The boundaries that once separated work from life used to be so obvious we barely noticed them. A commute signaled the beginning and end of the day. Office attire distinguished our professional identity from our personal one. Even leaving a desk at five o’clock marked a shift from our work persona to our private self — the original “right to disconnect” built into the structure of work itself.
When work went mobile — and later moved fully into the living room — those cues disappeared. Without them, many people struggle to disengage. They close the laptop but remain tethered to tasks, emails, and unfinished conversations. As Microsoft’s data shows, the result is an endless workday: professional life bleeding into every corner of the week, with no natural off switch.
It’s tempting to fix the problem by reinstating external structure. Some organizations call people back to the office a set number of days each week. Governments around the world are experimenting with right to disconnect laws — policies that give employees the legal ability to ignore work messages after hours without fear of penalty.
The Rise Of Disconnect Laws
France led the way in 2017, requiring companies with more than 50 employees to respect after-hours boundaries unless a separate agreement was in place. Italy and Spain quickly followed, and by 2024 at least 18 countries — including Belgium, Greece, Luxembourg, Mexico, Australia, and Ontario in Canada — had adopted versions of the law. The details vary: some apply only to remote or hybrid workers, others to all employees; some include fines or mandate contractual clauses, while others remain voluntary. These differences matter — research shows the benefits are strongest where enforcement is clear and coverage is broad, while partial or weakly enforced laws yield far less impact.
Until recently, debates centered on whether such laws might harm competitiveness or simply help workers avoid burnout. A new study by Yuye Ding, Mark Ma, and Zhuoying Niu offers the first large-scale evidence. Examining OECD countries over a decade, the researchers found that right to disconnect laws not only improve employees’ satisfaction with work-life balance but also boost firm profitability. In Ontario, Canada, for instance, employee ratings of work-life balance rose significantly after the province adopted its law in 2021. Across countries, companies reported stronger performance, primarily through higher productivity. The evidence suggests these laws help — but they also reveal the limits of what policy can achieve.
Why Right to Disconnect Legislation Isn’t Enough
In a global economy, work is no longer defined by one office, one schedule, or even one time zone. It is always 5 p.m. somewhere — and 9 a.m. somewhere else. The real challenge is that legislation assumes one definition of working time. In reality, working time looks very different for each of us.
Flexibility is precisely why many people value remote and hybrid work. Some do their best thinking late at night, others prefer to log in before sunrise. A rigid prohibition on sending or receiving emails outside of “regular hours” risks undermining the autonomy flexibility was meant to provide. The early riser who starts the day by clearing their inbox at 6 a.m. can only do so if the night owl on their team was free to draft messages the evening before.
That’s why blunt instruments like legislation miss the point. If legislation prevents one person from working when they are most productive, another loses the benefit of starting fresh. That’s the paradox of the endless workday: we need boundaries, but we don’t all need — or want — the same ones. The problem is not flexibility itself. The real challenge — and opportunity — is unlearning past norms and creating new ones so that flexibility doesn’t become synonymous with always on.
This is where the study’s findings matter most. The true value of legislation is not in dictating schedules but in signaling a broader cultural shift: flexibility cannot be abused as an expectation to be “always on.” The laws provide employees with much-needed permission to disconnect.
But laws are only signals. The right to disconnect creates permission, not practice. In a global, flexible, digital workplace, boundaries cannot be legislated into existence. They must be designed. That means organizations and individuals alike must take ownership of building the systems — cultural, managerial, and personal — that preserve flexibility without letting it collapse into an endless workday.