What are the WHS implications of the “right to disconnect”


What are the WHS implications of the “right to disconnect”


Workers will be able to refuse to monitor, read or respond to contact from their employer as part of a new law which grants them the “right to disconnect” from work outside of normal working hours, unless the refusal is unreasonable.

The Closing Loopholes Bill No. 2, which was recently passed by federal parliament, was one of the more contentious rights granted under the legislative changes.

Greens Senator Barbara Pocock said the newly legislated right will make a difference for workers who are not paid for being available and who donate many unpaid hours to their workplace.

“In implementing this right, we are playing catch up with 20 other nations who have already acted on this massive problem,” she said.

“This change will help workers protect their mental health and improve work-life balance. It will especially help those in insecure jobs who need that legislative backup.”

Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations Michaelia Cash said the law opens up another level of complexity for businesses at a time when they are doing it very tough.

“In a country with five time zones during the summer months and in a globally competitive economy, it’s not clear how this will help increase productivity in the workplace,” she said.

Employers also took issue with the law, claiming they are impractical and will add unwarranted conflict and uncertainty into workplaces. 

“There are already provisions in the Fair Work Act and awards that regulate the extent to which employees can be unreasonably required to work outside normal hours,” said Innes Willox, chief executive of employer association Ai Group.

“These changes were unfortunately added into the mix at the last moment, without being properly thought through, with a view to securing the Greens’ support for the passage of the rest of the legislation.”

Unions welcomed the passing of the Bill and said the law will give new rights to casual and gig workers, protect road transport workers, and provide new rights for workers to disconnect from work when they are not being paid.

“For the first time, all Australian workers will have the right to refuse unreasonable, unpaid work such as the expectation they will monitor and respond to emails out of hours in which they are being paid,” said ACTU secretary Sally McManus.

Long working hours have recently come under increased scrutiny, especially following COVID and a widespread trend for workers to put in longer hours given many no longer had commutes and found it difficult to disconnect as their workplace and home became one and the same.

Centre for Work Health and Safety survey found that, due to the ability to work from home, employees were working longer hours, experienced increased demands from their superiors or found it hard to ‘switch off’ from work outside of work hours.

Another survey by the 
Centre for Future Work found that 71 per cent of employees had worked outside their scheduled work hours often due to overwork or pressure from managers.

The survey found that the most commonly experienced negative consequences of overtime work were physical tiredness (35 per cent), followed by stress and anxiety (32 per cent), and being mentally drained (31 per cent).

Parliamentary inquiries have also examined how the advancement of technology has led to “availability creep”, where employees feel they need to be available all the time to answer emails, calls or simply deal with their workload.

“This has only been exacerbated by the pandemic,” the Select Committee on Work and Care Interim Report stated.

“Availability creep impacts mental health, exacerbates work-life stress, impacts on productivity and takes workers away from a fair day’s work for a fair day’s pay.”

The new “right to disconnect” law contains important exemptions for employers where after-hours contact would be considered reasonable.

In certain industries and occupations, the right of disconnect will be limited because of the need to monitor certain work-related communications. 

Employers would also be able to contact workers about matters such as rostering and shift work, in an emergency, where there is a WHS concern, or where a worker receives appropriate compensation.

In taking into account whether a refusal by an employee is unreasonable, a number of employee-related matters must also be considered, including the nature of the employee’s role and the employee’s level of responsibility, and the employee’s personal circumstances (including family or caring responsibilities).



Source: Australian Institute of Health & Safety (AIHS) 

Contact Us

Zenergy News

May 14, 2025
Learn how to create a CoR Management Plan to meet Chain of Responsibility requirements under HVNL. Includes checklist and compliance steps.
May 14, 2025
CoR training ensures compliance with HVNL laws. Explore online options in NSW, Victoria, Adelaide and more to meet Chain of Responsibility requirements.
May 14, 2025
Discover the benefits of Chain of Responsibility online training in Australia. Flexible, accessible and compliant with HVNL. Start learning with Zenergy today.
Warehouse traffic vehicles pedestrian
May 14, 2025
Create a safe warehouse environment with a comprehensive traffic management plan. Download our checklist or contact Zenergy for expert support in planning.
Directors' duties for psych risks unpacked in new report
April 23, 2025
The WHS obligations of company directors include taking reasonable steps to understand the psychological hazards in their workplaces, and this is a "personal" prosecutable duty, a new guide for directors warns. Directors' obligations include establishing that their organisations and their management "are equipped with appropriate resources and processes to eliminate or minimise these risks to the extent that is reasonably practicable", the guide by the Australian Institute of Company Directors and law firm King & Wood Mallesons says. Most of any organisation's work to address psychosocial hazards will be "driven by management", given the complexity of the risks and the deep operational knowledge required to guide action, it says. "The board plays a supporting role in constructively challenging these efforts and maintaining oversight of how effective psychosocial risk management contributes to broader organisational culture and leadership." Under Australia's national model WHS laws – adopted by all jurisdictions other than Victoria, which has similar legislation – officers have a duty to exercise due diligence to confirm their organisation is meeting its WHS obligations. (See section 27 of NSW's version of the laws, for example.) This duty is a "personal duty, meaning [officers] can be prosecuted for failing to meet their due diligence obligations", the guide says. "Prosecution typically requires proof that the officer failed to take reasonable steps to comply with their duty, assessed in the context of the organisation's overall safety and health management system," it says. These due diligence obligations apply to paid directors, and are "recommended" for volunteer directors, who can be prosecuted in limited circumstances. "While non-executive directors have not been the focus of WHS regulators to date, this can change, and regulatory expectations are rising," the guide notes. According to the 12-page document , company boards and governance play a crucial role in ensuring psychosocial risks are managed effectively. Directors must oversee management's efforts at identifying and implementing control measures, set expectations and confirm that the necessary frameworks are in place. "This includes seeking information, reviewing board reports, assessing organisational culture, and challenging management where needed to strengthen risk controls," the guide says. Examples of how boards should address the workplace factors that create psychosocial risks include: Overseeing how managers monitor the risks associated with work design by drawing on complaints data, employee surveys, and absence and turnover rates, and engaging regularly with management to assess risks and evaluate measures; Confirming that management is complying with the positive duty to eliminate workplace sexual harassment, and obtaining regular reports on key behavioural risks involving code of conduct breaches and harassment cases; Setting expectations for management to provide workers with practical assistance and timely consultation in the event of organisational change and restructures, which can create significant stress; Engaging with management to review how it is addressing remote work risks, and ensuring there they have a clear policy to guide them in determining when remote arrangements are appropriate; and Overseeing how HR and performance management processes are managed, and confirming that investigation procedures are fair, workers have access to appropriate support, and outcomes are handled as consistently as possible. Governing WHS Psychosocial Risks: A primer for directors, by the Australian Institute of Company Directors and King & Wood Mallesons, April 2025 This article has been reproduced with permission from OHS Alert, and the original version appears at www.ohsalert.com.au.
April 7, 2025
Zenergy recently hosted Women in Safety, a special networking event dedicated to fostering collaboration in the health, safety, and wellbeing sector. Held on March 20, 2025, at The Winery, Surry Hills, this event provided a relaxed and welcoming atmosphere where professionals gathered to exchange insights, share experiences, and build meaningful connections. With attendees from diverse industries—including construction, logistics, corporate sectors, and more—the event highlighted the vital role of women in shaping safer workplaces across Australia.
More Posts