Uber Faces €825M Fine Over Automated Driver Suspensions

The Dutch Data Protection Authority has fined Uber €825 million (roughly $966 million). According to Reuters, it is the second-largest fine ever issued under Europe's GDPR regulation.

The regulator investigated complaints that Uber was deactivating driver accounts automatically — without adequate warning and without human involvement. In the words of the authority's deputy chair, Monique Verdier, the company committed “serious violations.” “A computer should not be making decisions with such serious consequences on its own,” she said.

Uber disagrees with the findings. The company maintains that most suspensions are short-term, that permanent deactivation of an account never happens without human review, and that drivers have the right to appeal. Dutch regulators, however, insist that some drivers were permanently deactivated without any human involvement — a claim Uber disputes as it plans to appeal the decision, calling the fine “disproportionate.”

Who's Behind the Complaint

The case traces back to the story of Brahim Ben Ali, a former Uber driver in France. After his account was deactivated in 2019, he gathered statements from another 170 drivers and brought the complaint to the Netherlands, where the company's European headquarters is located. Help came from PersonalData.io, a Swiss nonprofit specializing in digital rights. Its founder, Paul-Olivier Dehaye, noted that a driver “can complete a thousand trips with satisfied passengers, but a single complaint about a serious problem is enough — and the consequences can be enormous.”

According to Dehaye, this is already the third fine the Dutch regulator has imposed on Uber: the company was previously fined €290 million over its handling of drivers' personal data and another €10 million on related matters. All of these cases grew out of complaints from the same group of drivers. Dehaye is now launching a company called StartClaims to support class-action suits, and he intends to pursue compensation — first from Uber, and later in other gig-economy and ad-tech cases.

A Dispute Over Substance

The decision has sparked debate about the limits of automation. John Gruber, author of the blog Daring Fireball, questioned the regulator's wording: in his view, saying that a “computer” made the decision is like claiming that a late employee was fired by “the clock on the wall.” Policy is set by managers, and the devices merely record that the rules are being enforced. Gruber also worries that the fine effectively outlaws tracking drivers who cheat passengers or abandon them without a trip.

Dehaye counters that the critic is missing the main point: Uber is free to punish dishonest drivers through human hands, but then the company will have to take responsibility for those decisions — that is, behave like an employer rather than a neutral platform.

Source: TechCrunch