Is This Driver Exploitation by Uber? Is It Intentional or Just a Bug?

— By Sergio Avedian —

When “Exclusive” Isn’t Exclusive: Inside Uber’s Trip Radar Controversy

Over the past few weeks, a growing number of Uber drivers have raised alarms about a troubling pattern inside Uber’s Trip Radar and “Exclusive” ride offers. Thanks to our driver community’s diligence, I have received dozens of screenshots from all over the country. Please keep sending them in to [email protected]! 

What initially looked like isolated glitches has now sparked a broader debate about algorithmic pricing, transparency, and whether drivers are being systematically nudged or exploited by the platform.

At the center of the controversy are screenshots and public exchanges that appear to show the same ride being offered to a driver at one price, removed, and then re-offered moments later at a lower payout, sometimes labeled as an “Exclusive.”

A Ride Offered, Pulled, and Repriced

In the first screenshot above, circulating widely on social media, a driver is shown an UberX Trip Radar offer paying $11.45 for a roughly 19-minute, 5.5-mile trip. 

The offer appears normal: pickup distance, destination, rider rating, and total payout are all visible.

Moments later, that same trip disappears. The second image shows the familiar message many drivers have seen before: “Trip is no longer available.” At this point, most drivers assume another driver accepted the ride or the rider canceled.

But then comes the third screenshot, and this is where the frustration begins. The same route, same duration, same destination, now sent back to the same driver as an “Exclusive” offer for $8.84, nearly 23% less than the original Trip Radar amount.

To many drivers, this doesn’t feel like a coincidence. It feels like repricing, it feels like exploitation at best. Is this even legal?

Boston-based driver Matt (@boston_drives) publicly called out the practice in a viral post, labeling it an “Exclusive scam.” His argument is simple: drivers are shown a decent offer, told it’s gone, and then pressured to accept a worse one, often under the implied threat of algorithmic consequences.

His post goes further, tagging regulators and calling the practice what many drivers are already thinking: worker exploitation.

Uber Responds: “It’s a Bug”

Uber did respond. In a reply shown in the next screenshot, Sachin Kansal, a Senior VP and head of product at Uber, acknowledged that the experience is “not fair or acceptable,” but attributed the issue to a bug.

According to Kansal, the problem occurs when a rider cancels and quickly re-requests the same trip, leading to fare discrepancies. Uber claims it has identified the issue and is rolling out fixes while continuing to monitor the situation. On its face, this explanation seems reasonable. At Uber’s scale, with millions of trips per day, bugs do happen.

I am not Convinced

“Not All of These Trips Are Being Canceled”

In a direct reply, I pushed back on the explanation. I pointed out that while rider cancellations do happen, not all of these repriced trips fit that pattern. Out of millions of daily rides, it strains credibility to believe that the repeated examples shared by drivers are all edge cases tied to rapid re-requests. 

I also noted that I already sent multiple documented examples directly to my contacts at Uber.

My conclusion is blunt: the machines are learning, perhaps too well! Algorithmic discrimination is alive and well!

Algorithmic Pressure on Both Sides of the Market

The deeper issue here isn’t just one bug or one pricing anomaly. It’s the growing sense among drivers that Uber’s algorithms are actively managing behavior on both sides of the marketplace.

Riders are shown one price and encouraged to wait as the “spinner” searches for a driver. Drivers, meanwhile, are shown fluctuating offers, time pressure, and acceptance-rate consequences all nudging them toward decisions that benefit marketplace efficiency, not necessarily driver earnings.

As I put it in another post (screenshot above), once the rider is locked into a fare, “the games begin in the back end with the driver.”

Even if this behavior skirts legality, many drivers argue it crosses an ethical line.

Why This Matters

Uber has long maintained that drivers are independent contractors with the freedom to accept or decline trips. But that freedom becomes questionable when declining offers leads to hidden penalties, throttling, or reduced access to earnings opportunities.

If an “Exclusive” offer is genuinely exclusive, it should not pay less than the same ride moments earlier. And if pricing changes are the result of bugs, drivers deserve transparency, not silence, mixed messages, or opaque algorithms.

The Bigger Picture

This controversy comes at a time when competition for drivers is intensifying. As I noted, some drivers are already leaving Uber for Lyft, citing clearer pricing and fewer psychological games.

Whether Uber’s explanation holds up or not, one thing is clear: trust is fragile. And once drivers believe the system is working against them, no amount of “exclusive” labels will fix that.

For Uber, the fix isn’t just technical, it’s cultural. Transparency, accountability, and respect for drivers’ time and labor will ultimately determine whether the platform retains the workforce it depends on.

Email me your comments to [email protected]

Sergio@RSG

Did someone forward you this newsletter? Subscribe now for free so you never miss an update…

Never miss a Rideshare Guy update…

Twitter/X │ YouTube │ Instagram │Facebook │ LinkedIn │ TikTok