California may become the first state in the United States to give workers the legal right to ignore their boss after hours.
The so-called right to disconnect would allow employees to disregard calls, texts and emails from their employers once the working day is over.
The bill, introduced by Matt Haney, a San Francisco assembly member, would compel companies to outline their plans for implementing the new law. It would also allow California’s workplace regulator to investigate and fine employers who violate the law.
“Work has changed drastically compared to what it was just ten years ago. Smartphones have blurred the boundaries between work and home life,” Haney said in a statement. “Workers shouldn’t be punished for not being available 24/7 if they’re not being paid for 24 hours of work.”
According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Americans work longer hours than many of their European counterparts. In 2022 employees in the US logged an average of 1,811 hours a year, compared with 1,532 hours in the UK and 1,511 in France.
Advertisement
Haney, a Democrat, said the bill balances workers’ rights with allowing businesses to prosper.
Australia, Argentina, Italy and Spain are among the countries who already have the right to disconnect laws, and Haney said that California-based companies stuck to such policies for their offices abroad.
“Many of California’s larger employers are already abiding by right to disconnect laws in other countries and choosing to grow their companies rapidly in those places,” he said.
Critics of the bill say it is too broad and could harm employees who rely on overtime to make more money.
Ashley Hoffman, senior policy advocate for the California Chamber of Commerce, said the organisation is opposing the proposal, which she described as a “job killer”. “The bill may effectively ban overtime unless it is pre-planned,” she wrote in a letter to Haney. “That would result in significant lost wages for workers who regularly want to work overtime.”
Advertisement
Hoffman dismissed the part of the bill that exempts emergencies, saying that for a worker to know whether an email is urgent they would first have to read it. “Otherwise, they have no way of knowing whether they can ignore it, which asks the question: what is the point of allowing these exceptions if all emails can be ignored?” she wrote.
