Australia’s Right to Disconnect: When Employees Can Refuse After-Hours Contact

Employees in Australia’s national workplace relations system may refuse to monitor, read or respond to work-related contact outside their working hours unless that refusal would be unreasonable. Whether you can decline a particular call, message or email depends on the reason for contact, its disruption, your role and personal circumstances, and whether you are compensated for availability or extra work.

This is not a blanket ban on employers sending messages after hours, and it does not make every refusal lawful. Employees and managers should assess the particular contact, check the applicable award or agreement, discuss workable boundaries and document the facts behind their position.

Who has the right to disconnect?

The statutory right applies to national system employees. It began on 26 August 2024 for employees of non-small-business employers and on 26 August 2025 for employees of small-business employers; the Fair Work Ombudsman’s guidance confirms those commencement dates and explains that contact outside working hours is not itself prohibited.

The right covers attempted contact from an employer and work-related contact from a third party, such as a client, supplier or member of the public. It can apply to calls, emails, texts, social media and workplace messaging services.

Working hours depend on the employee’s arrangements at the relevant time. Someone rostered on call or performing agreed overtime may have an availability obligation, while a message sent outside one employee’s schedule may arrive during another employee’s shift.

How the reasonableness test works

The test is contextual. Section 333M of the Fair Work Act 2009 directs decision-makers to consider the reason for contact, its method and disruptive effect, compensation for availability or additional hours, the nature and responsibility level of the role, and the employee’s personal circumstances, including family or caring responsibilities.

Other relevant matters may also be considered, and no single listed factor automatically decides the outcome. A senior title does not make every late request reasonable; equally, personal commitments do not necessarily justify ignoring contact that is required by law or falls within a properly arranged on-call obligation.

A refusal is expressly unreasonable when the contact or attempted contact is required under Commonwealth, state or territory law. In other cases, the practical task is to weigh the operational need against the disruption and the employment arrangements already in place.

Assess an after-hours request in five steps

1. Establish why contact is needed. Ask what would happen if the matter waited until the employee’s next working period. A safety incident, service outage or genuinely time-critical obligation carries more weight than a routine update.
2. Measure the disruption. Consider the time, frequency, channel and expected response speed. One clearly explained message may be less disruptive than repeated calls across several platforms, especially when substantial work is expected.
3. Check compensation. Identify any on-call allowance, overtime, time off in lieu, higher-duties payment, salary component or non-monetary benefit connected to availability or additional hours. Do not assume an ordinary salary buys unlimited availability.
4. Examine the actual role. Focus on duties, authority and responsibility rather than the job title alone. An employee responsible for resolving an active incident may be differently placed from someone unable to resolve it.
5. Account for personal circumstances. Family and caring responsibilities are expressly relevant. Health needs and other circumstances may also affect how disruptive the contact is and whether the employee can respond.

Record the facts under these headings rather than relying on labels such as “urgent,” “senior” or “flexible.” A short written assessment can reveal whether the issue is exceptional or reflects a recurring staffing or scheduling problem.

When a refusal may be reasonable or unreasonable

The following scenarios are conditional illustrations, not legal rulings. A different deadline, payment arrangement, role or personal circumstance could change the assessment.

A potentially reasonable refusal: an employee’s agreed hours finish at 4 pm so they can collect a child from care. A routine request arrives at 4:30 pm, another qualified worker is available, and delaying or reassigning the task will cause no immediate harm. Low urgency, an available alternative and the caring responsibility support waiting until the next working period.

A potentially unreasonable refusal: an employee is temporarily performing a manager’s role, receives extra pay expressly connected to reasonable after-hours availability and has sole authority to approve an urgent deliverable due the next morning. A brief request through the agreed channel asks for that approval. In those circumstances, refusing even to assess the request may be unreasonable.

A senior employee who may reasonably refuse: a manager receives repeated weekend messages about non-urgent formatting changes. There is no on-call arrangement or imminent deadline, and the requests could be handled on Monday. Responsibility is relevant, but it may not outweigh the low operational need and repeated disruption.

An on-call employee who may unreasonably refuse: an employee receives the applicable allowance, is rostered as the designated responder and is contacted through the agreed channel about an incident covered by that roster. Compensation, advance notice and a defined operational requirement weigh against refusal.

Check awards, agreements and compensation

Do not apply the statutory test in isolation from the instrument governing the job. Modern awards include right-to-disconnect terms, and an applicable award may identify circumstances in which an employee can be required to monitor, read or respond outside working hours. Enterprise agreements and other registered agreements can also contain relevant provisions.

If an applicable enterprise agreement gives an employee a more favourable right to disconnect than the statutory right, that agreement term can continue to operate. Review the relevant documents in this order:

• the modern award or enterprise agreement covering the employee;
• rosters, on-call provisions, overtime rules, allowances and recall procedures;
• the employment contract and any written higher-duties arrangement;
• workplace policies, team protocols and individual arrangements; and
• records showing how availability and work performed after hours are compensated.

A workplace policy cannot settle the statutory question merely by declaring every employee permanently available. Conversely, an employee should not ignore a specific award or agreement obligation because a general policy encourages disconnection.

Managers should distinguish ordinary salary from compensation connected to availability or extra hours. Written arrangements should identify what an additional payment covers, when monitoring is required, the expected response time and how resulting work will be recorded and paid.

Agree on workable contact boundaries

A workplace discussion should define boundaries before a disputed message arrives. Cover what qualifies as an emergency, who is rostered on call, which channel is used for escalation, how quickly a response is expected and who provides backup coverage.

When discussing boundaries, state your ordinary hours and explain circumstances that affect availability without disclosing unnecessary personal details. Managers should describe genuine operational risks and arrange alternatives instead of treating an entire team as continuously reachable.

Record the outcome in a concise email or protocol. For example, it might say that routine messages may be sent after hours but require no response until the next shift, while defined critical incidents go to the rostered responder through a designated number.

Notification settings, scheduled sending and incident-severity labels can support the arrangement. These tools reduce ambiguity, but they do not replace the individual assessment of whether a refusal is unreasonable.

Separate checklists for employees and managers

Employee checklist

• Confirm your ordinary and rostered working hours for the relevant day.
• Check your award, enterprise agreement, contract and on-call arrangements.
• Identify compensation for remaining available or working additional hours.
• Assess the stated urgency, the consequences of delay and whether contact is required by law.
• Consider the disruption and relevant family, caring or other personal circumstances.
• Where practical, communicate your boundary and identify your next available time or an alternative contact.
• Keep the message, roster, relevant instrument and a factual note of discussions.

Manager checklist

• Decide whether contact is necessary immediately or can wait for working hours.
• Explain the reason, required action and response deadline through the least disruptive agreed channel.
• Check whether the employee is rostered, on call or compensated for the requested availability or work.
• Consider the employee’s actual responsibilities without assuming seniority creates unlimited availability.
• Take known personal circumstances into account and use backup coverage where practicable.
• Record work performed and apply relevant overtime, allowance or agreement provisions.
• Review recurring contact to identify staffing, scheduling or escalation problems.

What happens when the parties disagree?

The parties must first attempt to resolve a right-to-disconnect dispute through workplace-level discussions. Each side should identify the disputed contact, the relevant working hours, why the refusal is said to be reasonable or unreasonable, and the records supporting each applicable factor.

If those discussions fail, an employee or employer may apply to the national workplace relations tribunal. The Commission’s right-to-disconnect fact sheet explains that it may help resolve the dispute or make orders addressing an employee’s continuing unreasonable refusal or specified employer conduct when the refusal is not unreasonable.

Employer conduct addressed by an order may include continuing to require a response or taking disciplinary or other action because of the refusal. An order under the specific right-to-disconnect jurisdiction cannot require payment of a monetary amount, although other legal rights or processes may be relevant to the circumstances.

Preserve the messages, rosters, compensation records, applicable workplace instruments and notes from discussions. Employees may seek assistance from a union or workplace-relations adviser, while employers may consult an industry association or obtain legal advice.

Create a role-specific contact protocol

The practical next step is a written protocol tailored to the role. Define ordinary hours, on-call periods, valid escalation reasons, backup contacts, expected response times, record-keeping and compensation, then check every term against the applicable award or agreement.

Review the protocol when duties, staffing, client obligations or personal circumstances change. When a dispute occurs, document the particular contact against the statutory factors instead of relying on a general expectation that the employee must always answer—or never needs to.

Also read:

• Gary Stevenson Pauses Weekly YouTube Videos After Health Concerns