It ends with legal action

The recent high-profile legal battle between Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni over alleged sexual harassment during the filming of "It Ends With Us" has reignited crucial conversations about workplace harassment, power dynamics, and the role of NDAs in both entertainment and corporate settings.

In December 2024, Lively filed a complaint alleging that Baldoni created a "hostile work environment" through "disturbing" and "unprofessional" behaviour, including entering her trailer uninvited while she was in vulnerable situations and improvising unplanned physical intimacy without an intimacy coordinator present. The case highlights common workplace harassment issues: power imbalances, the complexity of reporting, the potential for retaliation and the need for more coordinated professionalism in all workplace settings.

The UK has recently evolved to address such concerns. The Worker Protection Act, effective from October 2024, introduced a new legal duty for employers to take proactive steps in preventing sexual harassment. "Companies must maintain a strict zero-tolerance policy regarding sexual harassment," emphasises Sirsha Haldar, General Manager at ADP UK & Northern Europe. "The primary goal should always be to create an environment where employees feel safe reporting any instances of harassment, discrimination, or misconduct with no fear of retribution."

The Lively-Baldoni case brings attention to the role of retribution in sexual misconduct cases -- with both sides making this claim. And while a Non Disclosure Agreement (NDA) was not reported to have been used in this scenario, it mirrors those where NDAs have been heavily weaponised, not just in the world of entertainment but in industries like banking. As Julie Morris, employment partner at Keystone Law, notes: "At their worst, NDAs silence victims and prevent them from speaking about their experiences, protect the powerful, avoid accountability and stop boards and shareholders from fully understanding their culture."

However, Morris also highlights the nuanced reality of NDAs: "There are many cases where confidentiality clauses are more justified. For example, where a misplaced remark accidentally oversteps a line, where the incident in question involves two individual junior employees, where the victim genuinely wants confidentiality, or where the validity of the complaint is genuinely contested by the employer."

The ongoing legal battles between Lively and Baldoni – with countersuits and allegations of smear campaigns – also illustrate another complex aspect of workplace harassment: the potential for false or exaggerated claims. While such cases are statistically rare, they can have serious implications for all parties involved and potentially discourage legitimate victims from coming forward.

The UK’s approach to preventing workplace harassment now extends beyond traditional office boundaries to include work-related social events, parties, and networking functions. This broader scope recognises that harassment often occurs in less formal settings, requiring comprehensive prevention strategies and clear reporting mechanisms.

Looking ahead, organisations must balance creating safe environments while ensuring fair processes for all parties involved. As Haldar emphasises, "Companies must ensure that all reports are investigated fairly, and that prompt action is taken. It is essential for everyone to thrive in inclusive and secure environments."

The evolving legal framework in the UK highlights the importance of proactive prevention, clear reporting channels, and careful consideration of how NDAs are used in resolving harassment claims. The challenge lies in protecting victims while ensuring due process – a balance that requires ongoing attention from employers, legislators, and society at large.