A quarter-million Uber drivers just told the algorithm it works for them, not the other way around. Worker Info Exchange International (WIE) filed a collective legal action at the Amsterdam District Court on September 2, representing roughly 240,000 drivers across the UK, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Poland, and Romania.
The core claim: Uber’s AI-powered “Upfront Pricing” system violates the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation by using automated decision-making and profiling without drivers’ consent. The drivers say the algorithm uses their personal data to train pricing models that systematically push down what they earn, all while keeping the math completely opaque.
What the algorithm actually does
Uber shifted from a fixed pricing model to dynamic pay systems starting around 2020. Before the switch, drivers typically paid a flat commission rate of approximately 25%. Under the new system, that commission has reportedly ballooned past 50% on some trips.
Uber’s algorithm evaluates a driver’s acceptance and rejection history, behavioral profile, and other personal data points to generate individualized trip offers. Two drivers picking up similar rides from the same location might see meaningfully different payouts. The system essentially prices each driver based on what it predicts they’ll accept.
UK drivers have reportedly lost an estimated average of £5,337 per year since the pricing changes took effect. Cumulative losses could reach as high as £26,239 per driver from August 2021 through June 2026, according to figures cited in the legal filings.
A transatlantic legal offensive
The Amsterdam case isn’t happening in isolation. On July 9, a separate class action, Carranza v. Uber Technologies, was filed in California raising similar complaints. That US lawsuit zeroes in on how the algorithm leverages drivers’ behavioral data to generate lower pay offers, essentially accusing Uber of using surveillance as a wage suppression tool.
The European filing leans heavily on GDPR, which gives individuals significant rights over how their data is used in automated decision-making. One of the key allegations is that Uber unlawfully transferred driver data to the United States. GDPR violations can result in fines of up to 4% of a company’s global annual revenue.
A June 2025 survey conducted by the University of Oxford in conjunction with WIE found that a majority of drivers perceive their pay structures as manipulated and unpredictable.
WIE has framed the issue in blunt terms. Drivers describe living in “constant fear” of a “soulless” algorithm that controls their economic lives. The underlying complaint is substantive: workers subject to automated management systems have almost no ability to understand, contest, or negotiate the decisions that determine their income.
What this means for the gig economy
The EU’s AI Act, which began phased implementation in 2024, classifies employment-related AI systems as “high-risk” and subjects them to heightened oversight. These lawsuits are essentially asking courts to enforce protections that legislators have already signaled they consider necessary.