Did you know that nearly 17 per cent of workers reported experiencing work-related psychosocial disorders in a recent national survey by the Ministry of Human Resources?
Conducted from 2023 to 2025 across seven industries under the National Occupational Disease Prevention Programme, the survey revealed that 16.91 per cent of participants have experienced work-related psychosocial disorders.
This evaluation underscores the growing severity of occupational stress driven by heavy workloads, fast-paced environments, and relentless time pressures.
A prominent factor contributing to this psychosocial hazard is technostress, which is the psychological distress caused by an inability to adapt to or manage the continuous use of digital information and communication technologies (ICTs).
Constant exposure to real-time communication channels such as incoming emails, instant messages, and virtual meetings can leave employees mentally drained.
These demands produce cognitive and emotional exhaustion, severely compromising an employee’s ability to psychologically disengage from professional duties and making it increasingly difficult to switch off and recharge.
Re-Conceptualising Digital Connectivity As Workplace Harassment
While digital communication tools are vital for organisational agility and collaboration, a critical boundary exists between essential digital communication and covert workplace harassment.
When organisations expect around-the-clock availability, characterised by mandatory responses late at night or on weekends, pervasive monitoring, and continuous task allocation during personal time, the line between productivity and workplace bullying blurs.
Unlike traditional bullying, which often depends on physical presence within a 9.00- to-5.00 frame, digital bullying occurs regardless of time or place.
Receiving work messages at odd hours creates a culture of “digital presenteeism,” instilling anxiety, burnout, and a sense of losing control over personal time.
Power Asymmetries And Implicit Coercion
The dark side of digital reliance stems from organisational power dynamics. Although digital tools are designed for seamless collaboration, structural authority can implicitly turn routine communications into sources of psychological pressure.
Even without explicit mandates, employees often feel compelled to respond after hours out of fear of negative repercussions such as poor performance appraisals, career stagnation, interpersonal marginalisation, or contract non-renewal.
While an isolated late-night email does not constitute harassment on its own, a pervasive pattern of unreasonable communication expectations violates personal boundaries and creates a toxic, hostile work environment.
Left unchecked, it transforms into a systemic psychosocial hazard that directly damages mental health.
Balancing Emergency Responsiveness With The Right To Disconnect
In genuine crisis scenarios, such as system outages, urgent safety concerns, or critical operational disruptions, timely intervention is vital. Employees share a collective responsibility to respond promptly to authentic emergencies to protect business continuity.
However, organisations must strictly differentiate between exceptional emergencies and routine operational tasks. Non-urgent matters such as general updates, standard task allocations, or routine inquiries should be scheduled or addressed during regular working hours.
Reserving after-hours contact exclusively for true emergencies fosters mutual trust while ensuring an employee’s right to rest remains protected.
Organisational Implications And Recommendations
To address this issue, the Ministry of Human Resources and individual organisations must implement clear policies surrounding after-hours communication. Key actionable recommendations include:
Formalise a “right to disconnect” policy: Establish formal guidelines that define expected response windows. Unless a role is explicitly designated as “on call,” employees should have no obligation to read or respond to messages outside contracted hours.
Protect personal recovery time: Explicitly classify non-working hours, weekends, scheduled leave, and public holidays as protected recovery periods.
Prohibit adverse consequences: Ensure structural protections so that declining non-urgent, after-hours communication does not impact performance evaluations, career progression, or employment security.
Conduct psychosocial risk assessments: Integrate technostress evaluations into routine workplace safety and health audits. Organisations should gather empirical data on digital habits and employee well-being to identify high-risk departments and co-create evidence-based boundary policies.
Foster psychological safety: Build an organisational culture where setting reasonable communication boundaries is supported without fear of penalisation.
Conclusion: Navigating The Line Between Urgency And Personal Downtime
Protecting the psychological well-being of employees requires a delicate balance between leveraging digital tools effectively and respecting downtime.
While genuine crises will always demand swift action, routine work must not spill over into personal hours.
By recognising the subtle dangers of digital overload and formalising clear communication boundaries, organisations can build healthier, more sustainable workplaces, thus ensuring essential technology serves as a tool for connection rather than an instrument of coercion.
Harjit Kaur is a nurse educator and health care professional with extensive experience in clinical practice and nursing education. Her areas of interest include nursing professional development, workplace well-being, mental health advocacy, risk management, and patient safety.
- This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Ova.
