Congress Should Embrace the Right to Disconnect

By Dr. Gleb Tsipursky

The most profitable thing many companies can do this year is tell their employees to stop responding after hours. That claim sounds like heresy in an “always on” economy that valorizes availability, but new evidence from a study by Dr. Mark Ma and colleagues at the University of Pittsburgh shows that setting a hard stop after the workday pays off for both employers and workers. The data lands at a moment when many are debating whether to follow dozens of jurisdictions that already protect the right to disconnect, and both Congress and state legislatures should strongly consider following their lead.

Profits Rise When Workers Can Log Off

Here is the study headline finding you do not hear in late-night Slack threads: When countries adopt right to disconnect laws, firm profitability goes up. In a large difference-in-differences analysis spanning 143,396 firm-year observations across 28 OECD countries from 2014 to 2024, companies in nations that enacted a right to disconnect posted significant gains in both return on assets and operating income after adoption. The increases equal roughly 5.7 percent and 6.1 percent of the standard deviation of those measures, a real boost that shows up quickly after the laws take effect.

The mechanism is not mystery or magic. Productivity improves when people recover outside work. The study documents higher revenue per employee after adoption and lower operating expense per employee, while total headcount does not change in a statistically significant way. In other words, firms generated more per person with leaner operating costs, which is exactly what executives say they want.

Methodology matters in policy debates, and this one holds up. To avoid the pitfalls of traditional two-way fixed effects with staggered policies, the authors use modern statistical methodology and match treated countries to neighbors to control for regional effects. The profitability gains persist across specifications and appear soon after adoption.

If you assume these results are simply macro tailwinds, think again. The study finds that adoptions are not explained by GDP growth, employment, or birth rates, and the pre-trend checks are flat. That strengthens the causal story policy makers care about: limit after-hours interruptions and firms perform better.

Stronger Rules, Stronger Results

Not all right to disconnect laws are created equal. Design choices determine whether the policy is a paper tiger or a performance enhancer. Countries that pair the right with meaningful enforcement see larger gains. Where fines for noncompliance exist and where employers must include the policy in employment contracts, the profitability lift is bigger and statistically stronger.

Eligibility matters too. Extending protections to all workers beats limiting them to remote or hybrid staff, although even remote-only rules still help. These details are not abstractions; they are levers U.S. lawmakers can pull.

International experience offers practical templates. Australia’s Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Closing Loopholes No. 2) Act created a national right to refuse employer contact outside working hours, with clear timelines for rollout and guidance from the Fair Work bodies. The official legislation and regulator explain when the right applies, how disputes are handled, and when small businesses come into scope, giving employers certainty and workers clarity.

Europe’s experience is instructive as well. Company-level research compiled for the EU finds that right to disconnect policies work best when paired with awareness efforts, manager training, and practical measures that limit out-of-hours connection. That combination raises acceptance and improves effectiveness on the ground. Over seventy percent of workers in companies with a policy rate its impact positively, but the biggest gains come when policies are embedded in day-to-day practice.

This is the core lesson for the United States. If Congress or states choose to act, they should avoid vague aspirations and write rules that are easy to follow. Spell out what counts as “nonworking hours,” require written policies, align with time-zone realities, and specify enforcement that nudges compliance rather than inviting litigation. The profit story depends on clarity.

A Policy Win For Workers And Employers

Profit is only half the story. Workers’ lives improve when they can truly unplug. Using tens of thousands of Glassdoor ratings, the study shows a statistically significant rise in work-life balance satisfaction among employees in Ontario after the province implemented its right to disconnect in 2022. The effect is strongest at firms that started with weaker work-life balance, exactly where policy can do the most good.

Independent surveys point the same direction. Slack’s Workforce Index, based on more than 10,000 desk workers, finds that people who log off at the end of the day report “20 percent higher productivity” than those who feel pressure to work after hours. That is a striking confirmation that productivity improves when boundaries are respected.

Opponents warn that the right to disconnect will paralyze urgent operations. That straw man ignores the text of modern bills and laws, which include exceptions for emergencies and scheduling. New Jersey’s pending A4852 would require employers to set a written policy defining nonworking hours, while allowing exceptions for emergencies or scheduling and specifying administrative enforcement, a straightforward and flexible approach.

California’s 2024 proposal stirred a healthy debate and has not advanced, due in part to concerns from employer groups. Even critics acknowledged the challenge the policy tries to solve. That debate is worth having, but it should be anchored in facts rather than fears, because the best evidence we have shows that clearly drafted rights with reasonable enforcement and exceptions can raise productivity and satisfaction at the same time.

For lawmakers who are cautious about mandates, there is a middle road that still captures the performance gains the study identifies. Congress could set a floor for federal contractors, requiring a written right-to-disconnect policy with emergency carve-outs and reporting requirements. Agencies could model best practices by setting server-side delays on emails sent after hours or by adopting default quiet hours, techniques already used by several European employers. States can run alongside with targeted statutes like New Jersey’s. If you prefer a market approach, the evidence still helps: boards and investors can ask management teams to adopt right-to-disconnect policies voluntarily, because the business case is now clear.

Finally, consider the labor market angle. The profitability effect in the research is greater in tighter labor markets, where employees have more bargaining power. That implies a competitive advantage for jurisdictions that make it easier to attract scarce talent with credible work-life balance. If Washington wants to keep high-skill workers in the United States, codifying a sensible right to disconnect would be a smart way to do it.

Conclusion

When lawmakers ask business what they need, the answer is usually the same: productivity, predictability, and talent. The right to disconnect delivers all three. Productivity improves because rested people do better work. Predictability improves because expectations are clear and after-hours communication is reserved for truly urgent needs. Talent flows to places that respect time outside the office, especially in a world where many of the best candidates can take their skills anywhere.

The latest evidence should move this debate out of the realm of intuition. We now have large-sample, multi-country data showing that right to disconnect laws are associated with higher profitability and better employee satisfaction, with larger gains where rules are clear and enforceable. The picture that emerges is a blueprint for policy that supports business outcomes without sacrificing human ones.

It is time to stop treating after-hours availability as a proxy for commitment. A clear pro-growth move Congress can make for the modern economy is to help Americans log off, so they can show up the next day ready to produce at the top of their game.

About the Author