The Right to Disconnect

 Technological advancements have significantly changed the traditional boundaries of employment. Work is no longer necessarily confined to a particular workplace or a particular part of the day. As a result, labor law faces a relatively new question: should employees have a legal right to disconnect from work-related communications outside their working hours?  

 The concept known as the right to disconnect generally refers to an employee’s ability to refrain from work-related communications and activities outside working hours without suffering negative consequences for doing so. It is therefore broader than simply allowing an employee not to answer an email. Its main purpose is to protect the distinction between working time and rest time. The right to disconnect has not developed through one uniform international legal instrument. Instead, different jurisdictions have adopted different approaches, including statutory provisions, collective bargaining mechanisms, employer policies and codes of practice. At the level of the European Union, the European Parliament adopted a resolution on the right to disconnect on 21 January 2021. The resolution described the increasing use of digital tools as contributing to an “always on” culture and linked the issue to working-time limits, rest periods, work-life balance, health and well-being. Importantly, however, the resolution itself did not create a directly applicable EU wide right to disconnect. At the time of the resolution, there was no specific EU legislation establishing such a right across all Member States. Instead, the European approach has developed through the interaction of several existing labor law principles: limitations on working time, minimum rest periods, occupational health and safety, privacy and work-life balance. This makes the right to disconnect particularly interesting from a legal perspective. It does not necessarily require labor law to create an entirely new concept. It can also be understood as a modern application of existing principles to a digital working environment. 

 France provides one of the clearest examples of statutory recognition of the right to disconnect. The French Labor Code requires collective bargaining to address the arrangements for the full exercise of the employee’s right to disconnect and the implementation of measures regulating the use of digital tools. These measures are intended to protect rest periods, leave and employees’ personal and family life. Where no agreement is reached, the employer must establish a charter after consulting the relevant employee representative body. The charter must define how the right to disconnect is exercised and provide for training and awareness measures concerning the reasonable use of digital tools. The importance of the French model lies in the fact that it does not simply tell employees that they are free to stop responding to messages. It places an organisational responsibility on employers to create conditions in which disconnection can actually take place. This raises another important question: what happens when an employee continues working outside working hours voluntarily? A recent decision of the French Court of cassation provides an interesting example. On 25 March 2026, the French Court of cassation considered a case concerning an employee who had performed work-related activities during sick leave and argued, among other things, that his right to disconnect had been violated. The Court rejected the appeal. It noted that there was no evidence that the employee had been required to respond immediately to the emails received. Most of the emails were automatic notifications, while the employee had voluntarily connected to his professional computer and carried out occasional actions. On those facts, the Court did not find an established violation of the right to disconnect. The decision illustrates that the mere existence of communication outside working hours does not automatically mean that an employer has violated the employee’s right to disconnect.

 Ireland provides a different regulatory model. In 2021, the Workplace Relations Commission adopted a Code of Practice on the Right to Disconnect. Rather than creating a standalone statutory right in the same form as the French model, the Code provides practical guidance for employers, employees and their representatives and operates alongside existing employment legislation. The Irish approach is particularly significant because it recognises that the formal ability to ignore a message may not be enough. An employee may technically be free not to answer an email at 10 p.m., but may nevertheless feel that failing to respond could affect their relationship with their manager, future promotion or professional reputation. This leads to a more precise question: Can an employee disconnect without suffering professional consequences? An effective right to disconnect therefore requires not only limits on working time, but also protection against negative consequences for respecting those limits.

 An important misconception is that the right to disconnect would prohibit employers from contacting employees after working hours. That is not necessarily the purpose of such a right. Certain professions require on-call arrangements. International companies operate across different time zones. Emergencies may arise. Employees may agree to flexible working arrangements. Some communications may also be automated and require no response. The purpose is therefore not to eliminate all communication outside standard working hours. Instead, regulation can focus on preventing permanent or unreasonable availability from becoming an implicit requirement of employment. This distinction is particularly important for modern workplaces, where flexibility is increasingly valued by both employers and employees. The challenge is to preserve flexibility without allowing flexibility to become an expectation that employees remain permanently connected.

 Right to disconnect is particularly relevant for Azerbaijan as remote and digitally mediated work becomes increasingly integrated into employment relationships. Azerbaijani labor legislation already contains several principles that could provide a foundation for such a development. The Labor Code similarly establishes that normal weekly working time may not exceed 40 hours. It also regulates overtime work and requires employers to maintain accurate records of employees’ working time and overtime hours. These provisions already establish the basic legal distinction between working time and rest time. The potential introduction of a specific right to disconnect would therefore not necessarily require abandoning the existing structure of Azerbaijani labor law. Instead, it could build upon it. Rather than simply copying the French model, Azerbaijan could develop a mechanism adapted to its existing labor law framework. One possible approach would be to introduce a provision in the Labor Code defining the right to disconnect as the employee’s right not to perform work related activities outside established working hours, except in circumstances provided by law, the employment contract, and internal rules.

 The right to disconnect represents a broader transformation in labor law. It reflects the shift from regulating only the duration and location of work towards regulating the boundaries of work itself. Ultimately, the question is not whether an employer should ever be allowed to send an email after working hours. The more fundamental question is: Can an employee finish the working day without remaining legally and professionally connected to work? As technology continues to blur the boundary between professional and private life, the answer may become one of the defining questions of modern labor law.

Bibliography:

Constitution of the Republic of Azerbaijan.

Azərbaycan Respublikasının Əmək Məcəlləsi.

European Parliament, “The Right to Disconnect” (2021).

French Labor Code, Article L2242-17 

Cour de cassation, 25 March 2026, Right to Disconnect.

Government of Ireland, “Code of Practice for Employers and Employees on the Right to Disconnect.”