Since the pandemic, the concept of the "right to disconnect" has grown in visibility. Learn more about the idea and how it could be implemented in the UK.

In the words of general secretary Mike Clancy: "Flexible working must be made to work for workers as well as employers… 'Flexible' has to actually mean 'flexible', not simply moving work from the office to home with the same long-hours, always-on culture."

The Labour Party backs the policy and at the time of writing is planning to include it in its next General Election manifesto.

In the words of Angela Rayner, deputy leader and shadow secretary of state for the future of work: "Flexible working is not just about working from home, it is about a fundamental change to working practices to improve the lives of all working people. Flexible working means work fitting around people's lives, not dictating their lives."

The "right to switch off", as Labour call it, would be part of a package of employment policies that would ban zero-hours contracts, get rid of "fire-and-rehire" policies, and more.

If implemented, it has the potential to bolster trade union power – something that will worry businesses, as reflected in the Financial Times's "Bosses beware" headline.

How would it work?

For an idea to become a legal reality, there's a lot of work to be worked. While Labour is light on detail, Prospect has suggested three possible avenues:

1. Enterprise agreements. This would be a situation where employers and unions agreed on times when contact with workers could and couldn't be made.
2. An enforced legal directive.
3. Legislative or statutory guidance which advises organisations as to what a right to disconnect would look like.

What are the objections?

Opponents of the right to disconnect point to existing versions of it that appear to have been poorly implemented.

For instance, VW introduced a "server lock" which meant staff couldn't access emails on their work phones outside normal hours. Some staff have said that this made flexible working harder, not easier.

Perhaps the strongest objection is how a right to disconnect would maintain the advantages of hybrid working.

More and more employees are now in the habit of choosing their own hours – so how will that square with legislation that prescribes "normal" working hours and limits communications outside of them?

This view has been well expressed by Len Shackleton, a professor of economics at the University of Buckingham. He argues that under the right to disconnect, "employers are going to want to be damned sure you're available and fully occupied during your contracted hours".

He continues: "[M]uch of the flexibility of working at home, which has allowed you to nip out to the supermarket or to pick up the kids and make the time up later, will disappear. Employers will want to know why you haven't answered that phone call or email."

The right to disconnect in Europe

In 2017, France introduced legislation to combat the "always-on" work culture. Breaches are punishable with a fine. In 2018, for instance, British firm Rentokil was fined €60,000 (£51,557) by a French court.

In Portugal, there's a blanket ban on bosses contacting workers out of hours. The only exception is force majeure.

Ireland introduced the right to disconnect in early 2021. And in April 2023, Belgium began requiring all employers with more than 20 staff to come up with an internal policy.

Whether the law will be passed here is uncertain, but it's clearly an issue that's gaining more traction as time goes on and hybrid working becomes more entrenched.

Whatever happens, we'll keep you posted.

At Milners Law, we have teams of experienced employment lawyers in Leeds, Pontefract and Harrogate. Looking for guidance? Get in touch today for a free consultation.