So even when it looks equal on a surface level, because the algorithm doesn't discriminate by gender, these structures result in an unequal distribution. This is the part that one side cries itself hoarse over, and the other handwaves away as "personal choices".
OTOH, the algorithm's purpose isn't to account for structural gender problems, it's to reward the drivers who earn Uber the most profit, thereby encouraging more behavior by them that earns them the most profit
the structural biases working against women--their driving habits resulting in less fares/hour and their domestic responsibilities resulting in less of the most needed hours--means they earn uber less money.
it wouldn't make sense for uber to pay employees who earn them less the same as employees who earn them more. they'd lose their highest-earning employees to a competitor who did not try to correct for these biases. quits are at all-time highs right now, so this is a real concern.
Oh, I completely agree. I wouldn't expect from the algorithm - or Uber - to compensate for such fundamental societal structures. I just think it does a very good job at showing something that many talk about. The cost of the unpaid labor that is often expected of women is very clear here. ---
Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.