Logged In, Burnt Out: Insights into Right to Disconnect Bill

The rise in mental health issues and burnout is not sudden; a 2024 report found that 62% of the workforce experienced burnout—a staggering statistic compared to the global average of 20%

The International Labour Organization reported that Indian employees work an average of 46.7 hours per week, with a majority working more than 49 hours weekly (ILO, 2024). The Indian workforce consists of approximately 50 million individuals. According to a report by the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) and MediBuddy, a digital health platform, 86% of employees are struggling with mental health issues. The rise in mental health issues and burnout is not sudden; a 2024 report found that 62% of the workforce experienced burnout—a staggering statistic compared to the global average of 20%. Additionally, the toll of burnout is not just psychological but also physical, with reports indicating that over 70% of employees face at least one health risk due to stressful lifestyles (Upadhyay, 2025).

What Is the Right to Disconnect Bill, 2025?
Inspired by laws passed in France, Italy, Portugal, and Australia since 2017, the Right to Disconnect Bill was proposed as a private member’s bill during the first winter session of the Lok Sabha on December 5, 2025. Proposed by MP Supriya Sule, the Bill calls for the creation of mutually agreed-upon policies regarding after-hours contact. It proposes the establishment of an Employees’ Welfare Authority to ensure that employees are not obligated to respond to work-related telecommunications after working hours or on holidays.

With the intention of improving work–life balance, enhancing quality of life, and reducing burnout caused by digital overload, the Bill also advocates for the introduction of counselling services and digital detox centres. The counselling services aim to raise awareness about healthy use of digital and communication tools, while digital detox centres are envisioned as spaces where employees can connect with colleagues without digital distractions.

Considering the “info-obesity” caused by constant work-related communication and the “telepressure” arising from the compulsion to respond to calls and messages at all times, employees have been reported to experience emotional exhaustion, high stress levels, and sleep deprivation. Taking into account the competitive nature of markets and diverse work cultures, the Bill allows flexibility by permitting employees to negotiate disconnect rules with their managers. If employees work beyond designated hours, they would be entitled to overtime pay at the same rate as their regular wages.

Additionally, the Bill outlines an Emergency Communication Protocol specifying who may be contacted in case of emergencies and how such communication should occur. Overall, the Bill advocates respect for employees’ rights and personal space. Violations of these boundaries could result in fines of up to 1% of the employee’s total remuneration.

The Psychological Underpinnings
Changes in work culture, largely driven by the pandemic, have led to increased use of digital tools in workplaces. While these tools improve accessibility and efficiency, they also blur the boundaries between personal and professional life, resulting in merged work and personal time. Work no longer ends when employees leave the office; instead, post-office hours are often consumed by emails, messages, and client calls, perpetuating a broken stress loop.

This issue is structural rather than individual. Expectations from clients and managers for constant availability have entrenched a culture of perpetual connectivity. Referred to as “telepressure” in the Bill, the term denotes the burden employees face from the constant pressure to be online, respond immediately, and remain consistently prompt in communication. Being perpetually “on” reduces opportunities for mental rest, contributing to burnout, job-related distress, emotional exhaustion, and sleep disturbances.

The inability to disconnect from professional roles at home undermines genuine downtime, preventing employees from restoring the cognitive, emotional, and mental resources necessary for efficient functioning. The Bill directly addresses these concerns by advocating improved mental health outcomes for employees.

Work–life balance is an essential component of overall well-being. Clear boundaries between work and personal life prevent role conflict and allow for effective management of both domains, reducing role overload. Personal time is not surplus time; it is essential for nurturing individual identity beyond work and for self-care and relationship maintenance. Excessive digital demands that intrude upon this time can lead to heightened stress, digital overload, and poorer psychological well-being (Bai & Vahidien, 2023). Awareness and training in healthy digital habits, coupled with respect for employees’ personal boundaries, can lead to higher commitment and lower turnover rates (Gupta et al., 2025).

Obstacles in Implementation
The Bill was introduced as a Private Member Bill—that is, by a Member of Parliament who is not a government minister—making its passage and implementation unlikely. Even if enacted into law, its effectiveness would depend on several contextual factors. In Indian society, many organisations equate employee availability with dedication. This long-standing work culture could pose a significant obstacle to implementation.

Social pressure on employees to remain constantly available is often reinforced by implicit expectations from management. Moreover, the diversity of sectors—ranging from emergency services and startups to multinational corporations, global teams, and gig workers—makes uniform implementation particularly challenging. Employers may justify after-hours contact under the guise of flexible timings or on-call requirements, complicating negotiations over disconnect rules.

Additionally, abrupt enforcement of boundaries between work and personal life may impose psychological strain on individuals who use work as a coping mechanism or as a primary source of identity. A sudden disconnect could lead to stress related to excess free time, guilt over not pursuing job-related growth, or identity conflict stemming from the need to cultivate a non-professional identity.

The irony lies in the fact that while policymakers express concern over employee mental health, millions of workers have not even attained the “luxury” of burnout. Domestic workers, delivery riders, and those in the informal sector often lack formal recognition, fixed hours, or stable wages. While employees in air-conditioned offices worry about boundaries, a vast majority of the population struggles to survive in conditions devoid of any boundaries at all.

Rights and regulations apply only when the law recognises the worker. Informal workers labour until exhaustion, often without contracts, unions, or grievance mechanisms, remaining invisible by design. How does one disconnect when one was never connected? When digital burnout is acknowledged but the physical burnout underpinning the nation’s labour force is ignored, the Bill begins to resemble a policy of privilege rather than protection.

The Right to Disconnect Bill has been introduced at a time when the need for disconnection is acute. The erosion of work–life boundaries has resulted in psychological costs far beyond initial expectations. By recognising employees’ right to personal time and disengagement from professional roles, the Bill underscores the importance of mental health in a post-digital world.

However, institutionalising personal time must be accompanied by organisational commitment and broader inclusion of mental health within labour rights frameworks. As societies evolve, adaptation must extend beyond economic change to encompass emotional infrastructure, fostering a workforce that is healthier, more resilient, and sustainable.

Thus, even if the Bill succeeds, it will represent a victory only for a small fraction of employees—those with salaries and emails to disconnect from—while a significant portion of the population continues to wait for basic labour protections, regular pay, and the right to rest at all.

Authors: Muskan Shah, FLAME Alumna & Prof. Moitrayee Das, Faculty of Psychology, FLAME University.