Is the Right to Disconnect a total disconnect?

Authored by: Transitioning Well

In theory, the concept of allowing workers to disconnect sounds like the right thing to do. As long-term advocates for mentally healthy workplaces, the importance of disconnection is not new to us. We know that constant connectivity (or hyperconnectivity) can affect an employee’s life-work balance and mental health. However, there are limitations in a blanket piece of legislation that doesn’t take into account all the factors, including the way in which we now work.

We would do well to learn from those who have tried before us (e.g., France, Spain, Belgium, Portugal), and examine the following:

Flexible and hybrid work policies

In the last five years, our work practices have changed dramatically and, as of August 2023, 37 percent of employed people regularly work from home. Hybrid and flexible work is here to stay. And, while it can sometimes make it hard to disconnect, it does have its benefits.

A recent AFR piece stated that flexible working practices contributed to two law firms hitting gender parity for the first time, and could account for steady gender representation improvement across the legal industry.

What’s problematic is when you overlay a ‘right to disconnect’ – legislation that can often be premised on a traditional 9-5 schedule – that flexibility can be lost, and those who thrive in that flexibility (such as the women noted above) could be unfairly penalised (and the last thing the world needs is another motherhood penalty).

As a recent seminal paper, The Right to Disconnect says, “Hybrid, remote, and time-shifted flexible working arrangements have become normalized during the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, [right to disconnect legislation] might not effectively address these issues of remote work and hyperconnectivity.”

Psychosocial hazards 

Like flexible work, the right to disconnect gets tangled in this simplified notion of ‘hours’, ‘connectivity’ and ‘output’. However, what that doesn’t take into account are the psychosocial hazards that can contribute to an inability to disconnect, and could actually be exacerbated by a mandate, such as:

Job demands 

“Simply restricting access to work may not stop employees from experiencing distress if workloads are high and/or if workplaces still expect fast responses as proof that employees are working,” The Right to Disconnect acknowledges.

For workers who are already experiencing unsustainable workloads, the idea of being forced to switch off – and be unable to churn through that work – can cause even more stress.

Low job control

“When the right to disconnect becomes a mandate, it undermines employees’ agency in choosing to disconnect,” the paper states.

“Organisations opting for an approach that forces workers to disconnect whether they want to or not – for example, by shutting down email during after-work hours – strip employees of the agency to exercise this right”.

Again, taking away an employee’s autonomy, or their right to step away from work in the afternoon only to return in the evening, can have huge mental health impacts.

It’s important that employers acknowledge and address any psychosocial hazards at an individual level before adding additional policies to the mix.

Frontline and shift workers 

When it comes to ‘future of work’ policies, frontline and shift workers are often a forgotten cohort, and yet 16 per cent of Australians have shift work as their main occupation. Flexibility, working from home and, yes, the right to disconnect can feel impossible for many people who fall into this cohort.

These are people who are often on call, working odd hours, and/or need to be available at all times in case of an emergency (though the proposed legislation does allow for contact outside of ‘connection’ times in these circumstances). For some, disconnection can literally mean life or death. For others, like those working in more casualised work environments, enforced disconnection can mean a loss of income and have negative lifestyle impacts.

‘What do organisations, and their people, really need?’

To read the rest of Transitioning Well’s article and practical tips here.