• definitemaybe@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 days ago

    an Uber spokesperson said, "We strongly disagree with this decision and disproportionate fine, which we will appeal. The AP examined historic policies that were discontinued years ago. …

    So, basically, “we broke the law 4 years ago. That’s like forever ago, so you can’t fine us.”

    If that’s their legal defense, LMFAO.

  • t3rmit3@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    Imagine living somewhere that brings suits against companies for hurting workers, without the workers themselves needing to pay exorbitant fees to bring a class action.

    • mark@social.cool110.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      4 days ago

      @AcesFullOfKings @sanitation Article 22

      The data subject shall have the right not to be subject to a decision based solely on automated processing, including profiling, which produces legal effects concerning him or her or similarly significantly affects him or her.

  • Kairos@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    Does that mean “the car”?, because I read this as “Tesla knocks out some drivers.”

    • ℍ𝕂-𝟞𝟝@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      Nah, you can’t fire people via AI. Or if you want to be pedantic, you can’t make automated decisions about people via AI.