The ‘Right to Disconnect’

The ‘Right to Disconnect’ is gaining momentum. There is new legislation in Australia that echoes that in other European countries giving employees the right to disconnect. It’s designed to prevent unreasonable employer behaviour putting pressure on their people to be ‘always on’. While this is well-intentioned, will it actually make a difference?

Do we need to legislate?

I find myself pushing back against it. It’s not that it isn’t important. It is absolutely an area we need to put more of our attention. The future of our workforce and our productivity is going to be enabled by more and more technology. If we haven’t got a handle on the blurring of the boundaries between work and home life that the technology can create, then we’re in for more harm than good. I’m just not convinced that this legislation is the right response.

New legislation may act as a backstop in more extreme cases of unreasonable employers, but the duty of care that employers have as part of the Health and Safety legislation surely already provides that backstop protection. What about aiming higher than ‘do no harm’? Can’t we look for ways to drive more productive and healthy ways of working and put our focus there instead?

I’m not convinced that further legislation will really change the behaviour in our organisations and teams. The concern I have is that legislation (just like our organisational policies) can be pretty cheap and nasty. We can be seen to be doing something without really having to focus on the hard (and expensive) job of true behaviour change. Doing no harm is one thing, but aren’t we actually trying to get the best outcome, with increased productivity and wellbeing?

If the intention of the ‘Right to Disconnect’ is to curb the harm being done by burnout, with people never truly switching off from work, then we need to work on boundaries, rather than rights. Boundaries between work and home that are healthy and sustainable, nuanced to the work I do and the person I am.

It takes two

Heejung Chung’s work on the Flexibility Paradox shows that we often make harmful choices for ourselves when being given the option to work flexibly. The Right to Disconnect focuses only on the employer and misses out the other half of the equation - we all need to get better at managing our time, energy and boundaries, both the employee and the employer.

Getting every team having high quality conversations about what their boundaries look like is surely much more likely to get the change we’re all seeking. Using a simple tool to help people understand their own boundary preferences and how close (or far away) that is to their reality, gives teams the language and framework they need to put healthy boundaries in place that fit the needs of the individuals as well as their role requirements.

Boundaries and workload

If the work expectations are incompatible with reasonable boundaries, then we need to rightsize the workload too. A right to disconnect isn’t going to do that for us. With better boundaries that meet our preferences and realistic work expectations we will get the healthy culture we’re all looking for.

Better practice is what we really need, not legislation, if we want a healthy and productive workforce that can effectively manage the boundaries between work and home.

What do you think?

Would you welcome the Right to Disconnect?