The Right To Disconnect

Technology has changed how people work. Gone are the days of the workday ending at a desk or the punch of a timecard, no, work follows people into their homes and onto their phones. Into every hour of their day. While some flexibility has had tremendous advantages, like working remotely, constant connection to work has caused stress, fatigue, and frustration among employees who feel as though they can never truly log off. Society can address this problem by appealing to legislators in the United States to give workers the right to disconnect. The purpose of such legislation would be to protect people from the expectation to answer work messages or perform work-related tasks after the standard, or agreed upon, workday ends. A return of a clear separation between work and personal life would improve mental health and fair treatment to the employee.

Not long before COVID, most people left work behind when they exited the building. Today, many jobs follow the employee home. Surveys show that most salaried employees in the United States check their work email during evenings and weekends (Pew Research Center, 2023). Hourly employees, especially those in service industries, have irregular schedules and feel pressured to respond when called in by their employer. This shift has created a toxic culture where employees are expected to be available any time of day, regardless of if they’re being paid or not.

It falls short to blame the issue solely on the presence of technology, rather we should include the expectations that come with it. There’s a belief that always being reachable is a sign of loyalty or commitment, which leads employees to answer their phone or complete tasks during their personal time. This isn’t done out of genuine interest for their jobs, but because they fear missing opportunities or worse, losing their jobs.

This continual access to work robs the employee of more than just their time. It has serious mental health detriments, which leach into physical health. The World Health Organization has linked job burnout to contemporary work expectations (World Health Organization, 2019). This includes exhaustion and a drop in employee performance. Research has also found links between long hours and various other issues like poor sleep, anxiety, and even heart problems. Being expected to stay connected beyond work hours can be deadly.

Changes have already been made in some countries. France, for instance, passed legislation that allows employees to ignore after-hours communication from employers. This was in response to growing reports of stress and burnout among the French population. In America, where employees are faced with similar problems, there are absolutely zero protections. Americans report some of the highest levels of stress related to work compared to any other high-income nation.

There must be limits on when work takes place and companies who want productive and healthy staff must be willing to accept them. Wage laws define some protections for hourly workers, but salaried employees are often left without any limits whatsoever. Many salaried employees work more than 50 hours per week without any additional pay or benefit. While some say this is part of the job, the reality is it creates an unfair system where the boundaries are unclear, and the rest becomes a rare luxury.

How great is must feel to risk being overlooked for promotions or risk being punished if an employee decided not to respond to messages after hours. The reward of being “always on” will not compensate the employee for congestive heart failure or severe depression. A right to disconnect would protect employees from this pressure. How much better would it feel to have a protected understanding that messages or tasks after hours should be rare and not routine? Being available at all hours does not equate to better work, either. In fact, it often leads to poorer performance. People who work constantly tend to burn out, lose focus, and make even more mistakes than they would not bringing work home with them. True productivity depends on being rested, focused, and able to think clearly. When there’s no time to rest or think outside of work, the quality of work will suffer.

Thankfully, some international companies have taken steps to limit access to work tools after hours. Volkswagen, in Germany, puts a halt on email delivery after a certain time of day (BBC News, 2011). While these changes won’t stop people from doing their jobs, they do support better working conditions and help reduce stress. This puts the ball in the employees’ court and gives them the choice to either take advantage of their free time or assist in whatever task is needed. The United States should adopt similar rules that reflect this dire need for personal time.

The expectation to be “always on” does not affect everyone equally, either. People with caregiving duties, including parents and women, are less likely to be available during off-hours. These individuals might be seen as less committed, even if they perform well during their regular shifts. This has the potential to create unfair barriers to advancement. A sort of “quantity over quality” barrier where the employee can retaliate if an employee values their free time.

Employees with mental or physical health conditions may also be harmed by the expectation of constant communication. They might need firm boundaries for their personal wellbeing. Without legal backing, asking for such boundaries can lead to judgement or retaliation. A clear right to disconnect would protect these individuals and promote fair treatment across a range of jobs. Critics will argue that protections like these would hurt flexibility. But protecting personal time does not mean workers lose all freedom. It simply draws a line around when they’re expected to be reachable. Emergencies can and will happen, and they can still be managed through proper planning. Flexibility can still exist during previously agreed upon hours.

Others will argue that people in salaried positions knew what they were getting into. But realistically, expectations change. Employees might accept a job with one set of duties, later to find that the expectations have grown over time. This is more common than most people think. The right to disconnect would give these individuals a way to hold the line and avoid being taken advantage of through informal expectations.

We’ve already seen results from countries with stronger rules around working hours, who report better employee satisfaction and higher quality results. No argument could be made that protecting rest would harm success. No, it supports it. There is not a single reason for American workers to be left behind when others around the world are gaining protections that support healthier lives. A clear right to disconnect would give people the ability to enjoy life beyond their jobs. It would promote health, support fairness, and encourage better work rather than more work. The absence of such a rule allows unfair treatment to flourish while making it harder for employees to speak up. Giving people the right to disconnect is not just about comfort but about creating a respectful and fair system that values their time and health. It shouldn’t matter if they’re on the clock or not.

References