Uber has been ordered to pay $10,000 in damages to an Australian driver after the company permanently banned him from work over a passenger complaint but failed to gather evidence that he had breached its code of conduct.
The verdict of New South Wales The Civil and Administrative Court (Ncat) issued a ruling regarding Uber’s conduct when terminating a driver’s account after a trip last August.
One of the passengers claimed that the driver told her she was beautiful and asked about her marital status, according to the court ruling.
But the driver denied this, claiming that she only complained after he refused her request to expedite their journey to Sydney Airport, and that she was unhappy with the low rating he subsequently gave her.
The driver, who relied in part on a Punjabi interpreter during the court proceedings, was working as an independent contractor, what Uber calls a “co-driver.” He drove for Uber full-time, earning about $212,000, including tips, in the fiscal year before he was fired.
He earned an average “Gold Diamond” rating of 4.98 stars out of 5 as a driver after 19,956 trips over two and a half years. Four of those trips resulted in a customer complaint.
In the initial complaint about the incident on August 9, 2023, the passenger checked a box stating that the driver’s behavior was “unprofessional or rude” but did not provide written comment.
Uber responded to the rider the same day, saying it had noticed the comments on the driver’s account and would give the rider a 50% discount on the next two rides.
According to the court, the passenger filed a second complaint the same day, saying the driver’s “language was inappropriate/threatening.” She then added: “The driver asked me if I had children and if I was single or married. He then told me that I looked like a Bollywood actress he had met and showed me a picture of them together. He continued to tell me that I was very beautiful. I felt very uncomfortable.”
Uber responded by saying, “We are sorry to hear that the driver/delivery person may have engaged in sexually inappropriate behavior,” adding that it would provide a full refund to the rider.
The next day, Uber informed the driver that it had received a “concerning report” that he may have commented on a passenger’s appearance. It told him that it would temporarily remove his access to Uber while the company investigated, and asked for any information he could provide about the negative comments.
The driver denied the alleged behaviour, saying he respects his customers.
“I had one client.” [made me rush] And tell me [to] “He rushed out and took some illegal turns. I just told you,” he wrote in letters released by the court. [her] “I can do my best to get you to your destination as quickly and safely as possible… The customer was very rude. But I didn’t say anything.”
Three days later, Uber informed the driver that it had decided to “permanently disable his account as a result of these comments,” the National Court of Appeal ruled. The court said he could appeal.
The driver responded by begging Uber to check his record.
“Please check this again so I can get back to work,” he wrote.
He filed an appeal, saying he had lost his career and would take legal action if his account was not reactivated within 10 days.
Five days later, Uber said it had conducted further investigation but would maintain the ban.
The driver sought $10,000 in lost net income covering the 30-day period after his termination. He represented himself before Ncat, and did not seek reinstatement as an Uber driver.
Uber relied on a defense that the driver committed a “material breach” of the services agreement, a threshold that can be reached either through a single serious incident or several smaller breaches.
She submitted messages from customers about three previous complaints made against the driver, including a passenger who alleged he called her “sexy” and another who alleged he asked her if she was “free on weekends.”
The driver also denied the allegations, saying that many drivers had faced false complaints from passengers asking for refunds, especially during periods of price increases and when passengers were drunk.
The court accepted that these allegations were sufficient to terminate his employment, but ruled in favour of the driver, citing his denial and near-perfect responses over nearly 20,000 trips.
The court also noted Uber’s lack of evidence from the complainants; its failure to contact the complainants for further testimony; and the lack of evidence that Uber’s “specialized team” actually reviewed the driver’s appeal.
“Nothing is more important than the safety and well-being of all users on the Uber platform,” an Uber spokesperson told the Guardian. “We do not take decisions to ban drivers from the platform lightly, but in this case we stand by our decision given the multiple complaints we have received about alleged inappropriate behavior.”
