Nowadays, the line between professional and personal time has become increasingly blurred. Australia’s introduction of the Right to Disconnect law aimed to address this issue. However, new research suggests that the reality on the ground may not match the law’s lofty intentions.
The Right to Disconnect law, introduced in August 2024 to safeguard workers from after-hours communication, appears to be struggling to achieve its intended impact, according to recent findings. The new law seems to be taking longer than anticipated to settle in and show positive results.
A study conducted by the job site Indeed has shown that four out of five workers continue to receive work-related communications outside their regular hours. Even more alarmingly, 65% reported being contacted by their superiors whilst on personal leave. These figures suggest that the Right to Disconnect law has yet to make significant inroads into changing workplace culture and practices.
Amanda Gordon, a workplace psychologist consulted by Indeed, offers some perspective on the slow pace of change. She emphasises that shifts in workplace culture rarely happen overnight, stating, ‘We just have to educate each other about what’s reasonable and what’s okay, and test things out a bit and see what works.’
Whilst some might dismiss after-hours messages as a minor inconvenience, the research indicates otherwise. Over half of the workers surveyed (52%) reported that these communications disrupt their personal lives. Moreover, 30% claimed that such intrusions have affected both their mental and physical well-being. These statistics highlight the very real consequences of blurred work-life boundaries on employee welfare.
Perhaps the most troubling finding from the Indeed study is that 79% of workers don’t feel comfortable ignoring messages when they’re off the clock. This reluctance stems from various concerns: fears about career progression, missing out on promotions, causing project setbacks, or damaging their professional reputation.
Gordon expresses particular concern about this trend, noting, ‘There are some people who are scared to switch off, even in their Christmas holiday break… And it’s not life-saving surgery that [bosses are] impacting. It’s some nonsense, and we can’t allow that.’
The Right to Disconnect law grants employees the right to refuse ‘unreasonable’ communication from work outside of regular hours. However, the definition of ‘unreasonable’ remains a point of contention, as it can vary significantly between companies and individual managers.
Indeed’s research identified the top three reasons that workers felt warranted after-hours contact:
1. Responding to urgent project deadlines (55%)
2. Correcting an error (42%)
3. Matters related to personal issues (32%)
To address these challenges, Gordon suggests that workplaces should have open discussions to establish clear guidelines. She emphasises that managers should initiate these conversations, saying, ‘The powerful person should be going and saying, “Let’s talk about what it means for you and how we can make this work so that we’re all comfortable”.’
Not everyone is convinced of the law’s necessity or effectiveness. Graham Wynn, a recruitment expert, views the Right to Disconnect rules as ‘overkill,’ arguing that most companies already understand appropriate boundaries for contacting staff. He believes that existing mechanisms, such as Fair Work Australia, were sufficient to address any issues without the need for new legislation.
The research also revealed concerns from the employer’s perspective, with 47% worried that the law might lead to a drop in employee productivity if they can’t contact workers outside of hours and 55% of bosses indicating they would be willing to increase pay if it meant they could contact their employees around the clock.
Readers, have you experienced changes in your workplace since the introduction of the Right to Disconnect law? What are your thoughts on the issue? Share your opinions in the comments below.
Also read: Older workers often overlooked and underestimated
