The court found that Uber had not provided any information about the automated flags that triggered account reviews for two of the drivers. However, for a third driver, the court ruled that Uber had provided sufficient information about why its algorithm flagged the account for potential fraud. The long-running litigation in the Netherlands is working towards establishing how much information platforms using algorithmic management must provide to workers under EU data protection rules.
Key takeaways:
- Uber has been found to be in violation of European Union algorithmic transparency requirements, following a legal challenge by two drivers whose accounts were terminated by the company.
- The Amsterdam District Court ruled in favor of the drivers, stating that Uber failed to provide information about the automated decisions taken about them, which is a requirement under the EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
- Uber argued that disclosing more data about its AI systems would compromise its anti-fraud systems, but the court found that the company had not provided any information about the automated flags that triggered account reviews.
- The ongoing litigation in the Netherlands is working towards establishing how much information platforms using algorithmic management must provide to workers under EU data protection rules.