Abstract
The rapid growth of digital technology has changed the way employees work, communicate and manage their professional responsibilities. In the Indian Information Technology (IT) sector, smartphones, laptops, instant messaging applications, video conferencing and cloud-based systems have made it possible for employees to remain connected to their workplaces from almost anywhere and at any time. Although this connectivity provides flexibility and supports business continuity, it can also weaken the boundary between working hours and personal life. Employees may receive work-related calls, emails and messages after working hours and may feel pressure to respond immediately.
The concept of the “Right to Disconnect” has emerged as a possible response to this problem. It refers broadly to an employee’s ability to disengage from work-related communication outside recognised working hours without suffering negative employment consequences. The concept does not necessarily mean that employees should never be contacted after working hours. Instead, it aims to create reasonable boundaries while allowing exceptions for emergencies, formally agreed on-call duties and other legitimate operational requirements.
Recent Indian research provides empirical support for examining this issue. A 2026 study of 115 IT and ITeS employees found a significant relationship between digital overreach and burnout (r = 0.593, p < 0.0001), as well as between digital overreach and intention to leave employment (r = 0.577, p < 0.0001). The study examined issues including after-hours communication, pressure to respond quickly and work communication through personal devices.
Source: https://www.rjpn.org/ijcspub/viewpaperforall.php?paper=IJCSP26C1144
From a legal perspective, India does not currently have a comprehensive enacted statute specifically creating a general Right to Disconnect for employees. However, constitutional principles relating to personal liberty, privacy and dignity, labour legislation concerning working conditions, employment contracts and the proposed Right to Disconnect Bill, 2025 provide important areas for discussion. The Bill was introduced as a Private Member’s Bill and remains pending.
This research therefore examines the relationship between digital connectivity, employee well-being and labour rights in the Indian IT sector. It also analyses the constitutional, contractual and organisational dimensions of the Right to Disconnect and proposes a balanced framework that protects employees while recognising the operational requirements of modern businesses.
Keywords: Right to Disconnect, IT Employees, Work-Life Balance, Digital Overreach, Employee Well-Being, Labour Rights, Article 21, Workplace Technology, Burnout, India.
Introduction
Technology has become an essential part of modern employment. In the Indian IT industry, employees commonly use email, smartphones, enterprise communication platforms, video conferencing applications and cloud-based systems to perform their daily responsibilities. These technologies have improved speed, collaboration and flexibility, particularly for organisations working with clients across different cities and time zones.
However, technological connectivity has also created a new workplace problem: the boundary between professional and personal time is becoming less clear. Earlier, the physical workplace created a natural separation between employment and personal life. When an employee left the office, most work-related interaction generally stopped. Today, an employee may leave the office but continue receiving notifications, messages and emails on a personal smartphone.
This creates the possibility of an “always-on” work culture. Employees may feel that they need to remain available even when their formal working hours have ended. A junior employee may hesitate to ignore a late-night message from a senior manager because the employee may worry about being considered irresponsible or less committed. In this way, technological availability can become an informal workplace expectation even when no formal rule requires employees to remain connected.
A 2025 legal analysis of the Right to Disconnect describes the issue in the context of the changing digital workplace and examines its relationship with labour rights, constitutional values and work-life boundaries.
Source: https://ijlr.iledu.in/right-to-disconnect-a-new-labor-right-in-the-digital-era-a-comparative-and-constitutional-analysis/
The problem is especially relevant to the IT sector because of international clients, global teams, remote work and flexible working arrangements. A manager working in India may have to communicate with a client in another time zone. Therefore, simply establishing a fixed “no communication” period may not work for every organisation.
The central issue is consequently not whether technology should be removed from the workplace. Rather, the question is how technology can be used without making employees permanently available to their employers.
Background of the Study
The traditional idea of working hours was based largely on physical presence. Employees entered the workplace, completed their assigned duties and left at the end of the working day. The development of digital technology has changed this arrangement.
Email made communication faster, while smartphones made it possible to receive workplace information immediately. Messaging applications further reduced the delay between sending and receiving a message. Video conferencing and cloud platforms subsequently allowed employees to perform many professional activities from home.
Remote and hybrid work arrangements have increased the importance of this issue. An employee may technically be working from home, but the home environment can become an extension of the workplace. The employee may finish formal working hours but continue checking messages because the same device is used for both personal and professional activities.
The problem is not necessarily the existence of occasional after-hours communication. Some organisations genuinely require employees to respond to emergencies, system failures, cybersecurity incidents or client problems. The difficulty arises when exceptional communication gradually becomes normal practice.
A recent Indian study examined digital overreach among IT and ITeS employees. It considered factors such as after-hours messages, pressure to respond quickly, work messages on personal devices and work spilling into personal time.
Source: https://www.rjpn.org/ijcspub/viewpaperforall.php?paper=IJCSP26C1144
The study surveyed 115 employees working in different arrangements, including office-based, hybrid and remote work. Its findings indicate that digital overreach deserves attention as an organisational and employee-welfare issue.
Statement of the Problem
The increasing use of digital communication has created several difficulties for employees:
- Employees may receive work-related calls and messages after formal working hours.
- Employees may feel pressure to respond immediately to messages from managers or clients.
- Personal smartphones can become extensions of workplace communication systems.
- International teams may create communication demands outside conventional working hours.
- Remote work can make it difficult to determine when an employee has actually stopped working.
- Employees may fear negative consequences if they do not remain available.
- Organisations may lack clear policies defining legitimate after-hours communication.
- Employees performing on-call responsibilities may not always have clearly defined compensation, schedules or boundaries.
These problems demonstrate why the Right to Disconnect is not simply a technological issue. It is also connected with employment relationships, workplace culture, employee welfare and labour rights.
Objectives of the Study
The major objectives of this study are:
- To understand the meaning and importance of the Right to Disconnect.
- To examine the relationship between digital connectivity and work-life balance among IT employees.
- To analyse the constitutional relevance of privacy, dignity and personal liberty.
- To examine the existing Indian labour-law framework relevant to working conditions.
- To study the proposed Right to Disconnect Bill, 2025.
- To examine contractual and organisational approaches to after-hours communication.
- To identify practical challenges in implementing a Right to Disconnect in the IT sector.
- To suggest a balanced framework for protecting employees while maintaining legitimate business operations.
Research Questions
The study addresses the following questions:
- What is the Right to Disconnect?
- How does constant digital connectivity affect work-life boundaries?
- What is the relationship between the Right to Disconnect and Article 21 of the Constitution?
- Does Indian labour law currently provide a specific statutory Right to Disconnect?
- What does the proposed Right to Disconnect Bill, 2025 seek to achieve?
- How can organisations implement a Right to Disconnect without affecting genuine business emergencies?
- What role can Human Resource Management play in protecting employees from excessive digital work demands?
Research Methodology
This study follows a doctrinal and descriptive research methodology. It is primarily based on secondary sources, including academic research papers, legal articles, constitutional judgments, legislation, parliamentary documents and publicly available institutional sources.
The study also considers recent empirical evidence from Indian IT and ITeS employees to connect legal and theoretical discussions with workplace realities.
An important source is the 2026 study “Logged In and Burned Out: How Constant Connectivity and Work Setups Drive Exhaustion in Indian IT,” which surveyed 115 IT and ITeS employees.
Source: https://www.rjpn.org/ijcspub/viewpaperforall.php?paper=IJCSP26C1144
The legal analysis also refers to Supreme Court decisions relating to Article 21, privacy, dignity and contractual interpretation.
Literature Review
Harikrishnan’s 2025 article, “Right to Disconnect: A New Labor Right in the Digital Era? – A Comparative and Constitutional Analysis,” examines the emergence of the Right to Disconnect as a labour-rights issue in the digital age. The article discusses the changing nature of work, digital communication and the need to protect work-life boundaries.
Source: https://ijlr.iledu.in/right-to-disconnect-a-new-labor-right-in-the-digital-era-a-comparative-and-constitutional-analysis/
Recent empirical research has strengthened the importance of the issue in the Indian context. Mishra and Tiwari’s 2026 study examined 115 IT and ITeS employees and found significant relationships between digital overreach, burnout and intention to leave.
Source: https://www.rjpn.org/ijcspub/viewpaperforall.php?paper=IJCSP26C1144
The existing literature indicates that the Right to Disconnect should be understood from multiple perspectives. It is not only a question of working hours but also involves employee autonomy, organisational culture, mental separation from work, privacy and the design of workplace communication systems.
Research Gap
Existing discussions on the Right to Disconnect in India have largely focused on legal principles, comparative approaches and the proposed legislative framework. At the same time, recent empirical research has begun examining the relationship between digital overreach and employee outcomes in the Indian IT sector.
However, there remains a need to connect these two dimensions more closely. Legal discussions can explain employee rights and possible regulatory frameworks, while empirical research can show how digital connectivity is experienced in actual workplaces.
This study attempts to bridge that gap by examining the Right to Disconnect through legal, constitutional, organisational and employee-well-being perspectives. It particularly focuses on the Indian IT sector, where international operations, remote work and digital communication make the issue especially relevant.
Meaning of the Right to Disconnect
The Right to Disconnect generally refers to an employee’s ability to stop engaging with work-related communications outside recognised working hours without facing punishment, discrimination or other negative employment consequences.
The concept has three important elements.
- First, the employee should have clearly recognised working and non-working periods.
- Second, employees should not be expected to continuously monitor workplace communication during personal time.
- Third, reasonable exceptions should exist for genuine emergencies, on-call duties and other circumstances agreed upon in advance.
Therefore, the Right to Disconnect should not be interpreted as an absolute prohibition on all communication outside working hours. An IT company dealing with a major system failure may need employees with specific responsibilities to respond immediately. Similarly, an employee who has voluntarily agreed to a scheduled night shift may legitimately be required to work during those hours.
The purpose is to distinguish genuine operational requirements from an organisational culture in which employees are expected to be permanently available.
The “Digital Leash” and Always-On Culture
Modern communication technologies can create what may be described as a “digital leash.” A smartphone carried by an employee can connect that person to workplace communication throughout the day.
A notification does not necessarily require an employee to perform a complete work task, but it can interrupt personal time and create psychological pressure to respond. Repeated interruptions can make employees feel that they are never completely away from work.
The 2026 Indian IT study specifically examined digital overreach, including after-hours messages, pressure to reply quickly and work communication through personal devices.
Source: https://www.rjpn.org/ijcspub/viewpaperforall.php?paper=IJCSP26C1144
This distinction is important. The problem is not merely the number of hours actually spent typing emails. Even the expectation of being available may affect an employee’s ability to mentally disengage from work.
Right to Disconnect and Work-Life Balance
Work-life balance refers to the ability of individuals to manage professional responsibilities while maintaining adequate personal, family, social and recreational time.
Constant work connectivity can affect this balance in two ways.
- The first is direct: employees may actually perform additional work outside their scheduled hours.
- The second is psychological: employees may remain mentally connected to work even when they are not actively performing a task.
For example, an employee may be having dinner with family while repeatedly checking whether a manager has sent a message. Although the employee may not be actively working, the possibility of receiving work instructions prevents complete disengagement.
The empirical evidence from Indian IT employees is relevant here. Mishra and Tiwari reported a significant correlation between digital overreach and burnout, with r = 0.593 and p < 0.0001.
Source: https://www.rjpn.org/ijcspub/viewpaperforall.php?paper=IJCSP26C1144
The same study reported a significant relationship between digital overreach and intention to leave employment, with r = 0.577 and p < 0.0001.
These findings show an association, not proof that digital overreach alone causes burnout or turnover. However, they provide evidence that excessive digital connectivity deserves organisational attention.
Article 21 and the Constitutional Perspective
Article 21 of the Constitution of India states that no person shall be deprived of life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.
The Supreme Court has interpreted Article 21 broadly over time. In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, the Court significantly developed the understanding of personal liberty and constitutional protection.
Official Supreme Court judgment:
https://webapi.sci.gov.in/jonew/judis/5154.pdf
The Right to Disconnect is not currently established as a general constitutional right applicable to every employee in India. However, constitutional principles concerning liberty, dignity and personal autonomy provide an important framework for discussing the value of personal time.
The constitutional argument should therefore be made carefully. Article 21 does not automatically mean that every employee has an enforceable right to refuse every work communication after office hours. Instead, constitutional values can inform the broader discussion about employee dignity, autonomy and reasonable boundaries.
Privacy, Dignity and Personal Autonomy
Privacy is another important dimension of the Right to Disconnect.
In Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, the Supreme Court recognised privacy as a constitutionally protected right and connected it with liberty, dignity and individual autonomy.
Official Supreme Court material:
https://api.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2012/35071/35071_2012_Judgement_26-Sep-2018.pdf
The workplace does not eliminate an employee’s personal autonomy. Employees remain individuals with families, relationships, responsibilities and personal interests outside employment.
The Right to Disconnect can therefore be understood partly as a mechanism for protecting the practical boundary between professional obligations and personal life.
However, privacy principles should not be stretched to mean that employers can never contact employees outside ordinary hours. The employment relationship may legitimately include on-call duties, emergency responsibilities or flexible schedules. The key issue is whether such expectations are transparent, reasonable and properly defined.
Dignity and the Right to Personal Time
Employee dignity is not limited to physical safety at the workplace. It can also involve respect for an employee’s personal time and autonomy.
When employees believe they must respond to every message immediately simply because a senior person sent it, workplace hierarchy may effectively extend into personal hours.
This can be particularly significant for junior employees. A person with less organisational power may find it difficult to say that they are unavailable.
Therefore, a meaningful Right to Disconnect should include protection against retaliation. Employees should not be penalised merely because they did not respond to a non-emergency communication during a recognised rest period.
Indian Labour-Law Framework
India has several labour laws dealing with employment conditions, occupational safety, working conditions and employee welfare. However, the country has not historically had a single comprehensive statute specifically establishing a general Right to Disconnect.
The Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2020 is an important part of the modern labour-law framework. It consolidates and amends laws relating to occupational safety, health and working conditions.
Official India Code source:
https://www.indiacode.nic.in/indiacode/handle/123456789/22041?view_type=browse
The Code is relevant to the broader discussion of working conditions, but it should not be described as a specific statutory Right to Disconnect.
This distinction is important because the proposed Right to Disconnect Bill, 2025 addresses a more specific issue: an employee’s ability to disconnect from work-related calls and emails outside working hours and on holidays.
Right to Disconnect Bill, 2025
The Right to Disconnect Bill, 2025 was introduced as a Private Member’s Bill by Smt. Supriya Sule. Parliamentary documents identify it as Bill No. 51 of 2025.
The Bill seeks to establish an Employees’ Welfare Authority and provide employees with a right to disconnect from work-related telephone calls and emails beyond working hours and on holidays.
Official Lok Sabha Bill:
https://www.sansad.in/getFile/BillsTexts/LSBillTexts/Asintroduced/51%20of%202025%20AS125202592416PM.pdf?source=legislation
The Bill’s statement of objects and reasons connects the proposed right with reducing stress and tension between professional and personal life.
The current status is important: PRS India lists the Right to Disconnect Bill, 2025 as a pending Private Member’s Bill.
Source:
https://prsindia.org/mptrack/18-lok-sabha/supriya-sule
Therefore, the proposed Bill should not be treated as an enacted law or as an existing statutory right applicable to all Indian employees.
Importance of the Proposed Bill
The significance of the Bill lies partly in recognising that modern work creates problems that traditional working-hour rules may not completely address.
A worker may technically complete eight hours of work but still remain connected to workplace communication throughout the evening. Traditional concepts of working time may not fully capture this form of digital availability.
The proposed framework can also encourage organisations to develop clearer policies regarding communication, emergency situations and employee expectations.
However, legislation must also recognise differences between industries. An IT company providing services to international clients cannot always operate under identical communication rules as a local business operating during fixed daytime hours.
Contractual Right to Disconnect
Employment contracts are an important tool for creating workplace boundaries.
A well-drafted employment agreement or organisational policy can define:
- Normal working hours.
- Expected response times.
- Emergency communication procedures.
- On-call responsibilities.
- Compensation or benefits for on-call work where applicable.
- Communication channels to be used.
- Circumstances in which employees may be contacted outside ordinary hours.
- Protection against retaliation for refusing non-emergency communication during rest periods.
Clear contractual terms can reduce uncertainty for both employers and employees.
This is particularly important in IT organisations where employees may work with international clients and different time zones.
Principles of Contractual Interpretation
Indian contract law generally places importance on the actual terms agreed between parties.
In Nabha Power Ltd. v. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., the Supreme Court discussed the principles governing implied terms in contracts. Courts do not simply add terms because they appear reasonable; the requirements for implying contractual terms are more demanding.
A Supreme Court judgment discussing these principles is available at:
https://www.api.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2021/12246/12246_2021_36_1501_30124_Judgement_17-Sep-2021.pdf
This principle is relevant because an organisation should ideally not leave expectations about after-hours availability completely informal.
If an employee is expected to remain available outside normal hours, the arrangement should be clearly communicated rather than relying on assumptions such as “everyone in this team is always available.”
Practical Problems in the IT Sector
The implementation of a Right to Disconnect in the IT industry involves several practical challenges.
| Issue | Practical Challenge |
|---|---|
| Time Zones | Indian IT companies frequently work with clients in North America, Europe, Asia and other regions. A client’s normal working hours may overlap with an Indian employee’s evening or night. |
| Emergencies | Technology systems can fail unexpectedly. Cybersecurity incidents, server failures and critical production problems may require immediate intervention. |
| On-Call Work | Some employees are specifically appointed for on-call responsibilities. Their work arrangements are different from those of employees who have no after-hours duties. |
| Remote Work | Remote work can make the distinction between professional and personal time less visible. |
| Managerial Expectations | A written policy may be ineffective if managers continue to expect immediate responses outside working hours. |
| Personal Devices | Employees often use personal smartphones for workplace communication. This can make it difficult to separate work notifications from personal life. |
Empirical Evidence from Indian IT Employees
Recent research provides useful evidence about the workplace effects of digital overreach.
Mishra and Tiwari studied 115 IT and ITeS employees working in office-based, hybrid and remote arrangements. Their study found:
| Finding | Reported Result |
|---|---|
| A significant correlation between digital overreach and burnout | r = 0.593, p < 0.0001. |
| A significant correlation between digital overreach and intention to leave | r = 0.577, p < 0.0001. |
| Significant differences in digital overreach across work models | ANOVA results of F = 3.240 and p = 0.0429. |
Source: https://www.rjpn.org/ijcspub/viewpaperforall.php?paper=IJCSP26C1144
The study also reported that in-office employees in its sample had the highest average burnout and intention-to-leave scores. The authors referred to this as an “In-Office Paradox,” suggesting that physical presence at work does not necessarily prevent digital intrusion.
These results should be interpreted as findings from one study and not as proof that every Indian IT employee experiences the same conditions. Nevertheless, they demonstrate the value of further research into digital overreach and employee welfare.
Organisational Culture
A Right to Disconnect cannot succeed through written rules alone.
Suppose an organisation officially states that employees do not need to respond after 7 p.m., but managers regularly send messages at 11 p.m. and ask why employees have not replied. Employees are likely to interpret the manager’s behaviour as the real workplace rule.
Therefore, organisational culture is as important as formal policy.
Senior managers have a particularly important role. When leaders respect employees’ personal time, employees are more likely to feel comfortable disconnecting themselves.
Organisations should also distinguish between urgency and convenience. A message being sent late does not automatically mean that the matter is urgent.
Role of Human Resource Management
Human Resource Management can play a central role in implementing the Right to Disconnect.
HR departments can establish:
- Clearly defined working hours.
- Guidelines for after-hours communication.
- Emergency communication procedures.
- On-call schedules.
- Appropriate compensation arrangements where applicable.
- Manager training.
- Employee grievance mechanisms.
- Anti-retaliation safeguards.
- Periodic reviews of workload and communication patterns.
- Awareness programmes about healthy digital boundaries.
HR can also monitor whether employees are regularly working beyond their expected hours.
The purpose should not be to punish managers for every late message. Instead, the organisation should identify patterns that demonstrate systematic disregard for employee rest periods.
Managerial Responsibility
Managers have significant influence over employees’ digital workload.
A manager can reduce unnecessary after-hours pressure by using delayed delivery features, scheduling non-urgent messages for the next working day and clearly identifying genuinely urgent matters.
Managers should avoid creating a culture where employees believe that immediate responses demonstrate loyalty or commitment.
Performance evaluations should also focus on work quality, results and responsibilities rather than simply measuring whether an employee responds instantly to every notification.
International Perspective
The Right to Disconnect has received attention in several countries as digital technology has changed working patterns.
Comparative legal research shows that countries have approached the issue differently. Some approaches focus on statutory rights, while others rely more heavily on collective agreements, organisational policies or employee consultation.
The Indian debate should therefore not simply copy another country’s system. India has a distinct labour market, a large IT and services sector, international outsourcing relationships and a diverse range of employment arrangements.
The comparative discussion is useful mainly because it demonstrates that digital disconnection can be addressed through multiple legal and organisational mechanisms.
A comparative and constitutional analysis of the subject in the Indian context is available here:
RIGHT TO DISCONNECT: A NEW LABOR RIGHT IN THE DIGITAL ERA? – A COMPARATIVE AND CONSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS
Why an Absolute Right May Be Difficult
A completely absolute prohibition on after-hours communication could create practical problems.
Consider an IT company experiencing a critical cybersecurity incident at 10 p.m. If the only employee capable of resolving the problem is prohibited from receiving any communication, the organisation may face serious operational consequences.
Similarly, international businesses may require employees to work according to different time zones.
Therefore, the Right to Disconnect should be designed around reasonable boundaries rather than an unrealistic complete separation.
Possible exceptions may include:
- Genuine emergencies.
- Critical cybersecurity incidents.
- Major technical failures.
- Formally scheduled on-call duties.
- International shifts that are part of the employee’s agreed working arrangement.
- Situations where immediate communication is necessary to protect life, safety or major organisational operations.
Need for Clear Exceptions
Exceptions should not become a loophole through which ordinary work is constantly classified as an emergency.
An organisation should define what qualifies as an emergency.
For example, “client wants an update tonight” should not automatically qualify as an emergency if the matter can reasonably wait until the next working day.
On the other hand, a major system outage affecting thousands of customers may legitimately require immediate attention.
Clear definitions can protect both employees and employers.
Protection Against Retaliation
One of the most important elements of a Right to Disconnect is protection against retaliation.
A right becomes weak if employees technically possess it but fear losing promotions, receiving poor performance ratings or being treated negatively for exercising it.
For example, if an employee does not respond to a non-urgent message during a recognised rest period, that employee should not automatically be labelled as uncooperative.
An effective system should provide employees with a way to raise concerns without fear of punishment.
This protection is particularly important for junior employees because they may have less bargaining power than senior staff.
Balancing Employee Rights and Business Needs
The debate should not be presented as a conflict in which employee rights and business interests are necessarily opposite.
Businesses also benefit from sustainable working practices. Employees who have adequate time for rest and personal responsibilities may be better positioned to maintain long-term performance.
The goal should therefore be balance.
Employees should have predictable periods in which they can disconnect. Employers should retain the ability to respond to genuine emergencies and operate flexible schedules where business conditions require them.
The most practical approach is likely to be based on clearly defined expectations rather than a one-size-fits-all rule.
Proposed Framework for India
A practical Indian framework for the Right to Disconnect could contain the following elements:
| Framework Element | Proposed Approach |
|---|---|
| Defined Working Hours | Employees should know when their normal working period begins and ends. |
| Digital Communication Policy | Organisations should establish clear rules regarding emails, messaging applications and work calls outside normal hours. |
| Emergency Exception | The organisation should define genuine emergencies and identify employees responsible for responding. |
| On-Call Arrangements | On-call responsibilities should be clearly communicated in advance. |
| No Retaliation | Employees should not face negative employment consequences for declining non-emergency communication during recognised rest periods. |
| Manager Training | Managers should be trained to distinguish urgent matters from ordinary communication. |
| Employee Awareness | Employees should be informed about their rights and responsibilities. |
| Grievance Mechanism | There should be a reasonable internal mechanism for employees to report repeated violations. |
| Periodic Review | Organisations should review whether communication practices are creating excessive digital workload. |
| Flexibility for Global Teams | Companies working across time zones should create shift-based or rotation-based systems instead of expecting the same employees to remain permanently available. |
Right to Disconnect and Productivity
One common concern is that reducing after-hours communication could reduce productivity.
However, productivity should not necessarily be measured by the number of hours an employee remains online.
A healthier approach is to evaluate employees according to results, quality, deadlines and responsibilities.
Constant availability may create the appearance of commitment without necessarily producing better work.
The empirical evidence linking digital overreach with burnout is relevant here. The 2026 Indian study found a significant relationship between digital overreach and burnout among its sample of IT and ITeS employees.
Source: https://www.rjpn.org/ijcspub/viewpaperforall.php?paper=IJCSP26C1144
Therefore, organisations may need to consider whether excessive digital communication actually improves performance or simply increases employee pressure.
Key Findings
The major findings of this study are:
- Digital technology has weakened the traditional boundary between working time and personal time.
- IT employees may face pressure to remain available beyond formal working hours.
- The Right to Disconnect is increasingly relevant to modern employment relationships.
- Indian constitutional principles relating to liberty, privacy and dignity provide an important background for discussing personal autonomy.
- Article 21 does not currently establish a general statutory Right to Disconnect for all employees.
- The Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2020 addresses broader occupational and working conditions rather than creating a specific Right to Disconnect.
- The Right to Disconnect Bill, 2025 proposes a specific framework concerning after-hours work communication but remains a pending Private Member’s Bill.
- Recent empirical research involving 115 Indian IT and ITeS employees found significant relationships between digital overreach, burnout and intention to leave.
- Organisational culture is as important as written policy.
- A practical Right to Disconnect should include reasonable exceptions for emergencies and formally agreed on-call work.
Recommendations
Based on the analysis, the following recommendations are suggested:
- First, organisations should adopt written digital communication policies.
- Second, employees should be clearly informed about expected working hours and response times.
- Third, emergency communication should be limited to genuinely urgent situations.
- Fourth, on-call responsibilities should be planned and communicated in advance.
- Fifth, organisations should provide appropriate mechanisms for employees to report repeated after-hours pressure.
- Sixth, managers should receive training on digital communication and employee boundaries.
- Seventh, performance evaluations should not depend solely on an employee’s immediate response to messages.
- Eighth, organisations should encourage the use of delayed email delivery and scheduling tools for non-urgent communications.
- Ninth, companies working across time zones should use shift-based systems rather than relying on continuous availability.
- Tenth, policymakers should continue examining whether existing labour protections adequately address digital work patterns.
Limitations of the Study
This study has certain limitations.
- First, it is primarily based on secondary legal and academic sources.
- Second, the empirical evidence discussed is based on a particular study involving 115 IT and ITeS employees and should not automatically be generalised to every IT employee in India.
- Third, the experiences of employees may differ according to organisation size, job role, seniority, work model, client location and employment contract.
- Fourth, the legal position concerning the Right to Disconnect may evolve as legislation, judicial decisions and organisational practices develop.
Therefore, the findings should be understood as a research-based analysis rather than a claim that every employee experiences digital overreach in the same manner.
Future Scope of Research
Future research can examine the Right to Disconnect through primary data collected directly from Indian IT employees.
Researchers could conduct surveys comparing:
- Junior and senior employees.
- Remote and office-based employees.
- Domestic and international client teams.
- Permanent employees and contractual workers.
- Employees with and without formal on-call duties.
Future research could also examine whether organisations with formal digital communication policies report differences in employee satisfaction, burnout and turnover intention.
Longitudinal studies would be particularly useful because they could examine whether changes in workplace communication policies produce measurable changes in employee well-being over time.
Conclusion
The Right to Disconnect has emerged as an important labour-rights question in the digital workplace. The rapid development of smartphones, remote work, instant messaging, cloud technology and international business has created new forms of workplace connectivity. These technologies have significant benefits, but they can also make it difficult for employees to separate professional responsibilities from personal life.
The issue is particularly relevant to the Indian IT sector because employees frequently work with global teams, international clients and flexible working arrangements. A recent study of 115 IT and ITeS employees found significant relationships between digital overreach and burnout, as well as between digital overreach and intention to leave. The findings provide empirical support for taking excessive digital connectivity seriously.
Source: https://www.rjpn.org/ijcspub/viewpaperforall.php?paper=IJCSP26C1144
From a constitutional perspective, Article 21, privacy, dignity and personal autonomy provide important principles for understanding why personal time can have value. However, these principles should not be incorrectly described as an already established general statutory Right to Disconnect for all Indian employees.
The proposed Right to Disconnect Bill, 2025 represents an important legislative development because it specifically seeks to recognise an employee’s ability to disconnect from work-related calls and emails beyond working hours and on holidays. However, as of the current status, the Bill remains pending and has not become an enacted law.
Official Bill:
https://www.sansad.in/getFile/BillsTexts/LSBillTexts/Asintroduced/51%20of%202025%20AS125202592416PM.pdf?source=legislation
Current status:
https://prsindia.org/mptrack/18-lok-sabha/supriya-sule
The most practical approach is therefore not to create an absolute prohibition on every form of after-hours communication. Modern organisations sometimes have legitimate reasons to contact employees outside conventional hours. Emergencies, cybersecurity incidents, critical technical failures, international shifts and formally agreed on-call responsibilities may require flexibility.
The central requirement should be clarity and fairness. Employees should know when they are expected to work, when they are free to disconnect and under what exceptional circumstances they may be contacted. Employers should also ensure that employees are not punished for refusing non-urgent communication during recognised rest periods.
Human Resource Management has an important role in achieving this balance. Clear policies, manager training, emergency procedures, on-call arrangements, grievance mechanisms and anti-retaliation safeguards can help organisations protect employee well-being without unnecessarily restricting business operations.
Ultimately, the Right to Disconnect should be understood not as a rejection of technology but as an attempt to establish healthier boundaries around its use. The objective is to ensure that digital connectivity remains a tool for productive work rather than becoming a permanent expectation of employee availability.
A sustainable digital workplace should recognise that employees are not only workers. They also have personal lives, families, responsibilities and the need for genuine periods of rest. Establishing reasonable boundaries between professional and personal time can therefore contribute to a more balanced and sustainable employment relationship.
References
Mishra, Akshay & Tiwari, Nandini
Mishra, Akshay & Tiwari, Nandini. “Logged In and Burned Out: How Constant Connectivity and Work Setups Drive Exhaustion in Indian IT.” International Journal of Current Science, Vol. 16, Issue 3, 2026, pp. 384–390.
https://www.rjpn.org/ijcspub/viewpaperforall.php?paper=IJCSP26C1144
Harikrishnan, R.
Harikrishnan, R. “Right to Disconnect: A New Labor Right in the Digital Era? – A Comparative and Constitutional Analysis.” Indian Journal of Legal Review, Vol. 5, Issue 4, 2025, pp. 714–721.
RIGHT TO DISCONNECT: A NEW LABOR RIGHT IN THE DIGITAL ERA? – A COMPARATIVE AND CONSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS
The Right to Disconnect Bill, 2025
The Right to Disconnect Bill, 2025, Bill No. 51 of 2025, introduced in Lok Sabha by Smt. Supriya Sule.
https://www.sansad.in/getFile/BillsTexts/LSBillTexts/Asintroduced/51%20of%202025%20AS125202592416PM.pdf?source=legislation
PRS India
PRS India. Supriya Sule, 18th Lok Sabha – Private Member Bills and Current Status.
https://prsindia.org/mptrack/18-lok-sabha/supriya-sule
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, (1978) 1 SCC 248.
Official Supreme Court judgment:
https://webapi.sci.gov.in/jonew/judis/5154.pdf
Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India
Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1.
Official Supreme Court material:
https://api.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2012/35071/35071_2012_Judgement_26-Sep-2018.pdf
Nabha Power Ltd. v. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd.
Nabha Power Ltd. v. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., (2018) 11 SCC 508. Supreme Court materials discussing principles of contractual interpretation.
https://www.api.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2021/12246/12246_2021_36_1501_30124_Judgement_17-Sep-2021.pdf
Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2020
Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2020, Government of India.
India Code:
https://www.indiacode.nic.in/indiacode/handle/123456789/22041?view_type=browse
Lok Sabha Parliamentary Business
Lok Sabha Parliamentary Business – Right to Disconnect Bill, 2025.
https://sansad.in/getFile/lobpmb/2025/25072025.pdf?source=loksabhadocs
