{"id":2458,"date":"2025-08-02T20:42:12","date_gmt":"2025-08-02T19:42:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/21percent.org\/?p=2458"},"modified":"2025-08-02T21:40:17","modified_gmt":"2025-08-02T20:40:17","slug":"the-end-of-the-road-for-non-disclosure-agreements","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/21percent.org\/?p=2458","title":{"rendered":"The End for Non-Disclosure Agreements?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The standard practice of any Russell Group University when confronted with serious allegations against someone senior is the four stage process<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Stage 1<\/strong> is<\/strong> the Deliberate Stalling<\/strong> of investigations \u2014 especially when the accused is a Head of Department or a strategically important position. Delays occur through slow appointment of investigators, requests for further documentation from complainants, “paused” investigations during academic holidays or while staff are on sabbatical, repeated restructuring of complaint processes mid-case. This wears down the complainant who may give up.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Stage 2<\/strong> is<\/strong> the<\/strong> Minimisation and Reframing<\/strong>. Bullying is often reframed as \u201cpersonality clash<\/em>,\u201d \u201cperformance management<\/em>,\u201d or \u201cmisunderstanding.<\/em>\u201d<\/strong> Human Resources (HR) or senior leadership claim behaviour doesn\u2019t meet the \u201cthreshold<\/em>\u201d for misconduct and suggest informal resolution (e.g. mediation) or they dismiss incidents as isolated, despite repeated patterns of behaviour. Senior staff benefit from the presumption of innocence without any meaningful scrutiny. The complainant’s grievance is then dismissed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Stage 3<\/strong> is<\/strong> the \u201cInvestigation\u201d that lacks Independence<\/strong>. If the complaint persists and appeals, many universities rely on <\/strong>internal HR-led investigations <\/strong>or bring in contracted investigators (eg compliant barristers) with ties to university governance or legal teams. The reports are almost always an expensive sham to exonerate senior staff. A recent one at the Institute of Astronomy, University of Cambridge cost nearly \u00a370,000 — lucrative work for the lucky barrister! Not so good for the department which had to stump up the money out of its own resources!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Stage 4<\/strong> is the<\/strong> NDA<\/strong>. If the complainant has not yet been ground down and proceeds to take the matter to Employment Tribunal, then the University denies the matter until the day of the Tribunal and then finally offers up a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA). This is a financial settlement in exchange for victims\u2019 silence. These settlements avoid any tribunal, hush up the many blunders by HR or senior management, prevent awkward publicity and allow the accused to remain in post or retire \u201cwith honour\u201d.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Many universities use NDAs to settle cases of bullying, harassment, discrimination and sexual abuse quietly \u2014 prioritising institutional reputation over accountability. Between 2014\u201315 and 2018\u201319, nearly 11,000 NDAs were issued by 98 UK universities\u2014an average of around 2,600 in 2017\u201318, up from 2,020 in 2014\u201315, according to the Times Higher Education here.<\/a> These figures are an underestimate as some universities refused to provide any data (including the University of Cambridge).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Of course, NDAs reduce institutional responsibility, enable repeat offences by the perpetrators and silence victims. They undermine the very purpose of the legal protections in place. No university need ever fix its problems if it can rely on NDAs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This may be changing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Recent regulatory action in the UK has led to restrictions on NDAs in cases involving sexual misconduct. For example, the Office for Students announced in 2023<\/a> that universities\u00a0must not use NDAs\u00a0<\/strong>to silence students or staff\u00a0in <\/strong>sexual misconduct cases\u00a0if they want to remain compliant with funding conditions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Now the range of offences looks like it will be very considerably extended.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Louise Haigh<\/a>, MP for Sheffield Heeley, tabled amendments to the Employment Rights Bill at second reading in the House of Commons. As recorded in Hansard here<\/a>, this will prohibit NDAs not just in cases of sexual misconduct, but also in cases of abuse, harassment, bullying or discrimination. The amendment gained cross-party support from dozens of MPs. It would render void any NDA or confidentiality clause that prevents a worker from speaking about workplace harassment or discrimination, unless the worker consents and meets conditions (e.g. independent legal advice, cooling-off period).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The bill is expected to proceed to the committee stage in autumn 2025, followed by a third reading and then passage through the House of Lords. So, it could become law very soon, in early 2026.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thanks to Louise Haigh, the business model of many universities in dealing with bullying & discrimination will actually become obsolete in early 2026. It’s the end of the road for the four stage process.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Prudent universities should now be focusing much greater efforts on the effective prevention of bullying, discrimination and sexual harassment in the workplace. This includes dealing with the allegations properly instead of demoralising the victims and relying on NDAs to hush everything up at the end.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is no sign of any such prudence yet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

(The image is ‘Innocent’s Silence’ by Amparo Torres O and licensed under Creative Commons, see here<\/a>.)<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The standard practice of any Russell Group University when confronted with serious allegations against someone senior is the four stage process. Stage 1 is the Deliberate Stalling of investigations \u2014 especially when the accused is a Head of Department or a strategically important position. Delays occur through slow appointment of investigators, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"_uf_show_specific_survey":0,"_uf_disable_surveys":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2458","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-blog"],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/21percent.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2458","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/21percent.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/21percent.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/21percent.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/21percent.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2458"}],"version-history":[{"count":13,"href":"https:\/\/21percent.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2458\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2477,"href":"https:\/\/21percent.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2458\/revisions\/2477"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/21percent.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2458"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/21percent.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=2458"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/21percent.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=2458"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}