Should switching off be a right for all workers?

Given the increased popularity of flexible and remote work in recent years, the emergence of the right to disconnect debate during the same time period reveals that a tension is at play. While many workers theoretically have greater freedom to strike a better work-life balance, a large number are not simply managing to do so in reality. 

Many countries, including France, Australia and Spain, are attempting to mitigate these negative effects by introducing legislation that protects workers’ right to disengage from work technology outside their contracted hours.

Our view on the issue 

IOSH’s new Thought Leadership Panel shared their own reflections on the phenomenon of ever-connectedness. 

Another referred to the possibility, in the not-too-distant future, of “entirely new forms of ‘contract’ between people and their employers, where the fundamental relationship regarding who directs who is recalibrated”

They also saw issues related to worker connectedness as already commonplace and not helped by the affordability and ease of digital communication. The risk of harassment is certainly increased when it is so easy to communicate with individuals outside of working hours or formal channels.

Is legislation the answer?

Beyond the idea of a right to disconnect, another issue is how enforceable these laws are, and how practically they can be followed by employers. The nature of certain 24/7 businesses means that the ability to contact people outside traditional working hours is critical. As such, the question of worker-employer trust and organisational culture takes on even greater significance. It is one thing having the right to disconnect, it is another thing feeling compelled to exert it – and another step entirely to do so without fear of repercussion.

Building mutual respect

The right to disconnect may be more contentious for some than it is for others. Where connectedness and availability feel natural for some business, others may find tension with workers about a perceived need for constant contact. Problems are likely to arise when the expectation to work outside hours is imposed rather than mutually and respectfully agreed.

One panellist argued that it may be preferrable to consider the opposite of a right to disconnect, where workers positively agree to connect outside of their working hours. With permission to request flexible working being a legal right from day one in the UK, perhaps this is the kind of conversation that should take place early on and at intervals – with new workers choosing to opt in or out of out-of-hours communication.

A technology-driven future

Looking ahead, a tech-driven and perpetually connected future may transform beyond recognition – or make entirely redundant – terms like “duties”, “contracted responsibility” and “hours of attendance”. It’s difficult to anticipate how a right to disconnect may apply. Employment in the future may be unrecognisable to how it is today.

The final word should perhaps go to one of the panellists, who commented that these things tend not to resolve themselves swiftly. “This is going to be a slow and grinding process. Think back to how long it took between the light bulb being invented, business realisation that it could operate 24/7, and the introduction of shift patterns designed to protect workers rather than just maintain outputs?”

Interesting times lay ahead.