The law does not ban every after-hours message. It gives an employee the right to refuse to monitor, read or respond to work-related contact outside their working hours unless that refusal would be unreasonable.
Key takeaways
- The right is about refusing contact, not stopping an employer from sending every message.
- Reasonableness depends on the reason, disruption, compensation, role and personal circumstances.
- The right now applies to employees of both small and non-small-business employers, subject to national-system coverage.
- Unresolved disputes can be taken to the Fair Work Commission after workplace discussions.
Who is covered?
The right is contained in the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) and applies to national-system employees. Most employees of private businesses are covered, including full-time, part-time and casual employees. Coverage may be more complicated for some state public-sector and local-government workers. Independent contractors are not employees merely because they perform work for a business.
The right started on 26 August 2024 for employees of non-small-business employers and on 26 August 2025 for employees of small-business employers. A small-business employer generally has fewer than 15 employees at the relevant time, applying the Act's counting rules.
What does the right actually do?
Section 333M protects an employee's refusal to monitor, read or respond to contact or attempted contact outside working hours unless the refusal is unreasonable. Contact may include calls, emails, texts, social media and workplace messaging applications.
Work-related contact from third parties can also be covered. This could include contact from clients, suppliers, colleagues or members of the public.
When could refusing be unreasonable?
The Act requires several factors to be considered. No single factor always determines the answer:
- the reason for the contact;
- how the contact was made and how disruptive it was;
- whether the employee is compensated for being available or working additional hours;
- the employee's role and level of responsibility;
- the employee's personal circumstances, including family or caring responsibilities; and
- any other relevant matter.
A refusal is unreasonable where the contact or attempted contact is required by law. Awards, enterprise agreements, employment contracts and on-call arrangements may also matter.
Examples
Routine roster message
A supervisor texts a casual employee at 11:30 pm about a shift next week. The employee is not on call. The routine reason, timing and lack of urgency support the view that waiting until morning may be reasonable.
Paid emergency availability
An IT employee is rostered and paid to be on call when a serious outage occurs. The urgency, role and compensation may make refusing the agreed emergency contact unreasonable.
Repeated client calls
A client repeatedly calls a junior employee's private phone on weekends about non-urgent work. Third-party contact can be covered where it is work-related, and repeated disruption is relevant.
These are simplified illustrations, not predictions about a real dispute.
What can an employee do?
- Record the date, time, method, reason and frequency of the contact.
- Check working hours, on-call obligations, pay arrangements, the applicable award or agreement, contract and workplace policy.
- Raise the issue with the manager or HR and suggest a practical arrangement, such as a separate emergency channel.
- Confirm any agreement in writing.
- If the issue remains unresolved, consider help from a union, the Fair Work Ombudsman, a lawyer or community legal centre.
- An eligible employee or employer may apply to the Fair Work Commission using Form F92 after workplace discussions have not resolved the dispute.
Protections and limitations
The right to disconnect is a workplace right. The general-protections provisions may prohibit adverse action because an employee has or exercises that right. Depending on the facts, adverse action can include dismissal, demotion or harmful changes to employment.
This does not mean that every negative workplace event is automatically unlawful. A claim still requires the legal elements and evidence. The right also does not replace separate rules about maximum hours, reasonable additional hours, overtime or payment for work.
Sources and further reading
Primary legislation and official government guidance were prioritised. Links checked 25 August 2026.
Important notice
Lexplain provides general legal research and information only. It is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice, representation or personalised conclusions. Laws and individual circumstances can differ. Check the current law and obtain professional advice where needed.