Search Site

Banning NDAs in Sexual Harassment Cases Could Harm Women

Throughout 2017, we saw victims of sexual harassment become more empowered than ever before to come forward and tell their stories. But while many Americans begin to speak out and share their experiences, many more are legally prevented from doing so.

In most of these cases, the victims (who are, by and large, women) agree to sign non-disclosure agreements as part of sexual harassment case settlements. They get a monetary payment and sometimes positive references in their work, but are also legally required to say nothing more about the issue.

In the wake of all of the recent allegations that have toppled powerful figures in the worlds of media and entertainment, lawmakers across the United States are taking serious looks at banning the practice of NDAs as part of harassment settlements. State legislators in California and New Jersey are currently mulling over proposed laws that would prohibit companies from using such agreements.

However, there is reason to think the bills could actually hurt the women they intend to protect.

Could banning NDAs actually harm victims?

There is a straightforward argument for banning these agreements — powerful figures would no longer be able to legally gag victims who wish to come forward.

However, there are some down sides of banning NDAs. Many victims do not wish to go public, as it could actually result in further abuse. In most cases, the harasser is also not famous enough to merit press attention. For many people, the option to sign a NDA gives them the ability to quietly move on with their lives. It also makes a company more likely to settle and move on, as well.

By removing NDAs, companies that are worried about their image first and foremost would likely take cases to the courtroom more often, and these companies have many more resources on hand than the victims who would be filing the cases.

There are alternative solutions. Beyond banning NDAs, lawmakers could also prevent companies from filing for summary judgment in harassment cases, which would force them to go to a jury that would be sympathetic to the victim. Another option is to limit the powers of NDAs, so women are able to speak up and share stories after a certain length of time has passed, or to limit the number of NDAs a single accused harasser can use.

For more information on the steps you should take if you have been a victim of workplace harassment, meet with a knowledgeable Dallas whistleblower lawyer at Whistleblower Law for Managers.

Awards & Honors
Our Office
  • Dallas Office
    4514 Cole Ave
    Dallas, Texas 75205
    Phone: 214-306-8045
    Fax: 469-729-9926
As Seen In
In his new book, "Standing Up to China: How a Whistleblower Risked Everything for His Country," former client & Author, Ashley Yablon, quotes Attorney Steve Kardell about Whistelblower Law.
  • "Steve Kardell was terrific in representing me in some very adversarial discussions with Citigroup and also later represented me in my testimony before the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission."  -Richard Bowen, Citigroup Whistleblower

  • "Incredible knowledge of employee related concerns and equally brilliant knowledge of health care regulations, standards of practice. I would recommend this firm to anyone."  -V.B.

  • "Reaching out to Steve Kardell was the best decision I made. His ability to provide immediate insight and direction was very powerful, and a huge relief during a very stressful time period. For anyone struggling with a whistleblower situation, I would highly recommend at least speaking with Steve. After a 10 minute call with him, I had a better understanding of what I was dealing with. Even better, he gave me some immediate hope. In the end Steve did a better job than I thought was possible. Steve was able to get in contact with people in my organization, that I didn’t have access to. Because of his years of experience, he already has contacts in many organizations in Dallas. The entire situation was handled peacefully. I was impressed by his ability to “keep the peace”–rather than creating a battle with the organization. The reason I didn’t reach out to a lawyer initially, was because I thought it would mean an immediate end to any hope of a positive relationship with the company. Steve was able to address my concerns, and in the end I was able to continue to work for them."  -KS

  • "Never thought my career would end like it did after 30 years of service. I was part of the first round of the so called reduction of force. I asked myself how can I be part of this with 30 years of seniority. How did they pick these 90 plus employees? Now, the culture of this organization made you question every decision they made. It wasn’t what you knew it’s was a culture of who you know. Nonetheless, I did not accept their severance package. I immediately starting looking for an attorney who would take on my case. After the initial call to Steve I had hope again. He was open and honest about everything and reassured me he would do his best for me, and he did. I had an awesome outcome. Thanks Steve you’re the best."  -S.S.