American workers and bosses are grappling to locate the shut-off button.

• The "right to disconnect" movement in the U.S. has been unsuccessful in its legislative efforts, including in California.
• The opposition in the business world claims that a law restricting work communications beyond regular work hours is an excessive invasion of privacy and a misguided "one-size-fits-all" approach that is out of sync with a global workforce and the increasing trend of remote work.
• The political movement will persist due to the inability of company leadership to address work-life balance, according to experts, and the American work culture's relentless pace threatens to collapse.

It appeared that American office workers could potentially gain the privilege of disconnecting from work when not physically present, similar to a rising number of global colleagues.

The most recent attempt to pass a "right to disconnect" bill occurred on the West Coast, where the tech industry is concentrated and work culture is characterized by flexible, open-ended hours. Employees are often connected to the office through work software such as Outlook, Slack, and other email and instant messaging programs, even outside of regular work hours and into the weekend.

The bill that mandates workers the right to uninterrupted time off during non-working hours, excluding emergency or imminent scheduling issues or pre-negotiated terms, stalled out in California's State Assembly after its April introduction by Assemblyman Matt Haney (D-San Francisco). Its fate remains uncertain as it didn't make the deadline for this year's legislative session, leaving it stuck for the foreseeable future.

In a post-Covid world, where employees have become accustomed to working from home and employers have emphasized the importance of work-life balance, the bill emphasizes a persistent issue that requires a solution. The language of the bill calls for "employers to establish a workplace policy that grants employees the right to disconnect from work-related communications during non-work hours."

"Ten years ago, work was vastly different from what it is now," Haney stated when introducing the bill. "The use of smartphones has made it difficult to separate work and personal life. It's unfair to penalize workers for not being reachable around the clock if they're not being compensated for working beyond regular hours."

In 13 countries, there are currently laws that allow individuals to disconnect from work-related emails and other digital communication outside of work hours. These laws originated in France in 2017. New York City and Washington State have recently considered similar proposals, but without success. The fact that such laws have been enacted in Europe but not the U.S. may reflect differences in work cultures and the balance between free market and government oversight, with some viewing government intervention as an infringement on individual rights.

Another overseas example, rather than Europe, is what looms larger. Notable investors such as Jason Calacanis have emphasized that competition with China, where a 72-hour work week and a 996 work culture are commonplace, makes it difficult to implement the right-to-disconnect in the face of a generational geopolitical rivalry and economic competition.

U.S. business opposition

Some U.S. businesses have contended that workers should manage their own work-life balance. On the other hand, it is argued that the movement should be brought to the U.S. through companies' self-implementation of policies, as some foreign companies have already done.

The California bill aims to safeguard both hourly and salaried workers, but many critics argue that it would create administrative challenges and potentially harm employee autonomy. With the rise of remote work, where employees have demonstrated their productivity outside of traditional working hours, the bill could be counterproductive.

SHRM, the world's largest human resources trade group, wrote a letter of opposition to Haney in the spring, stating that the bill was a "blanket solution to workplace challenges" that "do not deliver expected results and often harm those they are designed to help."

The bill's one-size-fits-all approach, according to SHRM, would harm the autonomy of employers and HR professionals in finding workable solutions. SHRM did not provide any further comment beyond its letter.

History of legal worker protections

Legislation aimed at safeguarding worker rights and enhancing their well-being has been enacted for many years, ranging from ERISA to minimum wage laws that are gaining traction in the U.S.

Alan Guarino, vice chairman of management consultant Korn Ferry, recently explained to CNBC why the idea of work-life balance has become a goal for some workplace advocates and how it fits into the broader labor law history. He stated, "Pre-Covid, the world of work had become so fast-paced. If we didn't have Covid, I believe the work environment would have broken down within a decade. Work and life were intertwined, and life happened on the way to and from work. We were operating at 7,000 rpm. The bill is an attempt to address the issue that work is a 24/7 commitment."

An attorney who has written extensively on labor rights, including the right to disconnect, stated that while it's not the end of the road for the legislative concept in the U.S., it's not surprising to see failures to date. He explained that corporate opposition from the standpoint that such bills take away company flexibility in the workplace is a significant obstacle. However, he added that building momentum similar to successful minimum wage laws would be possible if a shift in focus is made.

Instead of viewing the right-to-disconnect as a narrow issue related to hours worked and compensation, it is more beneficial to approach it as a universal human right, like being guaranteed health and safety in the workplace, Secunda said. This can be achieved through language and laws that already exist, such as the Occupational Safety and Health Act, which provides legal protections under its general duty clause. Right-to-disconnect issues could be attached under mental health parameters set forth in the language of OSHA, he argues, similar to what is being developed for workplace violence issues.

A new work contract between bosses and employees

The recent legislative effort in California failed due to an unrealistic portrayal of how work operates, according to Joanna Starek, senior partner and chief commercial officer at leadership consulting firm RHR International. Starek used the example of a global company with employees in 38 countries to illustrate how a work day is not always confined to a 9-to-5 schedule. Similarly, the rise of remote work offers flexibility that workers desire, allowing them to take a few hours off during the day and work on a project in the evening.

Starek believes that the stalled bill has philosophical merit, but the questions it raises won't be resolved by the bill. The bill assumes that people work 9-5 in the same time zones, which does not address the issues of work-life balance and employee autonomy. Starek suggests that more research is needed to understand the modern world of work before such a bill can be passed in the US.

Even if a similar bill were passed, companies could easily circumvent its provisions by including different terms in employee contracts. As long as the employee signs, the legislation would be rendered irrelevant. To address the challenges faced by new employees in balancing work and personal life, better training and onboarding are necessary.

Microsoft Outlook and Slack have implemented features to address the issue of employees sending emails outside of normal work hours. Outlook flags emails before they are sent and suggests scheduling options, while Slack flags time zone differences and offers the "zzzs" for when employees are not checking notifications.

Guarino believes that the right to disconnect debate is correct in one aspect, which is that leaders may not know how to manage work's intrusion into life. However, he believes that solutions to this issue should be driven by individuals and their bosses. According to Guarino, it is all about leadership and the contract between employee and boss. He believes that it is essential to find a balance between work being 24/7 and work being eight hours a day. Guarino believes that legislation is not necessary if there is a good leader and employees who are aligned.