Calls to Abolish Non-Disclosure Agreements in the Workplace
Former Labour Minister Louise Haigh advocates for banning NDAs to protect vulnerable workers from workplace abuses.
Louise Haigh, a former Labour minister and current MP for Sheffield Heeley, has urged the UK Government to eliminate the use of non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) that, she argues, create a 'two-tier system of protection' for workers.
During a recent session in Westminster Hall, Haigh expressed her concern that low-paid employees are being silenced by such agreements, which she described as a 'tool of oppression' that employers cannot be trusted to wield responsibly.
Haigh had previously attempted to amend the Employment Rights Bill to prohibit NDAs specifically in cases related to sexual harassment and abuse.
Highlighting the prevalence of the issue, Haigh noted that NDAs disproportionately impact women, particularly those in low-income positions, as well as other vulnerable groups such as disabled individuals and people of color.
She indicated that these agreements allow employers to silence workers who have suffered serious harm without access to adequate redress.
Haigh argued that the use of broadly drafted confidentiality clauses has become standard practice, often signed unwittingly by employees.
She elaborated that while it is not the case that all employers are malicious, the widespread use of NDAs undermines accountability and provides a veil of secrecy over workplace misconduct.
The former minister referenced legislative measures taken in countries such as Ireland and the United States, which have recently legislated against certain uses of NDAs.
In the UK, under the Victims and Prisoners Bill amended in May 2024, confidentiality agreements are rendered void if they prevent victims from seeking legal or therapeutic advice related to criminal conduct.
Haigh's remarks drew attention to inconsistencies in protections available to different groups, citing how students within higher education are protected from NDAs in cases of harassment while workers employed by outsourced companies on campus do not enjoy the same rights.
This has raised questions regarding the justification for such discrepancies in the level of workplace protections.
During the debate, Labour MP Sarah Owen highlighted that around 435,000 pregnant women and mothers in the UK have signed NDAs, with 80% stating that they felt compelled to leave their jobs or reduce their working hours as a consequence.
Additionally, Owen pointed out troubling practices in the classical music industry, where individuals reported being pressured to engage in sexual favors to secure job positions.
Liberal Democrat MP Martin Wrigley called for the Government to implement a ban on NDAs within the National Health Service, emphasizing the need for greater accountability in that sector.
Liberal Democrat justice spokesperson Josh Babarinde criticized the function of NDAs as prioritizing corporate confidentiality over the protection of victims of misconduct.
Opposition from within the Labour Party was echoed by Shadow Business Minister Greg Smith, who urged the Government to set an example by disclosing how many NDAs have been employed within the civil service since its current administration took office.
Responding to the discussion, Business Minister Justin Madders acknowledged the importance of reviewing NDA usage and expressed a willingness to collaborate with fellow lawmakers.
Madders noted the necessity of understanding the implications for different sectors, emphasizing that any new legislation must avoid creating loopholes that could be exploited.
Furthermore, he pointed out that the initiative should consider the potential desire of victims to enter into NDAs without coercion, should they choose to do so.
Madders concluded by advocating for a 'cultural shift' among employers to address workplace abuse, stressing that without such changes, legislative measures alone may not effectively resolve the issue.
During a recent session in Westminster Hall, Haigh expressed her concern that low-paid employees are being silenced by such agreements, which she described as a 'tool of oppression' that employers cannot be trusted to wield responsibly.
Haigh had previously attempted to amend the Employment Rights Bill to prohibit NDAs specifically in cases related to sexual harassment and abuse.
Highlighting the prevalence of the issue, Haigh noted that NDAs disproportionately impact women, particularly those in low-income positions, as well as other vulnerable groups such as disabled individuals and people of color.
She indicated that these agreements allow employers to silence workers who have suffered serious harm without access to adequate redress.
Haigh argued that the use of broadly drafted confidentiality clauses has become standard practice, often signed unwittingly by employees.
She elaborated that while it is not the case that all employers are malicious, the widespread use of NDAs undermines accountability and provides a veil of secrecy over workplace misconduct.
The former minister referenced legislative measures taken in countries such as Ireland and the United States, which have recently legislated against certain uses of NDAs.
In the UK, under the Victims and Prisoners Bill amended in May 2024, confidentiality agreements are rendered void if they prevent victims from seeking legal or therapeutic advice related to criminal conduct.
Haigh's remarks drew attention to inconsistencies in protections available to different groups, citing how students within higher education are protected from NDAs in cases of harassment while workers employed by outsourced companies on campus do not enjoy the same rights.
This has raised questions regarding the justification for such discrepancies in the level of workplace protections.
During the debate, Labour MP Sarah Owen highlighted that around 435,000 pregnant women and mothers in the UK have signed NDAs, with 80% stating that they felt compelled to leave their jobs or reduce their working hours as a consequence.
Additionally, Owen pointed out troubling practices in the classical music industry, where individuals reported being pressured to engage in sexual favors to secure job positions.
Liberal Democrat MP Martin Wrigley called for the Government to implement a ban on NDAs within the National Health Service, emphasizing the need for greater accountability in that sector.
Liberal Democrat justice spokesperson Josh Babarinde criticized the function of NDAs as prioritizing corporate confidentiality over the protection of victims of misconduct.
Opposition from within the Labour Party was echoed by Shadow Business Minister Greg Smith, who urged the Government to set an example by disclosing how many NDAs have been employed within the civil service since its current administration took office.
Responding to the discussion, Business Minister Justin Madders acknowledged the importance of reviewing NDA usage and expressed a willingness to collaborate with fellow lawmakers.
Madders noted the necessity of understanding the implications for different sectors, emphasizing that any new legislation must avoid creating loopholes that could be exploited.
Furthermore, he pointed out that the initiative should consider the potential desire of victims to enter into NDAs without coercion, should they choose to do so.
Madders concluded by advocating for a 'cultural shift' among employers to address workplace abuse, stressing that without such changes, legislative measures alone may not effectively resolve the issue.
