RESEARCH OBJECTIVES:

Key Findings

KEY FINDINGS & RECURRING THEMES:

• Systemic issues in the sector
  
  Power imbalances
  NDAs present an unbalanced bargaining environment for arts workers. In such conditions, employees often have little leverage to negotiate fair terms or assert their rights. With the increasing pressures to perform under strained circumstances, workers are placed in vulnerable positions where the fear of losing their jobs or facing retaliation outweighs their ability to challenge unfair practices. This imbalance in power and resources creates a climate of tension and insecurity, where workers may feel coerced into signing NDAs as a condition of keeping their employment or receiving financial settlements.
  
  Contradiction of industry values & censorship
  The arts industry is fundamentally rooted in principles of open dialogue, creative freedom, and the exploration of diverse perspectives. It is a space traditionally intended to encourage critical engagement, challenge the status quo, and amplify voices that provoke thought and innovation. However, within many arts institutions, these values are undermined by practices that stifle discussion and suppress critical voices, through mechanisms like NDAs and other restrictive measures. This creates a paradox where institutions designed to champion artistic expression and open conversation become environments where silence and complacency are imposed.
  
  Institutional censorship has become rampant since Silencing in the Arts began in 2023. NDAs have been used as a tactic to prevent artists and arts workers from expressing their views on their own social media channels and within their own networks—specifically regarding solidarity with Palestine or anti-Zionist criticism—that conflict with the views of leadership, board members, and high-profile donors.
  
  Post-lockdown restructuring, financial strain and burnout
  The COVID-19 pandemic led to significant instability in arts organizations, with restructuring causing overburdened, under-resourced professionals. Diminishing budgets, high inflation, and reduced funding have further strained the sector, leaving workers overworked and underprepared. In this precarious environment, workers fear speaking out or pushing back for fear of losing their jobs.
  
  Ineffective diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) efforts
  While many arts institutions have introduced DEIA strategies in an effort to address systemic inequities and create more inclusive environments, these efforts often fall short due to a lack of proper funding and prioritization. In many cases, DEIA initiatives are treated as secondary or supplementary, rather than integral components of organizational strategy. Moreover, DEIA goals are sometimes deprioritized in favor of other operational concerns, such as budget cuts or short-term financial goals. As a result, these initiatives can become performative or superficial, failing to address the deep-rooted issues of inequality and exclusion that persist within the sector. Ultimately, the lack of investment in DEIA efforts undermines their effectiveness, leaving arts organizations unable to create truly equitable and inclusive spaces for all workers.
  
  Barriers to entry and precarious employment
  The arts industry is known for its high barriers to entry, making it difficult for many artists and arts workers to gain access to meaningful employment. These barriers include limited access to funding, competitive selection processes, and a lack of institutional support for emerging talent. As a result, many in the arts face extended periods of unemployment or underemployment, where they struggle to find consistent, stable opportunities that align with their skills and aspirations. Even when new opportunities do arise, there is often a significant risk of entering toxic work environments characterized by poor management, power imbalances, discrimination, and unhealthy workplace dynamics. These environments can be emotionally and mentally exhausting, further discouraging individuals from pursuing long-term careers in the sector. This cycle of instability and uncertainty makes it difficult for artists and arts workers to build sustainable careers and can exacerbate feelings of burnout and frustration.
  
  Inadequate leadership, board governance, and/or human resource personnel
  Arts institutions, particularly smaller organizations with limited staff and artist-run boards, often lack the professional training or personnel to support a healthy working environment. Regardless of size, many institutions were reported to have inadequate leadership and board governance, and a lack of HR departments or representatives. When human resource representatives were present, they were often serving the interests of those in positions of power (e.g. leadership, board), leaving junior and mid-level employees feeling unsupported.
  
  Measures of effective leadership are often based on fundraising targets over employee satisfaction. Additionally, there are not clear definitions of what constitutes effective leadership and board governance in the arts, nor are there formal consequences when these structures break down.
  
  Countless systemic issues in the sector can also stifle career growth and even discourage qualified junior and mid-level arts professionals from advancing into leadership roles. This in turn limits the pool of qualified candidates who are rooted in regional and/or national arts communities.
  
  Toxic and/or inadequate leadership structures are protected and reinforced through mechanisms such as NDAs, which prevent artists and arts workers from speaking about their experiences; this feeds a vicious cycle that keeps bad actors in positions of power and subjects a new pool of artists and arts workers to harmful work environments.
  

• Substantial personal and professional impacts of being silenced
  
  Feeling of pressure
  Participants often felt rushed to make a decision when asked to sign an NDA, and didn’t fully understand their rights at the time.
  
  Regret in hindsight
  Many participants later realized they could have refused to sign, asked for more time to consider, or negotiated the terms to better align with their situation.
  
  Devastation upon leaving
  Participants experienced deep emotional distress from the loss of their role, community, and professional identity, especially when leaving a position or the sector entirely.
  
  Impact on career trajectory
  This often led to a sense of alienation and, for some, a permanent exit from the sector. Many interviewees, particularly those identifying as women and/or Black, Indigenous, and People of Colour, resigned from the arts at pivotal moments in their careers, hindering their career progression and contributing to the lack of diversity in institutional leadership roles.
  
  Shift to independent work
  Those who remained in the arts made a vow to never work within institutions again, instead pursuing independent practices outside of institutional structures.

Survey Data

SURVEY DATA:


• Over 65% of respondents ended up signing the NDA they were issued
  

• Over 52% of respondents did not feel they had adequate time or information to consider options before signing the NDA
  
  

• Over 23% of respondents left the arts sector after their experience

• Board or leadership mismanagement or incompetency (58.7%)
• Internal conflict between leadership and staff (50%)
• Discrimination and/or any other form of oppression (39.1%)
• Internal reorganization or restructuring (39.1%)
• Violence and/or harassment (34.8%)

Highlighted Stories

HIGHLIGHTED STORIES

• “Throughout my employment at this institution, I witnessed and was also subjected to repeated instances of inappropriate conduct from my manager. These instances affected my mental and physical health greatly. Upper management was made aware of this behaviour on multiple occasions. When resigning my position to move to a new role at a different institution, I was told I had to sign a non-disclosure agreement, which indicated I would only speak “positively” about the institution. Even though my job performance was praised and no issues were indicated, I was told I would not be given any employment references in the future should I not sign the NDA. I was not permitted to keep a copy of the document after it was signed.”
  
  
• “When the gallery started developing complex financial relationships with private and corporate funders, all staff and board members were given a blanket NDA to sign to make funders feel secure. [The] problem was the reach of the NDA language was well beyond the limits of securing financial and donor information and extended to any discussion of the internal workings of the gallery.  I refused to sign it and requested it be rewritten.”
  
  
• “In my contract work, I was a party in a legal dispute with a public gallery over a discriminatory and harmful incident that was very public. A small settlement was reached with the provision of signing an NDA in relation to the terms of the settlement and the details of the negotiation process. I did not want to sign it but my collaborator did so I signed in support of their wishes.”
  
  
• “My position as Curator was terminated (financial challenges were listed as the reason) and I signed an NDA that was contingent on my receiving a severance. The experience was a significant trauma to me and my entire family, including my husband and child who was pre-school age at the time.”
  
  
• “An NDA was included in my employment contract and in my letter of severance. There was no attempt to enforce the nondisclosures in my case. But there were many incidents that occurred to fellow employees which I felt frightened to speak up about because of the possible consequences. It led to a culture of fear in the workplace.”
  
  
• “In [my province], over 80% of arts admins who have gone on mat leave in the last 5 years have lost their jobs; I felt forced to resign while on parental leave when the board changed my employment contract reducing flexibility, benefits etc despite a 5 year track record of me increasing the budget etc etc. I obtained minutes of a board meeting where they discussed making me a part time Executive Director, also they attempted to introduce a policy of no staff children allowed on site. I was the only staff person with a breastfeeding infant and newborn at the time. This is a feminist artist-run centre. I felt I could not represent them as ED when they were not upholding their own mandate in any way. They would not meet with me to discuss anything. I felt forced to resign. After community outcry at the agm they agreed to mediation with an external mediator. I agreed to sign an NDA for the mediation process. They did not provide an external mediator and the chair of the board mediated.”
  
  
• “After the entire board resigned due to toxic people on board, this left the org open to full on takeover. No oversight despite them not having enough board members to keep their charity status. I still consider the fact that since they did not have quorum, that they fired all staff illegally due to not following protocols (in my opinion). I was not able to speak about this publicly at the time because I was hoping to keep my job. Since then they are still grifting artists and it is morally and ethically disturbing to me to see the shell of an 50 year old organization being misused by con artists.”  
  
  
• “A municipal politician disliked me and put pressure on my boss to get rid of me, which they eventually did; I actually have sympathy for my employer's position, to a degree - this particular politician is horrible and can unfortunately put a lot of pressure on this agency, which has a really important job in Toronto's arts ecosystem.  I would have liked it if they had gone to bat for me more, but also in the grand scheme of things, their mandate is probably more important than my personal career.  The NDA, however, was just fucking insulting.”
  

• “The experience [surrounding the NDA] was traumatizing in a myriad of different ways and to varying degrees for different staff. The bottom line is that it was a gross display of misuse of power and the fact that so few people in the art world know about it, and the senior management and board have not been confronted or forced to own up to their behaviour is partly why it remains a source of stress and anxiety for me. It reinforces the negative perspective that anyone can get away with anything as long as they are in a position of power.”
  
  
• “In order to work on their equity audit and strategy, I was asked to sign an NDA about their internal processes and procedures. I signed an NDA in order to do equity work and it was then used as a threat to silence the harm and discrimination that took place by elected public servants and administration. The NDA was used to manipulate compliance.”
  
  
• “I filed a complaint with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario on the basis of disability discrimination (in part related to me raising concerns of racist hiring/firing practices, as well as management incompetence and wage theft). In order to avoid going to the tribunal (and therefore having my complaint on public record), the organization settled with me and had me sign an NDA in exchange for money; It is difficult knowing that, while my experience probably taught the org to actually take human rights seriously, having to keep private what happens means this org’s cycle of treating the lowest waged, and always marginalized, workers (who were the ones actually executing programming) as disposable and exploitable probably continued.”
  
  
• “Preventing past staff from connecting with present staff in the organization. Under this NDA no one could talk about their trauma and were afraid for their careers to follow.”
  
  
• “The NDA was presented to me at the end of my employment in connection with the non-renewal of my contract, despite the role having been presented to me as a permanent position. It included terms that would prevent me from speaking about my experience with the organization and from pursuing a human rights complaint or other legal action. This followed a period in which I had experienced workplace harassment, raised concerns about a lack of adequate accommodations, and was dismissed without cause shortly after returning from a sick leave for mental health.
  
  Despite being in a financially vulnerable position after my contract was not renewed, I chose not to sign the NDA or accept the compensation offered in exchange. I made this decision because I believe in accountability within the sector, particularly in non-profit and artist-run contexts that are often positioned as values-driven and committed to accessibility and inclusion. I found it deeply concerning that I was being asked to agree not to share any negative experiences about the organization, even if truthful, in order to protect its reputation. As an employee of four years, I found the circumstances of my dismissal (shortly after taking mental health-related sick leave) particularly difficult and destabilizing.
  
  As of writing this, the organization has not taken accountability for what I believe were breaches of my employment agreement or misrepresentation of my role. My formal complaint of workplace harassment was not investigated, and I experienced reputational harm within the very small arts community I live in as a result of how the situation was handled. Choosing not to sign the NDA was also important for my wellbeing. Being able to speak openly with my community about my experience was necessary to process what had happened and to mitigate further harm to my mental health.”