Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Australia

Australia Grants Workers 'Right To Disconnect' After Hours (npr.org) 117

Millions of Australians just got official permission to ignore their bosses outside of working hours, thanks to a new law enshrining their "right to disconnect." From a report: The law doesn't strictly prohibit employers from calling or messaging their workers after hours. But it does protect employees who "refuse to monitor, read or respond to contact or attempted contact outside their working hours, unless their refusal is unreasonable," according to the Fair Work Commission, Australia's workplace relations tribunal. That includes outreach from their employer, as well as other people "if the contact or attempted contact is work-related."

The law, which passed in February, took effect on Monday for most workers and will apply to small businesses of fewer than 15 people starting in August 2025. It adds Australia to a growing list of countries aiming to protect workers' free time. "It's really about trying to bring back some work-life balance and make sure that people aren't racking up hours of unpaid overtime for checking emails and responding to things at a time when they're not being paid," said Sen. Murray Watt, Australia's minister for employment and workplace relations. The law doesn't give employees a complete pass, however.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Australia Grants Workers 'Right To Disconnect' After Hours

Comments Filter:
  • People who answer out of hours will get the raises, bonuses, and promotions. People who don't will be at the top of the layoff list.

    • by Rinnon ( 1474161 )

      People who answer out of hours will get the raises, bonuses, and promotions. People who don't will be at the top of the layoff list.

      Not sure why this was modded down. Sure, it's a bit pessimistic, but I can't help but think it's accurate. On paper I'm sure you're not "allowed" to factor this in when considering said raises, bonuses, promotions, etc. but off the record I'm sure the above decisions will take this into consideration, and I imagine it will be hard to prove, one way or the other, that it was related to not answering those calls/texts out of hours.

      • On paper I'm sure you're not "allowed" to factor this in when considering said raises, bonuses, promotions, etc. but off the record I'm sure the above decisions will take this into consideration, and I imagine it will be hard to prove, one way or the other, that it was related to not answering those calls/texts out of hours.

        A professional is generally given a task, then performs it. If a person is so unprofessional that they refuse to answer their phone if it is outside of what they define as the only hours that they will work, of course they are not performing. And even easy things, like answering a call not to come into work, but just checking to see if something is done, well it's a pity they refuse to do that. Things will take that much longer if the work has to stop.

        So damned right that will make a big difference at

        • by Calydor ( 739835 )

          Work to live, don't live to work, man.

          • Work to live, don't live to work, man.

            Being professional actually doesn't mean that a person is living to work.

            • by Calydor ( 739835 ) on Monday August 26, 2024 @12:51PM (#64736510)

              Being available 24/7 without actually being paid for that fact means you do, though.

          • Work to live, don't live to work, man.

            If you don't enjoy your job, maybe you should find a new career.

            I like my job very much, and it is a big part of my life. My co-workers are some of my best friends.

            I get calls from co-workers who are working late, and I can often answer a question in two minutes that would take them hours to figure out on their own. I'd be an a-hole to refuse to do that.

            I do silence my phone when I sleep, but if I wake up to pee, I check for messages before I go back to sleep.

            • It may not be easy to find a new job while being on call 24/7 and having no free time. This law will protect employees while they are trying to find a new job and break toxic relationships with their current bosses.

            • by Anonymous Coward
              I like cooking. It doesn't mean that I want to be dragged out of my bed at midnight to bake a cake, though
        • You want my service after hours? Fine I’ll start billing for it then.

          • by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

            This is the whole "equal outcomes regardless of input" narrative at play.

            You do that. Your colleague doesn't. Should next promotions be handed to both regardless of differences in your actions, or can there be discrimination based on past actions?

            Notably, we already have the answer here from almost a century of evidence. Soviets tried this whole "equal outcomes no matter how lazy one is, and how invested the other is". It almost crashed their economy in 1920s (i.e. right away after implementation). They cli

            • by OhPlz ( 168413 )

              Promotions should be based on performance/merit. If you're constantly being called after hours, I would wonder why people have to contact you outside normal business hours. Why are you not able to get everything done during the workday? On the surface, you might think that availability is a good thing, but it may be a symptom of work not getting done efficiently or completely leading to those urgent inquiries.

              • by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

                >I would wonder why people have to contact you outside normal business hours.

                Common example: You're that one person hired on merit into the team who actually knows how to do the job, and so is called to help fix all the messes caused by Didn't Earn It workers.

                I can think of dozen others in the similar vein.

                • >I would wonder why people have to contact you outside normal business hours.

                  Common example: You're that one person hired on merit into the team who actually knows how to do the job, and so is called to help fix all the messes caused by Didn't Earn It workers.

                  I can think of dozen others in the similar vein.

                  psst. OhPlz is one of those people - you and I might be being insensitive clods! 8^)

              • Promotions should be based on performance/merit. If you're constantly being called after hours, I would wonder why people have to contact you outside normal business hours. Why are you not able to get everything done during the workday? On the surface, you might think that availability is a good thing, but it may be a symptom of work not getting done efficiently or completely leading to those urgent inquiries.

                Because that isn't how it works. I was often called in to fix other people's work. As I noted before, many co-workers would not spend a minute past 5:00 PM, and they left work needed first thing in the morning. So I got called in to haul asses out of the fire. Or maybe a test needed my attention, or something went wrong, and they needed me to consult.

                Nothing ever was the result of incompetence or a mistake on my part.

                • by OhPlz ( 168413 )

                  Nothing ever was the result of incompetence or a mistake on my part.

                  Hopefully, you got paid extra for that. Otherwise, you're just giving away your time. I can see doing that once in a great while, but certainly not as a daily occurrence. You can't be everyone, nor should that be expected of you.

                  • Nothing ever was the result of incompetence or a mistake on my part.

                    Hopefully, you got paid extra for that. Otherwise, you're just giving away your time. I can see doing that once in a great while, but certainly not as a daily occurrence. You can't be everyone, nor should that be expected of you.

                    I was paid 3X the other people in my department with the same job title.

                    Now all that said, I wasn't so worried about specific dollar amounts. What I did know was that money paid out was a metric of how they valued my work.

                    But in what is interesting to me is that things that don't bother me at all are insufferable for so many others. What is the difference? I definitely get time off as needed, get very good compensation, even in my present part time work, and that thing about work/life balance, I see

                    • Lol, triple the salary of everyone else? I guess when you finished everyone stood up and clapped too?

                    • Lol, triple the salary of everyone else? I guess when you finished everyone stood up and clapped too?

                      Not even. There was some friction, as you might guess. Especially the ladies in the group. They made a complaint that they should be paid what I was paid because gender laws. I told the boss to let me know, and I'll put my notice in. But the problem was solved when it was pointed out that while demanding the same pay, they were refusing to work more than 8 hours a day, refused to come in early or say late, refused to travel, refused to work on anything that had anything hazardous involved - tasks specifica

              • If you're constantly being called after hours, I would wonder why people have to contact you outside normal business hours.

                Because they know I'll take the call, answer their questions, and solve the problem.

                They do the same for me. We're a team.

                Why are you not able to get everything done during the workday?

                Because "everything" is unbounded. There's always more to do.

                I don't go home when I'm "done" because I'm never done. Items are added to my task list faster than I can finish them.

                So, I do my best to prioritize and go home when I feel I've done a day's work.

            • This is the whole "equal outcomes regardless of input" narrative at play.

              You do that. Your colleague doesn't. Should next promotions be handed to both regardless of differences in your actions, or can there be discrimination based on past actions?

              Notably, we already have the answer here from almost a century of evidence.

              And outside of the failed planned economy of the Soviet Union, we have here in America. I made no bones that I could move on if people that refused to have my level of productivity yet were paid the same. And we did have people who were pissed because of my salary, demanding to be paid the same, despite refusing to put in the work I did. Refusal to work overtime, or travel, or do any work that might be hazardous, even dressing appropriately for working around important visitors. In irony, I often stayed

              • What was happening after 5pm? You say people left things unfinished. Were you running the punched cards through the reader for an IBM S/360?

                • What was happening after 5pm? You say people left things unfinished. Were you running the punched cards through the reader for an IBM S/360?

                  Typically, it was finishing PowerPoints or posters, or various publications. Not actually my so-called field, but I could do it. Much of what we did had hard deadlines. If it wasn't finished for the meeting or lab tour, it was a total fail.

                  As with so many things, it started out innocently. "Ol, I have to get home to cook dinner, be a hon and do the last couple slides for me." or the boss coming in and saying so and so has yoga class tonight - how about you finish this report, because it is needed first th

              • by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

                >A surprising number of people are latent communists

                We all are. This is actually a well established fact with human thinking patterns in evolutionary psychology. It comes from two factors:

                1. Primary status seeking dictates that we seek to group against those immediately above us to tear them down and take their place. That makes us very sensitive to inequalities of outcomes when it comes to those above us. I.e. Bernie's "millionnaires" becoming "billionnaires" once Bernie made it to millionnaire level of

                • >A surprising number of people are latent communists

                  We all are. This is actually a well established fact with human thinking patterns in evolutionary psychology.

                  Maybe that's my issue. I might not think "right" and be some outlier of normal humanity. Certainly in some respects, my MO would seem to be in line with the ideal. I treat the people at the top the same as the people at the bottom - as in respectfully. But I've never felt the desire to tear someone down simply for them being more highly "placed" than me.

                  Quoting from the book:

                  "We have strong hierarchical propensities that are reflected in our desire to put ourselves above others, but we also have strong egalitarian propensities that can be seen when others try to put themselves above us".

                  Did you get a pre-production release or something? I went to order it, and it isn't available until February of next year.

                  • by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

                    Let's just say that I like to plug books that I find to be a good read on specific subject being discussed, and leave it at that. I read The Social Leap, enjoyed it greatly and this is von Hippel's next book.

                    I've been interested in evolutionary roots of human psychology for a while, and he's one of the best authors of books on the subject.

        • unprofessional? as in if your profession has it as a norm? That would be why there is language in the law that allows it if not being unreasonable.

          Usually staff are 'on call' and receiving a stipend for it. This allows employees to plan their time around their schedules as well.

          Unfortunately some Employers decide that their own working hours should fit within their lifestyle and expect other employees to comply with it. There needed to be a law to be pointed to.

          If it wasn't a problem, there would not have b

        • A professional is someone who works the damn hours they are *paid to work*. Someone who works for free outside those hours isn't a professional, they're a schmuck.

          • A professional is someone who works the damn hours they are *paid to work*. Someone who works for free outside those hours isn't a professional, they're a schmuck.

            That not professional - that's hourly work. Like working the drive through window at McDonald's

            I have always been paid for getting a particular task finished. The contract says nothing about how much I get for every hour worked. Just how much compensation per year.

      • by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Monday August 26, 2024 @12:26PM (#64736388)

        Not sure why this was modded down.

        Because we're talking about Australia, a country where I would relish being put in the front of a queue for a layoff due to not answering calls out of hours. The payout from the fair work commission would be fantastic.

        Australia is not an at-will state. You need to demonstrate a strict paper trail when laying people off. Many companies try and then find themselves getting arsefucked by the regulator. But I get it, to most of the people on this American site the concept of worker protections are a curiosity at best. And to our favourite troll OPing, frankly any English sentence baffles him.

    • by xevioso ( 598654 )

      Are you sure? This is Australia. The very fact that this law is even being considered shows that there may be a different work culture there. What indication do we have that Australian companies operate this way in general?

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Rinnon ( 1474161 )

        Are you sure? This is Australia. The very fact that this law is even being considered shows that there may be a different work culture there. What indication do we have that Australian companies operate this way in general?

        If you have two employees doing the same role, both of them pleasant to work with and turn in good work while they're in the office... but one of them repeatedly goes above and beyond the call of duty, taking care of extra tasks out of the office, responding to management (who probably IS working after hours) so that things can keep moving... when it comes time for one of them to get promoted which one would you pick, all else being equal?

        • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          HR would be wise to clamp down on that before it becomes a lawsuit.

          If they allow anyone to do it, the others could complain. Those emails will become evidence in an unfair treatment tribunal.

        • by ixuzus ( 2418046 )

          If you allow this you're setting your department up for disaster. When Mr 55 hour weeks gets promoted and replaced by someone working regular hours you're down nearly two work days a week right from the start. Add in that the new guy will take some time to get up to speed you're realistically down 3 - 3.5 work days per week. The bean counters sure as hell aren't forking out another budget because you got this much work done with this staffing level last financial year - get it done. It doesn't take long

    • No, the only thing you’ll get is more work.

    • by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

      The difference will come from the fact that most workers aren't easily replaceable. Especially the kind that employer needs to contact after hours routinely.

      Will it reduce your career opportunities? Yes, just like refusing to do overtime, working inefficiently, or being a dick in general and any number of other actions that demonstrate you're less of an asset than those you're competing with for the bonuses, raises and promotions.

    • by Savage-Rabbit ( 308260 ) on Monday August 26, 2024 @01:02PM (#64736570)

      People who answer out of hours will get the raises, bonuses, and promotions. People who don't will be at the top of the layoff list.

      That's not been my experience. Most people I've known who answered calls after hours despite not being hired to be on standby got to be on 24/7 standby without getting paid for it. At one point I worked with a Windows admin who got tired of not being able to even go on a weekend hiking trip because he might get a call, especially because the people calling got stink sour every time he couldn't just drop everything and show up to fix their shit. He went and asked to be paid for after hours calls, assignments and hours of fixing other peoples FUBARs only to be told that 'there is no budget for that'. Of course the after hours calls kept coming. After a while all of these people got sick and tired of this BS and went to work for another employer that was either willing to explicitly state in the employment contract that they'd not have to be on 24/7 standby or outline exactly what they'd be paid for it if 24/7 standby was part of the deal. I much prefer employers to be upfront about 24/7 standby than having to do it 'informally' for a year and then, maybe, if management is in a good mood at years end, being thrown some scraps from their high table. But hey, if you like being treated like a pet dog I suppose that's a choice.

    • When I was a manager there was an Australian worker. I had to take special training from the Australian HR rep! This was because they want to make very clear to the bosses that Australian workers have rights, that they must take a certain amount of vacation and the boss can't prevent it, etc. Mostly it's in some (not all) American tech companies where so many workers voluntarily work an extra 60 hours a week because they feel that they have to. I don't think it's necessarily true that they get the raise

    • by jjbenz ( 581536 )
      Probably true, but do we really want to live in a world where you have to sell your soul to your employer?
    • This is what everyone thinks, yes. But I never believed it. I decided early in my career that I was going to skip those long hours and being on call all the time. Instead, I worked hard when I was in the office, then went home, and pointedly didn't check my emails or messages. The amazing thing was, I got promotions and pay raises, if anything, faster than my peers, who were worn out and burned out all the time, and stressed because they were losing their families in the process.

      So no, I still don't believe

    • "People who answer out of hours will get the raises, bonuses, and promotions."

      Why would management give them anything when they've already demonstrated they will do more work for free?

    • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      People who answer out of hours will get the raises, bonuses, and promotions. People who don't will be at the top of the layoff list.

      In fantasyland that might be true.

      People who answer after hours will simply keep getting called after hours. Their raises will be no more than the cost of living adjustment and they will be promised promotions that will never come.

      Sure, they may be promised big raises and promotions, but everyone knows it doesn't happen until you switch jobs. Instead that carrot will be dangled

    • by mjwx ( 966435 )

      People who answer out of hours will get the raises, bonuses, and promotions. People who don't will be at the top of the layoff list.

      Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha...

      Oh wait, you're serious... Do you still believe in the tooth fairy too.

      No one gets a pay rise by working harder, only fools and horses work harder. You get a pay rise in two scenarios,
      1. You change jobs.
      2. You're worth enough to the company that they don't want scenario 1 to happen.

      OK, you could also include 3. you're good mates with senior management, which would almost preclude the working hard out of hours.

      People who let their employer rule their lives nev

  • it's an lot harder to fire someone in Australia as well.

  • We're going to have to figure out what is best for humans but we're definitely not evolved for 24x7 hypervigilance.

    People functioned in tribes of a hundredish people and being pure individuals among millions makes us crazy.

    Which is good for pharma sales and power seekers who exploit us.

    Just because tech exists to have us available 24x7 doesn't mean we should use it.

    We'd better pass a law now to prevent people from being required to be chipped as a condition of employment or public education.

    No, I am not kid

    • We're going to have to figure out what is best for humans but we're definitely not evolved for 24x7 hypervigilance.

      Hyper vigilance isn't related to this, that is usually related to PTSD. And if say the boss or a co-worker calls and that causes trauma and PTSD, might be time for some therapist action.

      There is a difference between professionalism and un-professionalism. I've always been available, and find answering questions or even having to go into work to fix an issue, just something I do. Causes zero stress, just part of work. Obviously if I'm halfway across the continent on vactation, I'm not going to be able to

      • I did not read your apologia for corporations and working yourself to death, but you seem awfully triggered about your approach to work.
        I am very professional and I don't take calls outside of work at all.
        Because you do makes you inferior not superior.

        • I did not read your apologia for corporations and working yourself to death, but you seem awfully triggered about your approach to work.

          You're projecting dood! I'm trolling for lazy people, not triggered - you're responses feed my amusement.

          I am very professional and I don't take calls outside of work at all.

          So if your boss calls with an emergency, you'll refuse to take the call, and if they manage to get hold of you, you'll still refuse to help?

          Because you do makes you inferior not superior.

          If that makes you happy to think so, then that's really great, and I think you should never lose your narrative. But consider that not all work can be neatly packaged into an 8 hour, inviolate and rigid day, where when your time stops, there is nothing to do.

          But

          • by jvkjvk ( 102057 )

            So?

            Just because in *your* particular job you *had* to do it doesn't mean anyone else has the same restrictions in their job. At all.

            I bet it was in your contract, as well.

            See, it wasn't in mine. Sure I understand crunch time. Pay me.

            Calls outside of work hours to my home number? Lol you don't have access to my home number.

            Give me a cell phone to answer calls? No thanks. If it comes to it I can find a better job easier than you can replace me.

            You are shitting in your own bed calling people lazy who may simpl

    • Such a law might not be sufficient. In a decade or two, you may need to be chipped to:

      Have a bank account

      Have Internet access

      Have a mobile phone

      Buy a car or a house

      Be allowed to board a plane or train

      and probably many more. Also, if you're not chipped, you may be required to inform the police every day about your whereabouts. When a crime happens and you happen to be nearby, you're first in the list of suspects. Your social credit is fixed to zero. And so on.

      • And this will get the "mark of the beast" crowd all rialed up, at least in America. I kind of hope they will try that chip shit here so I can watch what the religious fanatics do to them. Like watching a rat fight.
        • by GoTeam ( 5042081 )

          And this will get the "mark of the beast" crowd all rialed up, at least in America. I kind of hope they will try that chip shit here so I can watch what the religious fanatics do to them. Like watching a rat fight.

          What a weird thing to hope for? You "kind of" hope that society will be destroyed by the complete lack of privacy and autonomy so you can watch a group of nuts freak out as they stand up for what they believe in? Did you murder neighborhood dogs as a child?

          • I was being a bit sarcastic as I am not very fond of fundie groups. But if anyone tries this chip shit here, I hope all of America rises up and tears those chippy clowns a brand new asshole, hopefully literally running them out of America as the chippies are shitting their underroos in mortal fear for their lives. I hope religious and non religious alike rise up enmasse.
            • by GoTeam ( 5042081 )
              Ah, my bad. I'm with you in hoping we never have to deal with being chipped.
              • It would drive home the message that we really are thought as cattle in our society and people are not going to take kindly to that. It's one thing for our devices to be spying on us and us being data mined, but to have an actual physical implant put into our bodies? That's where they cross the line, even with people who up to this point don't really care about about corporate abuses just as long as they get their Netflix or shiny new device every year. The fact that large entities are still trying to push
        • The sad thing is that I'm a staunch atheist, yet I believe it's a real danger, which is seemingly drawing closer.

          When religious fanatics freaked out about the mark of the beast in the bar codes, I was having a laugh. But this time it's different.

    • In many countries, the security guards get very suspicious if someone is still working in the office after 5 or 6pm. There is nervousness that the union will find out and the company gets in hot water. Happened a few times to some cowoerks, but to me it only happened once, and I said "I'm American" and the guard said "carry on" :-)

      Yes, Americans have the stereotype of being workaholics with no lives.

  • by derplord ( 7203610 ) on Monday August 26, 2024 @12:13PM (#64736322)

    Welcome to something we've had in the Nordics for decades and decades.

    • It's something I've negotiated for decades right here in the USA. I simply ask in the interview what I can expect from oncall type activities. I tell them I will expect them to communicate any off-hours duties up front and I'll be considering that as a negative part of the offer. In many cases, they back way off from all that if you do it during the negotiation phase. If they don't, simply select another company and laugh at their demands. I've done exactly that and it works just fine, no Big Government ham
  • ... for spotting the critical weasel words:

    "...unless their refusal is unreasonable..."

    And who, pray, gets to decide what is "reasonable"? Ye-eee-ees.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      If it comes to a dispute, presumably the government decides if something is reasonable.
      If J. Random Employee left something royally fucked up something that was business-critical, a regulator might agree that it's reasonable to call to ask what happened in order to fix it, and might even agree that they don't have to keep the employee if they refuse to answer work questions during an emergency that they caused.
      Calling linemen to see if they can come in to fix power lines during a storm emergency, also reaso

      • Here is the problem I see with the reasonableness requirement. I leave work Friday at 5, head out to a camping trip... Boss contacts me with a reasonable request, however I can't see it until I get back into communication range late Sunday and might not even turn on laptop/look at work phone until Monday morning anyway. Yes, it was a reasonable request, however it is also reasonable for me to be out of communication on my time off. Which reasonable wins?

  • So, pretty much the same as during working hours.

  • Like we saw from the various attempts at smoking bans, these things tend to be an all-or-nothing proposition. The moment they include even small concessions or grey areas, all credibility of the laws & the likelihood of people winning legal disputes go out the window. There needs to be sufficiently heavy penalties for any messages sent between employers/management & employees under any conditions. They can argue out any reasonable mitigating circumstances in a public court of law, i.e. we can't leav

If the code and the comments disagree, then both are probably wrong. -- Norm Schryer

Working...