Everything that makes it harder for companies to get rid of gig workers also eventually makes it harder for gig workers to enroll
I'm willing to believe that outcome may be better in the abstract, since I'm not a big fan of Uber in the first place, but it's not clear that the average user of Uber wants that trade.
Pointing out that Decision A will likely lead to Outcome B, which may in turn cause Outcome C doesn't automatically mean it's a fallacy. It certainly doesn't mean that you snarkily posting wikipedia articles accusing me of bad-faith argumentation is justified.
In this case, it's not patently obvious that fewer, higher quality drivers is a net negative.
From there, sure, it's unclear if less "better" drivers are a business positive, but either way, that's an interesting discussion worth more than just "haha you did a fallacy". Claiming that it's likely that having less drivers that are "higher quality", whatever that means, will improve the service overall is just as much of a guess as what I put forward.
Either way, to go back to my original post, it's unclear to me that the users of the service are, on average, that upset about the quality of their drivers. The alternative is taxis, which certainly aren't better on average at screening their drivers for anti-social behavior in my experiences.