For 10 years, Jonathan has been available on e-mail. He receives messages as early as 6am and as late as midnight, and steadily for a 12-hour stretch every day. Right from when he first became a lawyer, the clear expectation was that he would do his best to read them as soon as they came in.
“When you get these e-mails on your phone, as we all do now, the pressure externally and internally to do something is huge,” said Jonathan, 41, from northwest England.
Grimacing, he remembers checking his inbox while on holiday with his partner, which led to a blazing argument in the middle of a tourist spot.
Illustration: Lance Liu
“I was told: ‘What can you do about it here?’ I said: ‘I can’t do anything about it, but I need to know, I need to see if there’s anything for me to reply to.’”
We were already struggling to maintain boundaries around work before the pandemic. For many of us, its migration into the home has been the final blow. Those of us who work remotely are working longer, more intense days — and the most obvious sign might be the Sisyphean task of managing our inboxes.
A study last year of 3.1 million workers in North America, Europe and the Middle East found “significant and durable increases” in the average number of e-mails sent internally, and the number of recipients. By measuring the time between the first and last e-mails sent (or meetings attended) in a 24-hour period, the researchers concluded that, since the pandemic, the average workday had extended by 48.5 minutes.
Social media manager Katie, 27, said she is being sent e-mails as late as 10pm or 11pm.
“With remote working, people will blindly fire e-mails towards you at any hour, hoping you’re still around to pick them up — there’s a complete disconnect,” she said.
The sound of another one landing in her inbox, taking her out of her evening wind-down routine, soon became so triggering that she turned off notifications on her phone and laptop.
“I know it’s because my colleagues are swamped with work and are just trying to clear their workload before the next day piles on... but hearing that bing when you’re eating dinner or sitting in front of the TV just makes it feel like you’re permanently at work,” Katie said.
Muting alerts has helped Katie to maintain boundaries, making it her decision whether to check e-mails after hours — which, she admits, she will do.
“It can be really hard if you’re a newbie and want to show your worth,” she said.
Which gets to the heart of the issue of receiving work e-mails outside work hours. Some might say that not checking them is easy enough, but the steady stream of communication — e-mails, texts, instant messages, group chats, calls — is only symptomatic. The real problem is much harder to tackle: the modern world of work, and the expectation that you should always be available to your employer.
PUSHING FOR NEW LAWS
In the UK, the Prospect trade union is pushing for what might seem, to some, like a radical solution to inbox management: government intervention.
“There was a real sense, pre-pandemic, that digital technology was blurring the lines between work and home, and that’s just been turbo-charged,” Prospect research director Andrew Pakes said. “People aren’t able to relax or switch off, and that’s adding to the psychological pressure.”
Prospect wants “the right to disconnect” to be recognized in British employment law reform slated for later this year, preventing bosses from routinely contacting employees outside of work hours or when they are on leave.
The British Labour Party has also lent its support as part of a package of measures to protect flexible working.
Under Prospect’s proposal, companies with 50 or more employees would be required to negotiate with staff and unions annually on a plan for managing after-hours contact, although implementation would be left up to each employer. A similar law took effect in France in 2017, to much global fanfare; Italy and Spain followed suit.
The pandemic has only accelerated this interest in a right to disconnect. In February, the European parliament called for it to be recognized as fundamental across the EU, pointing to the toll of “an always-on culture” on work-life balance. Slovakia introduced a law this year. In April, Ireland introduced a “code of practice” requiring not only proactive engagement on the issue but reviews, training and equity checks. In Canada, the government is exploring a similar policy; Dutch politicians are waiting to debate the subject.
Jonathan’s struggle to switch off, a continuing source of personal misery and relationship tension, has only worsened since the pandemic, to the extent that he is considering leaving the legal profession.
“I can just see that I can’t do this for another 30 years,” he said. “You have to ask if it’s right. I hate the term ‘mental health’ — but what toll is it going to take on people when 15 months of the pandemic has already had such a significant impact?”
Anna Rudnicka, a research fellow at the Interaction Centre at University College London, said that, in offices, we took for granted cues — from our colleagues, or our daily routines — to take breaks, eat lunch and stop working.
“Now, many people don’t know if it’s OK to take a break,” she said. It is even hard to know how to, with our personal and professional devices so often the same.
This extension and intensification of the workday is leading to measurably poor health outcomes such as inactivity, disrupted sleep, repetitive strain injuries, stress, depression, anxiety and burnout.
Barbara, 50, a teacher in central England, took a month off to recover from illness and still received e-mails with questions that only she could answer, and requests for her return. Headings such as: “Don’t read until you’re back!” did little to alleviate the pressure. For Barbara, that she was well enough to use a computer meant she felt pressure to reply.
“I thought I’d try to get ahead of the game, do a bit of work,” she said, sounding exasperated, not least with herself. “It just doesn’t stop.”
Over nearly 30 years of teaching, Barbara said, the actual job has not changed much. What is different is the demands on teachers’ time — from parents, with their own dedicated messaging platforms, to head teachers, able to delegate around the clock.
“It’s relentless, it really is,” she said. “It doesn’t account for family life, or down time, and that’s where it’s got to change.”
Barbara’s own attempts to manage expectations of after-hours availability are undermined by some of her colleagues’ all-hours replies.
“Some people don’t mind,” she said. “I think that’s because they’ve never known it any other way.”
However, even if individual boundaries can be maintained, it is hard to effect change as an individual, under pressure and overworked. Even while she was off sick, Barbara said, a quick glance at her inbox was better than letting communications pile up.
“Going back after a month and picking through the hundreds of messages on Teams, and everything else — it would have taken days,” she said wearily. “It’s almost like, better the devil you know... I do think we can be our own worst enemies.”
PRICE OF NOT REPLYING
There is a vicious cycle in our approach to work, Rudnicka said. People feel anxious, pressured and distracted, and they put more effort into being visible to compensate.
“It creates a culture of availability,” she said. “If your colleague is sending an e-mail, you don’t want to be the one person who doesn’t reply.”
The challenge is how to go about dismantling this culture. Every e-mail received after hours presents workers with a dilemma: answer it, and uphold an unsustainable system — or refuse to reply on principle, and risk potential repercussions.
Repercussions are real. UK statistics from before the pandemic show that people who worked from home were significantly less likely to receive promotions, training or bonuses compared with those who worked in the office. Amid job insecurity in the COVID-19 era, workers might feel even more unable to push back on unreasonable demands.
Claire Mullaly, an IT consultant based in Belfast, spoke out about her own e-mail overload to raise awareness of Prospect’s campaign.
“It’s not just a boss in an emergency... it’s constant,” she said, sounding as if she is under siege.
For Mullaly, the issue goes to the structure of the type of work she does. Because she is contracted for specific projects, she needs to be available, if only so as not to miss out on opportunities, while the growth of the gig economy has removed the safeguards that come with more permanent employment.
“The power has been removed from workers an awful lot,” she said. Yet managers are struggling, too. “It’s like a pyramid scheme of pressure.”
Recognizing work-life balance as a labor-law issue would enable workers and unions to speak up, and force employers to confront the realities of their operations.
“Ultimately, if people are routinely doing work outside their paid hours, we need to have a long, hard look at why,” said Pakes.
A highly individualized, dynamic approach to workplace organization where schedules are built around employees’ needs has been demonstrated to be effective in reducing overwork. For such a nuanced challenge as that, legislation might be too blunt a tool.
Indeed, enshrining the right to disconnect could be at odds with greater variation in work patterns built to accommodate childcare or colleagues in different time zones, warns Ella Hafermalz, associate professor at the KIN Center for Digital Innovation at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
“When you start to forbid people from working at particular times — for example, by deleting e-mails that are sent after hours — what sounds like an empowering initiative can instead become paternalistic, undermining the autonomy that flexible working is meant to offer,” she said. “That kind of flexibility in time and space has been fought for and we don’t want to lose it.”
In workplaces where overwork is entrenched, external interventions can be helpful, but more often, Hafermalz said, “being able to disconnect is usually a matter of company or sectoral culture.”
Indeed, a survey of French executives after the “right to disconnect” law took effect in 2017 found that 78 percent were continuing to read work e-mails and texts outside work hours.
The labor code only requires that companies negotiate an agreement, and just 16 percent of such documents have been found to be precise in their definitions of work tools and times. There are also no sanctions for employers for non-implementation, prompting calls especially during this pandemic for the law to be clarified and strengthened.
It shows the limitations of legislation without buy-in from employers, but it also presents a more immediate route to change — through direct negotiations with employers.
In Germany, for instance, it has long been standard to negotiate the right to disconnect directly with employers. Volkswagen was reportedly the first company worldwide to make it a policy not to forward internal e-mails to private accounts between 6:15pm and 7am. The telecoms giant Orange recognized the right to disconnect in its collective labor agreement in 2016.
Other companies have followed suit with measures such as allowing workers to switch off mobile phones after hours, or pausing the delivery of e-mails over the weekend. Since the pandemic, some employers have given staff more paid time off in the hopes of staving off burnout. All 700 employees of the dating app Bumble just had a week to go “fully offline.”
This suggests that companies are recognizing the importance of work-life balance, if only for their bottom lines.
PERKS OF OFFLINE RIGHTS
Creating lasting change takes commitment and resources, Mullaly said, “but the benefits are there: you’ve got people that are happy, rested, not jumping from job to job.”
In the long term, retention and performance would improve; companies could even advertise themselves as a “right to disconnect employer” to attract talent, she says.
However, disconnecting is more than just a perk — it is “one of the big health and safety challenges of this new era,” Pakes said.
Even pre-pandemic, in 2019, 18 million workdays were lost in the UK to work-related stress, depression or anxiety, and the true toll is only just becoming clear. A landmark study by the WHO and the International Labour Organization (ILO) in May found that working 55 hours a week or more was associated with a significantly elevated risk of stroke and fatal heart disease.
Long hours were responsible for one-third of all workplace deaths, a risk factor entirely overlooked until now.
Such figures make stark the cost of our approach to work, and the shortcomings of existing provisions to protect us. The WHO and ILO have recommended more legislation and collective bargaining to protect workers’ health, but first there needs to be acceptance that work needs to change.
The timing is critical, as the sudden shift to remote and hybrid working takes root. Without protections, Pakes says, this could result in a “new pecking order,” where workers are valued primarily for their availability, and professional roles could be dismantled into discrete tasks.
“We don’t want to hardwire new forms of inequality and discrimination,” Pakes said.
In the past, flexibility has been presented as a bonus, offering workers greater convenience or autonomy, while eroding boundaries in practice.
Abigail Marks, professor of future of work at Newcastle University Business School, says that a huge increase in productivity reported last year was hailed as a triumph of home working, despite the known prevalence of burnout.
“It’s not psychologically possible for us to keep working in this way,” she said.
In the future, we might also be forced to explore other measures of performance than output — e-mails among them. The first step, Marks said, is that we “stop this raw celebration of productivity” and push back on the inference that it is worth the sacrifice of our time and health.
Barbara did this with her boss.
“I said: ‘We bang on about health and wellbeing, and how important it is, but you sent me a message last night at 10 minutes to nine.’” They have a good relationship, and he was apologetic. “He said: ‘I just typed it and didn’t think’ — and that’s the problem.”
Barbara is fully in favor of the right to disconnect being recognized in law, to reach for as backup in those conversations.
When every e-mail adds up, we can all do our bit. Workers can support each other by unionizing and holding back on after-hours correspondence where possible.
Rudnicka, who has been researching strategies for effective remote working as part of the eWorkLife project, said that changing your work e-mail signature to state your hours or availability can model good boundaries.
Likewise, you can limit the number of times you check your work inbox each day, which can be presented to your boss as necessary to achieve focus.
However, Rudnicka adds, management needs to take the lead — not only by materially supporting employees to switch off and take breaks, but doing the same themselves.
“The whole company has to make sure that it’s OK for people to disconnect,” she said.
That might mean giving employees dedicated devices to be turned off outside work hours, or adopting an “e-mail charter” to discourage people from sending unnecessary messages and expecting instant replies.
Barbara, now back at work, has been taking the initiative — muting notifications, putting a send-delay on e-mails to keep them to work hours, and warning her colleagues she will not check them on weekends.
These could be quickly made policies, she said. “It’s people that would have to change.”
Additional reporting by Kim Willsher in Paris.
Recently, the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister newspaper) published three of my articles on the US presidential election, which is to be held on Nov. 5. I would like to share my perspective on the intense and stalemated presidential election with the people of Taiwan, as well as Taiwanese and Chinese Americans in the US. The current consensus of both major US political parties is to counter China and protect Taiwan. However, I do not trust former US president Donald Trump. He has questioned the US’ commitment to defending Taiwan and explicitly stated the significant challenges involved in doing so. “Trump believes
The government is considering building a semiconductor cluster in Europe, specifically in the Czech Republic, to support Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) new fab in Dresden, Germany, and to help local companies explore new business opportunities there. Europe wants to ensure the security of its semiconductor sector, but a lack of comprehensive supply chains there could pose significant risks to semiconductor clusters. The Czech government is aggressively seeking to build its own semiconductor industry and showing strong interest in collaborating with Taiwanese companies. Executive Yuan Secretary-General Kung Ming-hsin (龔明鑫) on Friday said that Taiwan is optimistic about building a semiconductor cluster in
China has successfully held its Forum on China-Africa Cooperation, with 53 of 55 countries from the African Union (AU) participating. The two countries that did not participate were Eswatini and the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, which have no diplomatic relations with China. Twenty-four leaders were reported to have participated. Despite African countries complaining about summit fatigue, with recent summits held with Russia, Italy, South Korea, the US and Indonesia, as well as Japan next month, they still turned up in large numbers in Beijing. China’s ability to attract most of the African leaders to a summit demonstrates that it is still being
The Russian city of Vladivostok lies approximately 45km from the Sino-Russian border on the Sea of Japan. The area was not always Russian territory: It was once the site of a Chinese settlement. The settlement would later be known as Yongmingcheng (永明城), the “city of eternal light,” during the Yuan Dynasty. That light was extinguished in 1858 when a large area of land was ceded by the Qing Dynasty to the Russian Empire with the signing of the Treaty of Aigun. The People’s Republic of China founded by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has never ruled Taiwan. Taiwan was governed by the
RSS