The Dutch Data Protection Authority has fined Uber €825 million, or around $966 million, over the way the company handled driver account suspensions and deactivations.
The penalty is the second-largest fine issued so far under Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation, according to Reuters.
The Dutch regulator investigated complaints that Uber used automated systems to deactivate driver accounts without giving drivers enough warning or providing sufficient human oversight. Deputy chair Monique Verdier said Uber had committed serious infringements and argued that decisions with major consequences for drivers should not be made solely by computers.
Uber strongly disagrees with the decision. The company said most driver suspensions are temporary and argued that permanent deactivations are subject to human review. Uber also said drivers can appeal account decisions. Dutch regulators, however, said some drivers were permanently deactivated without human review, a claim Uber disputes. The company plans to appeal the fine.
The case began with Brahim Ben Ali, a former Uber driver in France whose account was deactivated in 2019. Ben Ali later collected testimonies from around 170 other Uber drivers and brought the complaint to the Netherlands, where Uber has its European headquarters.
Ben Ali received support from PersonalData.io, a Swiss nonprofit focused on digital rights. The organization helped drivers gather information about how Uber’s deactivation decisions were made. Its founder, Paul-Olivier Dehaye, said that a driver could complete thousands of successful trips, yet a single serious complaint could still lead to major consequences.
Dehaye said the €825 million penalty is the third fine the Dutch regulator has issued against Uber. The company previously received a €290 million fine over its handling of drivers’ personal data and a separate €10 million fine related to privacy regulations.
According to Dehaye, all three cases originated from complaints submitted by the same group of drivers. He is also launching a company called StartClaims to support legal action and regulatory cases, initially targeting Uber before potentially expanding into other gig economy and advertising technology cases.
The ruling has also sparked debate over how companies should use automated systems to monitor workers. Some critics have questioned whether the decision could make it harder for Uber to automatically detect drivers who scam customers or repeatedly fail to pick up passengers.
If this article helped you, please consider supporting our work. Every small contribution keeps Abijita.com independent and running.
Dehaye rejected that interpretation, arguing that Uber can still use human decision-makers to punish drivers for misconduct. However, he said the company would then need to take responsibility for those decisions rather than relying on its position as a marketplace.
