dispatch system does not equate to automated decision-making, and that we provided drivers with the data they are entitled to. The court also confirmed that Uber’s processes have meaningful human involvement.”

Farrar, a former Uber driver who has since set up the drivers’ union Worker Info Exchange, said: “This is a hugely important first step . . . We’re going to have to do an awful lot more.”

Winning access to data was crucial, he said, because as platforms’ contractual arrangements with workers came under greater scrutiny, they were shifting towards more opaque automated management systems. Greater transparency would not only help drivers contest unfair decisions against them but would also help to ascertain their average hourly earnings after costs.

_________________
IDFIMH

and Uber will fight him all the way like a pit bull on steroids

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector

I actually think these lads love fighting Uber.

_________________
IDFIMH