Opinion The Uber Files expose gaps in regulatory structures, underline need for govts to be more nimble as they regulate Big Tech

On July 5, 2010, the first request for a ride was placed on the cab hailing platform, Uber. Less than two years later, Uber had expanded globally, with the app going live in Paris. The company now operates in more than 70 countries and 10,000 cities. Along the way, it also became the world’s most valued start-up. The platform’s global appeal and success can be traced to the sheer ease with which it allows for cabs to be hailed, often at odd hours. Coupled with a competitive pricing model, this makes for an attractive proposition for consumers across the world. And then, there is employment generation, with the company “employing” millions of drivers across the world. In India alone it has served around 9.5 crore riders, and has nearly six lakh driver partners. Yet, even as the company has reshaped public transport, it has been embroiled in controversy. By operating in the regulatory grey zones and blindspots, by taking on entrenched taxi services and unions, and by doing little to assuage consumer concerns, Uber has managed to get caught in the crosshairs of governments, drivers and riders.

Over the past few days, an investigation by this paper, carried out in collaboration with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, has painted a less than flattering image of the manner in which the ride-sharing platform has conducted itself over the years. The investigation details how the company tried to bypass regulators and cut corners as it navigated the loopholes in law in its drive to expand at breathtaking pace. The Uber Files are a classic example of how Big Tech manages to get ahead of the curve, and how policy often has to play catch-up. Consider, for instance, the revelation that the company has employed technology to stay ahead of law enforcement — the investigation has revealed how tools like “greyball” and “geofencing” were deployed “to keep Uber rides away from prying policemen and government officials”. Or how despite riders and drivers lying at the heart of the platform, it rode roughshod over the concerns of both. As the investigation has revealed, “critical elements of the new safety features” that were meant to be put in place after the rape incident in Delhi in December 2014 have still not been implemented.

Advertisement

However, such concerns are not India-specific. For instance, the classification of drivers, and as a consequence their treatment, is globally a contentious issue. Treating them as workers rather than self-employed, as the UK Supreme Court has ruled, would entitle them to minimum wages and other benefits. Or take the concerns over data privacy — the ride-sharing platform holds a treasure trove of information on the ride-hailers. While governments may be tempted to respond to such disclosures by imposing draconian rules, regulation should be framed with a light touch so as not to throttle innovation. At the same time, the sheer pace of innovation and the manner in which tech firms have exposed gaps in the regulatory structures underlines the need for governments to be more nimble in their approach as they attempt to regulate the new age behemoths.