Right to disconnect
is the employee’s protected freedom not to engage with work communications outside working hours. France pioneered mandatory negotiation on it, Spain and Belgium legislated variants, Australia added a statutory right — and EU-level rules keep being discussed. For employers it is now a policy expectation.
What a defensible policy looks like
The workable pattern: define normal communication windows, state that out-of-hours messages need no response absent genuine urgency, configure defaults (delayed delivery, meeting-hour norms), and train managers — the policy fails at the first 11 p.m. ‘quick question’ from a lead. Where law requires negotiation (France’s companies over 50) or works-council involvement (Belgium, Germany via co-determination on tools), run the process, not just the memo.
Cross-border teams add time-zone reality: disconnect rules per member’s local hours, with asynchronous defaults, are both compliant and operationally saner. See working time.
FAQ
Is ignoring after-hours email legally protected?
In the legislating countries, yes in substance: retaliation for non-response outside hours creates claims, and Australia’s right is enforceable directly. Even without a national statute, working-time and rest rules do similar work — the safe employer position is designing for disconnection rather than testing the edges.
Does the right to disconnect apply to on-call staff?
On-call is scheduled availability — a different, compensated arrangement with its own working-time treatment (stand-by duty may count as working time per CJEU case law depending on constraints). Disconnect rights govern the unscheduled rest of the workforce; do not blur the two categories.