Should Australia Introduce a ‘Right to Disconnect’?
In an era of constant connectivity, the line between work and personal life is blurring faster than ever. Smartphones, remote work, and 24/7 email access have made employees increasingly available outside traditional hours. This shift has reignited debate over whether Australia should introduce a ‘right to disconnect’ law — a policy granting workers the legal right to ignore work-related communications after hours without penalty.
What Is the ‘Right to Disconnect’?
The ‘right to disconnect’ is a workplace policy or law that limits an employer’s ability to contact employees outside of normal working hours. Originating in France in 2017, it has since spread to several European countries and even parts of Canada and the Philippines.
The idea is simple: employees should be able to rest and recover without being tethered to work emails, calls, or messages during personal time. This ensures a healthier work-life balance and protects mental wellbeing.
Australia’s Current Position
Currently, there is no national law in Australia granting employees an explicit right to disconnect. However, some protections exist under the Fair Work Act 2009, which covers reasonable working hours and protections against overwork or harassment.
In early 2024, the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) renewed its call for such a law, citing research that over half of Australian workers feel pressured to be available after hours. Several states have also begun considering workplace culture reforms, especially as hybrid and remote work models expand.
The Case For the Right to Disconnect
Supporters argue that such a law is long overdue. They point to the mental health crisis, burnout rates, and rising stress levels among employees in digital professions.
A ‘right to disconnect’ could:
Promote work-life balance: Ensuring workers can rest without guilt or fear of repercussions.
Boost productivity: Studies show that employees who can fully disconnect return to work more focused and engaged.
Protect mental health: Reduced stress, anxiety, and burnout contribute to overall wellbeing.
Support gender equality: Women, especially working mothers, often shoulder the bulk of unpaid domestic labour, and being “always on” exacerbates that load.
Some companies in Australia have already introduced internal policies limiting after-hours communication — showing that cultural change may precede legislative action.
The Case Against the Right to Disconnect
Opponents warn that while the principle sounds fair, implementing it could be complex and restrictive.
Critics argue that:
Certain industries require flexibility. Sectors like healthcare, law enforcement, and IT may need employees to respond urgently.
It may harm small businesses. Employers with limited staff may struggle to maintain operations without after-hours communication.
It could reduce autonomy. Some employees prefer flexible schedules that include working outside 9–5 hours.
Global business operations complicate boundaries. Multinational companies often require cross-time-zone coordination.
International Comparisons
In France, the ‘right to disconnect’ is mandatory for companies with more than 50 employees, requiring policies that limit digital communication outside work hours. Ireland and Italy have similar frameworks, while Canada’s Ontario province implemented its own version in 2022.
Each system balances flexibility with employee wellbeing, showing there’s no one-size-fits-all approach. If Australia were to legislate, it would likely adapt the idea to local employment conditions and workplace cultures.
The Role of Technology
Ironically, technology itself may help enforce a right to disconnect. Workplace management platforms can automatically mute notifications, delay email delivery, or track overtime compliance. These tools support both productivity and wellbeing — an example of technology solving the very problems it created.
Looking Ahead: Could It Work in Australia?
Public sentiment appears to favour some form of regulation. A growing number of employees are calling for a healthy separation between work and personal life. However, policymakers will need to ensure that any legislation balances flexibility with fairness — protecting workers without burdening employers.
As discussions continue, it’s clear that the ‘right to disconnect’ represents more than just a legal issue. It’s a reflection of changing social expectations, workplace norms, and our collective understanding of what it means to live well in a connected world.
Introducing a ‘right to disconnect’ in Australia could signal a major step towards modernising workplace laws and promoting mental health. Yet, it requires careful consideration of diverse industries, business needs, and evolving digital realities.
Whether through law or cultural change, one thing is clear — the future of work in Australia depends on finding balance between connection and wellbeing.
