Platform workers across the UK and Europe are preparing to mount a legal challenge against Uber’s algorithmic pay model. Stichting Worker Info Exchange (WIE) International, acting on behalf of drivers in the UK, the Netherlands, and other European countries, has issued a Letter Before Action demanding that Uber stop using its AI-driven “Up Front Pricing” system, failing which, they will file a class-action lawsuit in the Amsterdam District Court.
According to the organisation, the algorithm dynamically sets driver pay in real time, replaces fixed-rate remuneration, and has steadily reduced driver earnings since its introduction in the UK in 2020.
James Farrar, Chair of WIE International’s Management Board, said Uber “has leveraged artificial intelligence and machine learning to implement deeply intrusive and exploitative pay-setting systems that have damaged the livelihoods of thousands of drivers.” He further argued that the action “is not about financial fairness but about securing transparent, fair, and safe working conditions for all platform workers.”
The claim also argues that Uber violated the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) by relying on automated decision-making and profiling to determine pay without obtaining informed consent. Additionally, it alleges that Uber transferred European driver data to the United States without adequate safeguards. The case, therefore, seeks to determine whether platform companies can continue using opaque machine-learning systems to set pay while sidestepping core data-protection rights.
Research Behind The Proposed Lawsuit
The lawsuit draws on a large-scale audit of Uber’s pay and allocation systems using data obtained directly from Uber through Data Subject Access Requests (DSARs) conducted by WIE and Oxford University, the legal mechanism under Article 15 of the GDPR that allows individuals to request all personal data an organisation holds about them. Drivers used DSARs to retrieve detailed trip-level records from Uber’s backend.
In total, 258 drivers contributed more than 1.5 million trips covering 2016–2024, enabling a longitudinal analysis of how dynamic pricing changed pay, commissions, predictability, and working patterns.
The findings show a clear downturn in real hourly earnings after dynamic pricing took effect. Average gross hourly pay dropped from £22.20 to £19.06 (inflation-adjusted) when calculated using the Employment Tribunal’s definition of working time, which includes all hours logged into the app and available for work.
Drivers also spend over one extra hour per week on unpaid standby compared with 2022, reflecting more time waiting without pay.
Furthermore, Uber’s commission increased. Although Uber previously advertised a flat 25% marketplace fee, the audit finds a median take rate of 29%, with Uber retaining 50% or more on some trips after dynamic pricing.
Because the passenger fare is hidden from drivers, they cannot calculate Uber’s cut on individual trips, worsening transparency. Inequality between drivers also widened: while a small minority of newer drivers experienced modest gains, most long-standing or consistently active drivers saw sharp declines in hourly pay.
Predictability deteriorated as well. Historical patterns no longer help drivers estimate expected earnings, making trip values increasingly uncertain. Overall, the dataset reveals a system that lowers earnings, expands unpaid labour, and shifts economic risk onto workers.
How Pricing Works In India
The Centre’s Motor Vehicle Aggregator Guidelines, 2020, tried to put guardrails in place, capping commissions at 20% of the fare and limiting surge pricing to 1.5× the base fare, with drivers entitled to 80% of earnings. However, complaints about unexplained fare spikes, high cancellation fees, and end-of-ride price revisions have persisted, prompting a warning from the Ministry of Consumer Affairs (MCA) in 2022.
Advertisements
More recently, pricing debates have shifted from simple surge to algorithmic discrimination and interface tricks. The Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) has issued notices to Ola and Uber over allegations that iPhone users pay more than Android users for the same rides. Both companies have denied any differential pricing, but the investigation remains open.
Separately, a LocalCircles survey reported widespread complaints of hidden charges, bait-and-switch pricing, and aggressive advance-tipping prompts across major apps.
The Motor Vehicle Aggregator Guidelines, 2025, now formally allow platforms to charge up to 2× the base fare during peak hours, while still promising the same driver revenue shares.
Why This Matters
The proposed lawsuit strikes at the heart of how platform companies use artificial intelligence to manage labour. Uber’s “Up Front Pricing” system does more than calculate fares: according to researchers and Worker Info Exchange, it sets driver pay, determines commissions, and shapes working conditions through opaque, model-driven decisions.
As a result, the case will test whether algorithmic pay-setting can operate within Europe’s data-protection framework, which requires transparency, consent, and safeguards against unchecked automated decision-making.
The outcome also carries broader implications. Other platforms increasingly rely on similar systems, and regulators in India and elsewhere are already questioning discriminatory pricing and hidden charges.
A ruling against Uber could force firms to rewrite their pricing architecture, disclose how their models work, and rebuild driver-side protections. Conversely, a ruling in Uber’s favour may entrench algorithmic control as the industry standard, reshaping platform work for millions.
Also Read
Support our journalism:
For You
Source link
