Author: M. Sruthi, Vel Tech Rangarajan Dr. Sagunthala R&D Institute of Science and Technology
TO THE POINT
The Right to Disconnect refers to an employee’s ability to remain free from work-related communication outside the agreed working hours. The idea has gained importance with the expansion of remote work, hybrid work and digital communication.
The Right to Disconnect Bill, 2025 attempts to create a legal framework for protecting employees from continuous work-related communication. The Bill proposes that employees should have the right to refuse work-related calls and e-mails outside working hours and on holidays. It also provides for an Employees’ Welfare Authority to deal with matters relating to implementation and employee welfare.
The importance of the proposed right lies in maintaining a reasonable separation between professional and personal life. Continuous availability may result in work pressure, reduced personal time and difficulty in maintaining family and social responsibilities.
However, the Bill also raises questions regarding its practical implementation. Certain sectors may require emergency communication, international businesses may operate across different time zones, and some employees may voluntarily prefer flexible working arrangements. Therefore, the right has to be balanced with genuine requirements of the workplace.
USE OF LEGAL TERMS
Right to Disconnect: The right of an employee to disengage from work-related calls, e-mails and other communications outside working hours.
Work-Life Balance: The ability of an individual to maintain a reasonable balance between professional responsibilities and personal or family life.
Working Hours: The period during which an employee is required to perform duties under the terms of employment.
Out-of-Work Hours: The period falling outside the employee’s agreed or scheduled working hours.
Overtime: Work performed beyond the normal working hours for which additional compensation may be provided according to applicable law or employment terms.
Employee Welfare: Measures intended to protect the health, safety, dignity and overall well-being of employees.
Digital Communication: Communication through electronic means such as e-mails, telephone calls, messaging applications and online platforms.
Workplace Dignity: The principle that employees should be treated with respect and should not be subjected to unreasonable work-related interference.
THE PROOF
The need for a Right to Disconnect arises mainly from the increasing use of digital technology in employment. Earlier, leaving the workplace generally meant the end of the working day. Today, an employee may continue receiving calls, e-mails and messages even after leaving the workplace. This creates a situation where the employee may technically be outside working hours but still remain connected to work.
The proposed Bill directly addresses this issue. Its stated purpose is to establish an Employees’ Welfare Authority and to confer on employees the right to disconnect from work-related telephone calls and e-mails beyond work hours and on holidays.
The Bill is therefore relevant to the changing nature of employment. It recognises that working conditions cannot be examined only in terms of physical working hours when digital communication allows work to continue at any place and at any time.
The constitutional principles of dignity, privacy and personal liberty under Article 21 also provide an important background for examining this issue. In Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, the Supreme Court recognised privacy as a fundamental right connected with dignity and personal liberty. Although the judgment did not specifically deal with the Right to Disconnect, its principles are relevant when considering the protection of an individual’s personal sphere.
The proposed framework is also connected with labour welfare. Excessive working hours and constant availability may affect an employee’s health and personal life. A legal right to disconnect can therefore be viewed as an extension of the broader objective of humane and fair working conditions.
At the same time, the proposal requires careful consideration. A complete prohibition on all after-hours communication may not be suitable for emergency services, international organisations and certain essential occupations. The law should therefore provide reasonable exceptions while ensuring that employers do not use such exceptions to impose continuous availability.
ABSTRACT
Digital technology has transformed modern employment by making communication possible beyond conventional working hours. Although this development provides flexibility and efficiency, it has also created difficulties in maintaining a clear distinction between professional and personal life. Employees may be expected to respond to work-related calls, e-mails and messages even after completing their regular working hours.
The Right to Disconnect Bill, 2025 seeks to address this emerging concern by proposing a legal right for employees to disconnect from work-related communications beyond working hours and on holidays. The Bill also proposes the establishment of an Employees’ Welfare Authority for matters connected with employee welfare and implementation of the proposed right.
This article examines the proposed Bill from the perspective of work-life balance and employee welfare in India. It considers the constitutional principles of privacy, dignity and personal liberty and examines their relevance to the modern workplace. The study also considers the practical difficulties involved in implementing a Right to Disconnect, particularly in relation to emergencies, flexible employment and international business operations.
The proposed legislation represents an important step towards recognising personal time as an important aspect of employee welfare. However, effective implementation would require clear rules, reasonable exceptions, awareness among employees and employers, and appropriate mechanisms for addressing violations.
CASE LAWS
1. Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1
The Supreme Court recognised the right to privacy as a fundamental right under the Constitution. The Court connected privacy with dignity, liberty and individual autonomy.
The decision provides a constitutional basis for protecting an individual’s personal sphere. In the context of digital employment, it supports the importance of maintaining a boundary between professional obligations and personal life.
2. Consumer Education & Research Centre v. Union of India, (1995)
The Supreme Court recognised the importance of workers’ health and humane working conditions in the context of Article 21.
The case supports the principle that employee health and welfare are important components of dignified employment. This principle is relevant when considering excessive work pressure and continuous digital availability.
3. Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India, (1984)
The Supreme Court held that the right to live with human dignity forms part of the protection guaranteed under Article 21.
The principle of dignity is relevant to working conditions. Employment should not become a source of unreasonable interference with an individual’s basic personal life.
4. Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Female Workers (Muster Roll)
The Supreme Court emphasised labour welfare and social justice in relation to working women.
The judgment reflects the constitutional approach of providing humane and welfare-oriented conditions of employment. This approach supports the broader objective behind protecting work-life balance.
CONCLUSION:
The Right to Disconnect Bill, 2025 addresses an important issue arising from the digitalisation of employment. Work-related communication no longer necessarily ends with the completion of office hours. Calls, e-mails and messages can extend professional responsibilities into an employee’s personal time.
The proposed Bill attempts to provide a legal solution by recognising the employee’s right to disconnect and by proposing an Employees’ Welfare Authority.
The proposal is significant from the perspective of employee dignity, welfare and work-life balance. However, the proposed right must also take into account the practical needs of different workplaces. Emergency situations, international working arrangements and genuinely flexible employment cannot be ignored.
Therefore, the Right to Disconnect should not be understood simply as a right to ignore an employer. It should be understood as a broader labour-welfare principle which recognises that an employee is entitled to reasonable personal time outside work. A clear legal framework, reasonable exceptions, overtime protection and effective grievance mechanisms can make the proposed right meaningful in the Indian workplace.
FAQs
1. What is the Right to Disconnect?
It is the proposed right of an employee to remain free from work-related calls and e-mails outside working hours and on holidays.
2. Who introduced the Right to Disconnect Bill, 2025?
The Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha by Smt. Supriya Sule as a Private Member’s Bill.
3. Has the Bill become law in India?
No. The Bill has been introduced in Parliament but has not been enacted as a law.
4. Why is the Right to Disconnect important?
It can help employees maintain personal time, reduce work-related pressure and promote a healthier work-life balance.
5. Does Article 21 have relevance to this issue?
Yes. Article 21 protects life and personal liberty, and judicial decisions have connected it with dignity and privacy. These principles are relevant to maintaining a reasonable boundary between work and personal life.
6. What are the major challenges?
The major challenges include emergency work, international time zones, flexible employment arrangements, enforcement and defining reasonable exceptions.
7. What is the main objective of the proposed Bill?
Its main objective is to provide employees with a legal right to disconnect from work-related communication beyond working hours and on holidays and to establish an Employees’ Welfare Authority.
