Australia’s right to disconnect laws have been in place for almost two years but have barely been tested and this new case brings them into sharp focus. The dispute centres on a rail driver at a large freight company who has turned to the updated workplace laws to challenge being required to accept daily robocalls during off duty hours. The issue has emerged as many employers still rely on a mix of texts, apps and calls to manage complex rosters while employees grow more confident about pushing back on contact that spills into their private lives.
At the centre of the matter is an automated system that rings workers outside normal hours to confirm the next shift. Staff sources say missing the robocall and not returning it can be treated as being absent without leave with pay withheld and job security put at risk. Some employees argue that existing text alerts and roster apps already provide enough information, which makes the repeated calls feel unnecessary and intrusive. The freight operator has reportedly told staff that such contact is standard in the industry, that their enterprise agreement still requires next turn of duty notifications and that an aggregate allowance is designed to cover reasonable after hours communication.
The case is now before the national workplace tribunal under the right to disconnect provisions that formally took effect in August 2024 and it appears to be one of the first major tests of how far employers can go in expecting responsiveness outside paid hours. Any order would directly apply only to the driver involved but it could influence how the same operator and possibly other transport and logistics businesses manage rosters and contact rules. A transport union is expected to take part as an interested party while a separate Federal Court claim by the same worker over alleged adverse action adds another legal front and has already led to an undertaking that any termination step will come with seven days’ notice.
This dispute sits against a backdrop of only limited formal use of the new right to disconnect pathway. Between August 2024 and 30 June 2025 the national workplace tribunal received just seven applications linked to these rights, with most discontinued, withdrawn or resolved and only one still active. Other recent matters have touched on the right to disconnect indirectly, including a former school employee seeking almost $800,000 in part over not responding to allegations during holidays and a port worker who argued they were unlawfully stood down after resisting contact about attendance records. With so few applications on record this freight case seems likely to shape how employers balance operational needs with workers’ right to switch off even as most disputes still appear to be settled quietly inside workplaces rather than in public hearings.
