Login
Can the Right to Disconnect combat the ‘always-on’ culture in law?
Aussie lawyers have a complicated relationship with long hours. Many are weary of the effects of burnout but will push through it not only to appease themselves but also their firm. The long-term effect of this becoming habitual practice, however, can be detrimental.
Kace O'Neill
The Right to Disconnect (RTD) possesses great potential to dismantle harmful workplace practices that have contributed to widespread burnout. However, has the “24/7 grindset” become so embedded into the behaviour of Australian lawyers that even workplace legislation cannot separate the two?
This is a question that we posed to consultant and senior lecturer at The College of Law, Michael Appleby, who has taught the provider’s wellbeing skills component for 12 years.
“There has been a lot of research into the impacts of working long hours on employees, as referenced in the book, Creating the World We Want to Live In: How Positive Psychology Can Build a Brighter Future,” Appleby said.
“Long working hours negatively impact health, personal safety, and stress. They leave people less time to engage in social and leisure activities, rest or take care of themselves and others. The ‘always-on’ culture driven by technology means employees feel less able to switch off outside normal working hours.”
The ability to “switch off” from work was a clear goal when the Right to Disconnect was established as part of the Closing Loopholes legislation, as not being able to shift focus away from work can lead to some severe repercussions.
“We know, for example, that relationships are a key factor in maintaining health throughout the lifespan. As with any part of our lives, relationships need nurturing, and to nurture our relationships, we need to pay attention to them. Can you pay attention if you are on all the time? Or are you really paying attention mainly to the work domain?” Appleby said.
“We also know from the therapeutic space that an overemphasis on work is one of the common presenting features of barristers seeking psychological assistance. This is a concrete example of the negative impact of an over emphasis on work and one aspect of being on all the time.”
With the RTD now implemented, we will be able to see firsthand if this legislation can really negate that “always-on” mindset from being the status quo.
“RTD can play a part in supporting the mental health of new [workers]. At a societal level, it sends a signal to all of us that ‘turning off’ is OK and is a cultural norm,” Appleby said.
“It provides employers with an opportunity, by adopting this norm, to signal to employees that they support their wellbeing. It may also provide an opportunity to reset for those employees who feel that they must be on at all times.”
“This particularly applies to new [workers]. RTD applies to non-small businesses; however, although the legislation does not apply to smaller organisations, the general principles are worth considering by them.”
Young lawyers especially can be prone to overworking in an attempt to garner respect within their firm. Knowing the new law changes and the damaging effect that this mindset can have, it’s crucial that employers step up and communicate clear working boundaries with their young workers. Failure to do so will actively set them on the wrong path moving forward.
“New lawyers experience considerable stress when their organisations/supervisors/partners do not set out clear guidelines about communication – particularly out of hours communication,” Appleby said.
“My own experience is that more work needs to be done in the legal profession in relation to the design of work – this could lead to some very interesting new developments as we turn our attention in this direction.”
“Some employees overwork because there is too much work to do (another psychosocial risk) and the culture of the organisation within which they work promotes long hours of work. However, sometimes, it may also relate to an individual’s own motivations. RTD might provide the context for conversations with some employees around healthy and positive changes in their work habits.”
Appleby concluded by putting the onus on organisational leaders to set a clear standard that includes boundaries that prevent lawyers from overloading and burning themselves out.
“Really, this calls for leadership in organisations. It is the case (and I hear this in class a lot) that the people who work in organisations see both what you say and what you do – and if there is a disconnect, people recognise it immediately. Positive leadership in this regard is vital,” Appleby said.
“The opportunity here is for there to be a real win-win by supporting these changes and thus supporting the health of employees and at the same time enhancing the culture of the organisation in an authentic way. Your organisation might be doing this already. An organisation’s response to RTD will be just one aspect of promoting the wellbeing at work – but a very visible and tangible one.”
