California’s Proposed Right to Disconnect Bill
If passed, a new proposed bill in California would codify an employees "right to disconnect" into law. Jennifer talks with Katie Couric for her Wake-Up Call at Work newsletter. Since Jennifer’s been writing and analyzing the law since France made the bold move in 2017, she has been interested to see how it would play out.
Katie's newsletter digs in to the pros and cons and is worth reading and subscribing to. Jennifer’s hot take is this: she sees these policies as more of a good first step towards a broader conversation. She’s found that it’s companies with the best cultures - that care less about the law and more about employee happiness - where disconnecting is not just supported but celebrated.
When you dig into the law's language Jennifer’s not sure it dissuades companies from breaking them. For example, the California policy, the law has to be broken three times which means each time the employee has to call an ombudsmen and file a complaint, and the fine starts at a $100 - less than a parking ticket. In Ontario where Jennifer lives, there are countless loopholes. The law states that every employer has to have a right to disconnect policy - but it doesn't provide any guidance on what that policy should look like. An employer could say to an employee - you have the right to disconnect between midnight and 2:00 am and they would not be in breach of the law.
One study of all the EU countries with right to disconnect policies found eight out of ten employees still regularly receive work-related communication outside of those hours. Almost three-quarters reported being contacted by colleagues out of hours every day or on some days; 67% are contacted by line managers. The vast majority (almost 9 out of 10) of respondents responded to such communications, with one in four replying to all calls and messages received out of hours.
What Jennifer found most interesting is that the most cited reason for checking after hours was "feeling responsible for one’s assignments (82%), wishing to stay ‘on top of things' while fear of a negative impact if no response is provided (61%) and the expectation of better career progression (50%) was the least cited reason."
It would be great to revisit these policies because Jennifer is glad they're out there - but there's still a lot of work to do when it comes to actually tackling this "always on" mentality at work and in life.
Read the complete article at the link below.