3 ms·

They claim they didn't break it.

• tchalla 2mo ago
  Do you have a source for that?
  • mike_hearn 2mo ago
    It says so in the article.
    • tchalla 2mo ago
      I know what you are referring to but it doesn't. Read carefully again, it's carefully word smithed. The case is between 2018-2022. Uber says they have human review now that doesn't mean they did have human review in that time period.
• greycol 2mo ago
  Which is ridiculous on it's face, imagine claiming that stopping someone's income until you get around to reviewing it doesn't have a significant effect on someone. The real issue is if uber comes away from this thinking they can do a rubber stamp review, because the point of the law was clearly to stop unjustifiable decisions automatically being made(protecting both parties), as uber will still be on the hook for unjustified suspensions but redress will need to go through the court making it worse for all involved.