Right to Disconnect: Drawing the line after work

The Hindi:- Published on 23 December 2025

Why In News?

The Right to Disconnect Bill, recently introduced in India as a private member’s bill, has reignited debates around labour rights in the digital age. Amid the framework of India’s four consolidated labour codes, the bill seeks to address the modern challenge of constant connectivity, where work-related emails and calls encroach on personal time. It could mark a significant step in redefining work-life balance under Indian labour law.

Overview of the Bill

The bill proposes that employees have the right to ignore work-related communications outside prescribed working hours. It aims to respond to the pressures created by smartphones and other digital devices. However, the legislation operates within traditional time-based labour frameworks without formally redefining what constitutes ‘work’ in a digital economy. This creates ambiguities when interpreted alongside codes like the Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2020.

Key Ambiguities

• The bill does not clarify whether after-hours digital engagement counts as ‘work’ or overtime.
• Without a formal definition of digital work hours, the right functions more as a behavioural guideline than enforceable labour protection.
• This could limit its effectiveness in protecting employees’ personal time against employer expectations.

Global Comparisons

• European Union: Courts (SIMAP, Tyco, Jaeger cases) have ruled that ‘working time’ includes on-call periods under employer control, accounting for digital availability.
• France: Labour law distinguishes working hours from rest periods through collective bargaining, treating controlled availability as work.
• Germany: Enforces strict rest periods and embeds digital connectivity rules directly into labour regulations.

Unlike these models, India’s bill does not redefine the scope of work to include digital engagement under employer control.

Constitutional Dimensions

The right to disconnect is linked to Article 21 of the Indian Constitution (right to life and personal liberty), protecting individual autonomy from work intrusion. However, the bill does not explicitly claim constitutional status or clarify whether it is mandatory or can be contractually waived, leaving room for judicial interpretation.

Challenges

• The bill relies on traditional physical workplace frameworks without integrating digital labour or after-hours work rules.
• Enforcement remains uncertain, and its effectiveness will depend on judicial interpretations or future amendments.

Way Forward

• Integration with Labour Codes: Amend the bill to explicitly define digital work, overtime, and after-hours engagement in line with India’s four labour codes.
• Enforceability: Introduce mechanisms to make the right legally binding rather than merely advisory.
• Collective Bargaining: Encourage sector-specific agreements between employers and employees for flexible digital work policies.
• Awareness Campaigns: Educate employers and employees about the importance of work-life balance and responsible digital communication.
• Judicial Clarifications: Courts can interpret the bill in line with Article 21, reinforcing personal autonomy and setting enforceable standards for digital connectivity.

By addressing these areas, the Right to Disconnect Bill can evolve from a behavioural guideline to a robust legal safeguard, promoting work-life balance in India’s increasingly digital workplace.