Labour Right to Switch Off: UK government proposal explained - could it lead to compensation for employees?

• Labour plans to introduce a ‘right to switch off’
• The proposal would allow employees to disconnect from work outside of agreed hours
• Employees regularly contacted outside of work hours could be eligible for significant compensation
• The policy draws on similar laws in countries like France and Belgium, and aims to protect work-life balance
• The proposal is part of Labour's broader "New Deal for Working People," focusing on improving worker rights

Employees who are regularly contacted by their place of work outside of normal hours could be eligible for significant compensation.

That’s under government plans proposed by Labour to introduce a "right to switch off."

The aim of the proposal is to create a clear boundary between employees’ work and personal life, and could lead to substantial payouts at employment tribunals for staff.

But what exactly is the “right to switch off”, and how could Labour’s plans take shape in reality? Here is everything you need to know about it.

What is the ‘right to switch off’?

The "right to switch off" is a policy or legal right that allows employees to disconnect from work-related communications, such as emails, phone calls or messages, outside of their agreed working hours.

The concept is intended to protect workers' work-life balance by ensuring that they are not expected to be available for work duties during their personal time, without facing any negative consequences from their employer.

The "right to switch off" is increasingly being adopted or considered in various countries, with some nations, like France, Belgium, and Ireland, implementing laws that require employers to respect employees' off-hours.

The goal is to reduce stress, prevent burnout, and maintain a clear distinction between work and personal life - employees who are well-rested are more focused, creative and efficient during their working hours.

Under such policies, any breaches by employers - where employees are pressured or required to engage in work outside their official hours - could lead to legal consequences, including compensation claims in employment tribunals.

Such a proposal was key in Labour’s manifesto during the general election campaign earlier this year, and formed part of the party’s overhaul of workers’ rights, dubbed the New Deal for Working People.

Angela Rayner - then the party’s shadow secretary of state for the future of work - told the Financial Times in May that “constant emails and calls outside of work should not be the norm and is harming work-life balance for many”.

“We will look at how to implement this in practice, learning from countries where it has been introduced successfully,” she added.

It is understood that Labour’s proposals would require employees and employers to agree on specific hours during which they can be contacted, drawing inspiration from similar regulations in other nations.

According to The Times, employers who repeatedly violate these agreements could face increased compensation costs if taken to tribunal.

While breaching out-of-hours contact policies alone may not be grounds for legal action, it could be used as an “aggravating factor” in broader claims, enhancing the likelihood of winning and raising potential compensation payouts.

Currently, if companies are found to have disregarded codes of practice, tribunal compensation can increase by 25%, with breaches considered aggravating factors.

Experts told The Times that violating out-of-hours work agreements could lead to compensation payments reaching into the thousands.

What difference would it make?

In February 2022, union leaders called for a new right to switch off after research suggested employers enjoyed £27 billion of free labour in the previous year because of unpaid overtime.

The TUC said its study indicated that 3.8 million people did unpaid overtime in 2021, putting in an average of 7.6 unpaid hours a week, equivalent to £7,100 a year.

As in previous years, teachers were high on the list of those doing unpaid work, as well as managers and directors.

People who work from home are more likely to do unpaid overtime, while those who never work from home are more likely to do paid overtime, it was found.

Who might reject a ‘right to switch off’?

Government sources have reportedly said that the policy would need to be tailored to each individual workplace as it is implemented, and ministers recognise the potentially disproportionate impact it could have on smaller businesses.

Smaller businesses often have fewer employees, which could make it challenging for them to respond quickly to urgent situations or cover for absent staff without overburdening others if employees have a strict right to switch off.

Smaller companies may also struggle with the financial implications of hiring additional staff to cover out-of-hours work, which could be necessary if the right to switch off limits the availability of their workforce.

The right to switch off also does not necessarily align with every job and sector, with industries like hospitality and healthcare often requiring employees to be available outside of standard working hours to meet client or patient needs.

In industries with international clients or operations, employees may also need to be available across different time zones.

Independent or freelance workers who rely on multiple clients might prefer not to have a right to switch off, as their income is often tied to their availability and responsiveness.

Likewise, senior executives, business owners and entrepreneurs may choose to remain accessible at all times to ensure the smooth running of their operations.

Some employees may also prefer to manage their workload in a way that allows them to work outside of traditional hours, especially if they have personal commitments during the day.

Are you job-hunting? To view thousands of roles available right now, visit the JobsToday website.