To examine this topic, Jacob Carson, a current law student at the University of Newcastle and a finalist for the 2024 Australian Law Awards; Jeremy Short, a current law student and paralegal at the University of Sydney; and Tiana Barrese, the secretary for the Melbourne University Law Students’ Society and an in-house legal intern at Cummins Inc, deliberated on whether these laws will offer meaningful enhance to the working condition of the legal profession and whether it will improve students’ appeal to enter the legal field.

Understanding the RTD laws

The recent implementation of this law has ignited a lively conversation among law students regarding their potential efficacy within the legal profession.

VIEW ALL

Carson recognises the significance of the RTD law as a positive development in addressing the challenges faced by both legal professionals and students.

“It’s no secret that lawyers, and even law students, are more likely to suffer from insomnia and a general inability to ‘switch off’ due to their workloads, so the laws arguably are a step in the right direction,” Carson said.

While he acknowledges that the law is a step in the right direction, he remains doubtful about its practical impact on the legal profession, given that its effectiveness relies heavily on the discretion of employers.

“However, as many have rightly observed, the efficacy of these laws all comes down to whether your employer’s late-night contact is considered ‘reasonable’, and that takes into account the expectations attached to your role,” Carson said.

“I think this reasonableness exception probably makes the laws toothless when applied to many graduate legal roles.”

Nevertheless, Carson contends that the enactment of the law has initiated a dialogue that may subtly encourage law firms and businesses to re-evaluate their practices.

“But, even though the ‘Right to Disconnect’ laws don’t have a very big stick behind them to ensure their enforcement, I still think their passage has opened up a national conversation that will have a subtle but real influence on law firms and other businesses,” Carson said.

Short offers a more critical perspective on the impact the RTD law will have on the legal profession. While he acknowledges the growing discourse surround the new law, he remains doubtful about its capacity to address the entrenched issues within the legal field.

“Despite current discourse that has presented the right to disconnect as a ‘silver bullet’ to address issues of workload and burnout across industries and workplaces, such reform is unlikely to have a meaningful impact within the legal profession,” Short said.

Short underscores the intrinsic challenges present in the legal field that make it difficult to adhere to such stringent disconnect rules.

“The demanding nature of legal work, particularly when dealing with tight deadlines, overseas clients or urgent matters, is at odds with the idea that an employee can simply drop everything and refuse to monitor or respond to contact outside of their working hours,” he said.

Instead, Short suggests that even though the laws may not fundamentally alter the legal profession’s demanding nature, it will foster important conversations about employee wellbeing and workload management.

“If anything, the right to disconnect may trigger important workplace conversations to ensure that employees do not feel burnt-out or overworked and that any contact outside of working hours is only made if necessary,” Short said.

Barrese echoed similar sentiments that the law students expressed, saying: “I do not believe the right to disconnect provisions will have a significant impact on the legal industry. The provision only comes into effect where contact outside of working hours is unreasonable.

“Given the demanding nature of the legal profession, I find it hard to imagine that attempts to communicate will be considered ‘unreasonable’.”

While recognising that these regulations may have a substantial impact on other industries, Barrese anticipates that their effect on the legal sector will be minimal.

“I believe these new laws to have a significant impact in other industries, [but] I do not believe the legal industry is going to see much of a change,” Barrese said.

Impact on the appeal of legal careers

When asked about whether the RTD law could enhance the appeal of the legal profession to new graduates, all three law students conveyed a sense of scepticism regarding this proposition.

Carson expressed his doubt regarding this notion, saying: “I don’t think it’s likely to have much of an impact on the appeal of the legal profession for new graduates.”

Although the new law has a relatively minor direct effect, Carson remarked that the legal profession’s longstanding reputation for demanding workloads continues to attract talent.

“I think the new laws will have little, if any, direct impact on most graduate legal jobs. And yet, despite the legal profession’s centuries-old reputation for high workload, it has remained very appealing to thousands of graduates every year,” Carson said.

Short concurs with this perspective, noting that the law is unlikely to radically change the profession’s demanding nature.

“The right to disconnect is unlikely to radically alter the demanding nature of work within the legal profession in such a way that it would become more appealing to new graduates – largely due to the prospect that in some instances, exercising the right to disconnect would be considered unreasonable,” Short said.

Barrese also expressed scepticism about the potential of new RTD laws to make the legal profession more attractive to new graduates.

“Sure, these new provisions may assist in reducing unreasonable attempts to contact graduates and lawyers outside of working hours, but given the volatile nature of work within the legal industry, and the high salary grade, long hours and unexpected phone calls come with the territory of the job,” she said.

She also argued that law students are well aware of the demanding nature of their future careers. “I believe law students know what they are signing themselves up for, so it would not come as a surprise to receive a late-night phone call, when the circumstances warrant it,” she said.

Impact on learning and professional development

Although the RTD law is designed to protect employees from work-related communications outside regular hours, law students anticipate that it will have a limited effect on the learning opportunities available to them during their tenure as junior lawyers.

Carson articulated his perspective that the law is unlikely to produce significant effects towards the learning opportunities law graduates receive, stating: “I don’t think the laws will have much of an impact at all in this area.”

“You might argue that some employers could become reluctant to assign junior lawyers with skill-building, yet time-intensive, work – but I doubt that will really happen.”

Barrese echoed these sentiments, saying: “I do not see the right to disconnect laws impacting learning experiences. I think it is important to keep in mind that the provisions are concerned with contact outside of working hours – not the working hours in and of itself.

“Speaking with current graduates, I am also enthused by the level of support offered to them, including reasonable working hours as they start off in the industry.”

Short offers a more nuanced and cautious perspective, suggesting that the law’s impact will largely depend on how individuals choose to exercise the provisions of the RTD legislation.

“The impact will seemingly depend on the extent to which you wish to exercise the right to disconnect – notwithstanding potential repercussions if such refusal to monitor or respond to contact would be considered unreasonable, especially in circumstances,” Short said.

Networking concerns

A concern raised by this legislation is the potential limitation it may impose on opportunities for networking or professional development that occur outside standard work hours. However, these law students contend that such concerns are unwarranted.

Carson asserts that the legislation will not adversely affect networking opportunities, as such events are not deemed unreasonable communications outside of regular working hours.

“I don’t think they’ll have that sort of effect. The laws themselves are purely aimed at prohibiting unreasonable communication outside of usual work hours, and I can’t see how mutually agreed upon networking or professional development opportunities outside of work hours would fit that description,” Caron said.

“Besides, nothing can come between a lawyer and a good networking opportunity!”

Short agreed with this perspective, highlighting that employers retain the direction to engage in communications outside of standard working hours if they elect to do so.

“No, as employees can still ultimately choose whether they maintain contact outside of standard working hours,” Short said.

Barrese expressed how she believes that the impact the RTD laws have on networking and professional development opportunities “is dependent on the workplace and the approach that is taken”.

“In circumstances where workplaces are rigid in their application of the provision, we may see a reduction in engagement in networking or professional development opportunities outside of standard working hours,” she said.

“In my experience, firms have provided wonderful networking opportunities, and I trust that these opportunities will continue to be provided to aspiring lawyers.”