A group of Uber drivers has initiated a significant legal challenge against the company, alleging that they operate under a persistent anxiety due to an impersonal algorithm that determines their compensation and job assignments.
Drivers from the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and other nations are involved in a compensation lawsuit that could potentially amount to billions of dollars. The suit claims that an AI-driven wage-setting system violates data protection regulations and adversely affects their earnings.
The lawsuit has been submitted to a district court in Amsterdam, which serves as the European headquarters for the San Francisco-based technology firm valued at $150 billion (£111 billion). According to the European Trade Union Confederation, this marks the first collective legal action of its kind.
The core of the case revolves around a “black box” algorithm that utilizes data about drivers to establish individualized pricing for each ride. Drivers express concern that this system lowers fare offers to the minimum amount they might accept.
In conversations with the Guardian, drivers shared experiences where the algorithm offered the same job to multiple individuals at varying pay rates. One driver noted that after completing a long trip, the algorithm would propose less for the return journey, assuming they would not want to return empty-handed.
Mohammed Shirwa, a 41-year-old Uber driver based in Rotterdam, remarked, “It’s as if there is someone constantly observing you and understanding your weaknesses—the algorithm has become the boss. It continuously learns about your thresholds for accepting offers, leading to lower fares and leaving you trapped, aware that you need the work.”
Kola Oba, who described the algorithm as “soulless,” experienced a similar situation while resting in Tottenham, north London, where he and another driver were presented with the same job offer. The other driver received £27, while Oba was offered £23. They suspected this was due to Oba’s history of accepting lower-paying jobs, which the AI interpreted as a willingness to accept less. Uber previously attributed such disparities to various system features, including GPS data, surge pricing, and promotional offers.
“It’s unsettling—the company has access to all my information and is using it against my interests,” Oba stated. “It dictates my earnings, my working hours, my time with family, and my rest periods.”
Artificial intelligence increasingly influences job assignments by leveraging its growing capability to analyze business needs and employee behaviors, effectively acting as a “synthetic manager.”
Recently, the Dutch data protection authority imposed a fine of €825 million (£708 million) on Uber for terminating driver accounts through automated processes without sufficient notice. Uber has announced plans to appeal this decision. Additionally, the company intends to introduce autonomous vehicles in various European cities, starting in London and Zagreb, with human oversight.
The lawsuit is being spearheaded by the Worker Info Exchange, a campaign organization founded by James Farrar, who previously obtained a UK Supreme Court ruling affirming that Uber drivers should receive worker rights.
This legal action affects approximately 241,000 drivers throughout the EU and the UK, alleging that Uber has unlawfully employed automated decision-making, including profiling, to dynamically set pay and distribute work assignments.
The lawsuit seeks compensation for impacted drivers as well as an injunction to cease practices that are believed to violate GDPR regulations.
According to the drivers, Uber has been implementing dynamic pay-setting in the UK since 2023, which they claim has reduced their annual earnings by around £5,000. This system was introduced in the Netherlands earlier this year.
In 2023, Uber’s CEO, Dara Khosrowshahi, commented, “We can improve the way we assign trips to drivers based on their preferences or the behavioral patterns we observe.”
Uber has denied adjusting trip prices based on individual driver behavior, asserting that a driver’s history of accepting or rejecting trips does not influence personalized pay offers. The company contends that dynamic pricing enables them to increase earnings on less desirable trips, thereby enhancing a driver’s earning potential.
An Uber spokesperson stated, “While we have not yet reviewed the claim, we categorically deny the allegations. The Uber app calculates fares using real-time data about the trip, including distance, duration, and destination. Drivers are aware of their earnings and trip details before accepting any offer. The majority of total fares are directed to drivers, and the share retained by Uber has remained largely unchanged.”
A study conducted by academics at the University of Oxford in 2025, which Uber criticized for relying on incomplete and selective data, indicated significant reductions in driver earnings following the implementation of the “dynamic” algorithm.
Farrar expressed, “It’s troubling that Uber’s dynamic pay algorithms have reduced driver earnings for years, but the invasive and underhanded manner in which the company employs technology to monitor and influence driver behavior is an affront to their dignity as workers and as individuals.”
Anton Ekker, the Dutch attorney leading the case, stated, “A computer algorithm should not be the sole decision-maker in matters that affect individuals’ livelihoods. Like many online platforms, it must be held accountable for the widespread exploitation of European citizens’ vulnerabilities.”
