Photo credit: www.theguardian.com
The Dark Side of Non-Disclosure Agreements in the Workplace
Unions are fundamentally designed to defend employee rights, and there are numerous instances where they have successfully done so. However, recent revelations indicate that some unions may not always practice what they preach when it comes to creating safe and equitable work environments.
During a parliamentary discussion last week regarding the use of non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) by employers, Labour MP Louise Haigh highlighted troubling instances where unions themselves employed such agreements to suppress allegations of misconduct. She pointed out specific cases of unions, like the Transport Salaried Staffs’ Association (TSSA), which were accused of attempting to silence former female employees regarding serious claims of sexual harassment against then-General Secretary Manuel Cortes. A subsequent review by Helena Kennedy KC uncovered alarming incidents and management deficiencies at TSSA, revealing that Cortes’s inappropriate behavior was so widely known that new female members were advised to avoid being alone with him. This situation underscores the troubling irony of unions meant to protect workers potentially engaging in conduct that contradicts their mission.
Moreover, the assembly spotlighted additional distressing cases involving employees from various sectors. For instance, Haigh shared the story of an ITN worker with a functional neurological disorder who endured relentless bullying from management, including being compelled to apologize for seizures he experienced due to his condition. While he sought justice through legal channels, the eventual settlement included a nondisclosure agreement that restricted him from discussing the circumstances of his treatment.
Another case raised by MP Layla Moran involved a female ITN employee who faced retaliation after attempting to escape a toxic relationship with her superior. Following her complaint, she was suspended and prohibited from speaking to anyone except law enforcement. The settlement she accepted included an NDA that effectively silenced not just her, but also her family and friends.
The most vulnerable workers, particularly those in lower-paying, precarious employment, often remain unheard. These individuals frequently lack the access to legal support necessary to challenge NDAs, leaving groups already endangered by discrimination—including women, ethnic minorities, and individuals with disabilities—especially at risk.
While there are legitimate uses for NDAs, such as protecting sensitive business information or at the request of employees seeking discretion in discrimination cases, the proliferation of these agreements in employment settlements has become concerning. Originally intended as a safeguard for proprietary information, NDAs are now widely used as standard clauses that employers incorporate into numerous settlements.
This trend poses significant implications for workplace accountability and the freedom to express grievances. For instance, when healthcare workers settle disputes with their employers, why should they be obligated to remain silent about their experiences indefinitely? It raises fundamental questions about the balance of power in employment relationships.
Opponents of regulating NDAs often argue that restricting their use might decrease the number of settlements, yet evidence from the U.S. suggests otherwise. In several states that have enacted stricter NDA regulations, settlement rates have reportedly increased.
In the UK, notable recent legislation banning NDAs for sexual harassment and discrimination in universities represents a significant step forward. However, similar protections should extend to all workers, including those in outsourced positions like cleaning staff at educational institutions.
MPs like Haigh and Moran are advocating for the government to tighten restrictions on NDA usage within the broader framework of employment law. Their initiatives have garnered support not only from other political parties but also from business and union leaders alike.
As the government considers improving worker protections, it would be remiss not to tackle the manipulative use of NDAs in situations involving harassment and discrimination, as well as in cases where public interest is at stake. Failure to address this issue merely allows powerful entities to circumvent legal responsibilities through legal loopholes.
Ultimately, the abuse of NDAs raises serious concerns about justice in the workplace. Those who wield power often find ways to evade accountability, and it’s crucial for legislators to close these escape routes in order to foster a more equitable employment ecosystem.
Source
www.theguardian.com