When apps like Uber and Instacart shut down a worker’s account, the worker is often left to navigate a maze of contracts and arbitration procedures alone. Now some gig workers are turning to AI to fight deactivations, using chatbots to draft evidence summaries, request arbitration, and even decide when to send their next message.
Why deactivations are hard to challenge
Ride-hailing and delivery companies can remove workers from their platforms with little warning. Some removals are tied to safety or fraud concerns, while others arrive without a full explanation. To get back on the app or reach another resolution, workers must contact the company and start an arbitration process. That process can be lengthy and requires making sense of the contracts that govern their work. As independent contractors, gig workers usually have limited leverage, and lawyers often hesitate to take their cases because of the arbitration requirements embedded in the companies’ terms.
How workers are using chatbots
One Instacart worker who was deactivated earlier this year said he has used ChatGPT to push back on the company’s claim that he took the wrong route to deliver an order. According to the driver, the chatbot helped him write evidence reports and estimate how much income he has lost since losing access to the app. He has also asked the chatbot for guidance on timing his latest response to Instacart and on whether he might find free legal help. The driver said ChatGPT advised him to wait before sending his next message while he looks for a lawyer.
Others have taken a similar approach. On Reddit forums for gig workers, some users have described using ChatGPT to write letters to Uber Eats and DoorDash asking for their accounts to be reinstated, and some said the messages worked. One Uber driver in Tennessee said he consulted ChatGPT after his account was deactivated without a clear reason. After going back and forth with the chatbot, he said he had a letter that cited Uber’s driver contract and requested arbitration. The driver said the AI also suggested a strategic step: send the letter to Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi rather than only to the general arbitration email address. About a week later, he said he could access his account again.
The limits and risks of AI help
Robert Bruno, a professor of labor and employment relations at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, said AI can still be useful for gig workers who have few other options. He noted that workers are not shut out of defending themselves simply because they cannot afford a strong labor attorney. But Bruno added that generating evidence summaries is only one piece of the puzzle. Workers in arbitration also need to make a persuasive case for reinstatement and tailor that argument to the specific arbitrator hearing the matter. He expressed doubt that a chatbot could produce that kind of nuanced argument on its own.
There are broader risks as well. Chatbots often answer in a confident tone and can quickly generate official-looking documents, but AI-generated legal briefs or arguments can contain errors and damage a worker’s credibility.
Companies respond
Uber and Instacart did not directly address workers using AI to challenge deactivations. An Uber spokesperson said the company evaluates claims using data and facts, regardless of how an appeal is submitted. An Instacart spokesperson said the company does not take deactivation lightly and gives workers a chance to appeal. Uber has said appeals are reviewed by a real person, and Instacart has said final deactivation decisions are always reviewed by a human. The companies have previously declined to say what role AI plays in the initial decision to deactivate a worker. Uber customer service employees, for their part, often use AI to write responses to drivers’ messages.
For workers with few resources and limited legal options, the appeal of a chatbot is clear: it offers a way to organize evidence, draft arguments, and keep pressing a case that might otherwise stall.