What the ‘right to switch off’ could mean for financial services

The UK Government’s proposed Employment Rights Bill, which includes a ‘right to switch off,’ is stirring considerable debate across many sectors, with accountancy firms standing to be particularly affected. As the government explores measures to ensure workers can properly disconnect outside of working hours, there are growing concerns about the potential impact on industries where extended hours and overtime are often essential to meeting client needs. While the policy aims to protect work-life balance, its inclusion in an industry like accountancy — where flexibility and availability are baked in — could create significant operational challenges.

At the heart of the debate is the question of how this new rule will interact with the demanding and often time-sensitive nature of the accountancy profession. For many accountants, overtime is not an occasional inconvenience but a structural necessity. From managing tax deadlines to responding to last-minute client emergencies, the role of an accountant rarely fits neatly into a standard 9-to-5 framework. This is particularly true during peak periods like tax season or when dealing with complex compliance issues. The proposed legislation could fundamentally alter this dynamic.

As Vipul Sheth, managing director of AdvanceTrack Outsourcing, says, “On the face of it, the Government’s proposed ‘right to switch off’ law, modelled on similar regulations introduced in Australia, looks to be a progressive policy designed to promote employee mental health and work-life balance. However, for the accountancy sector, the legislation presents unique challenges.”

The inherent flexibility that clients expect from accountants is part of what makes the profession successful, particularly for small and mid-sized firms that are built on high trust and reliability. If accountants are legally entitled to disconnect and refrain from engaging with work correspondence after hours, firms may struggle to meet client expectations, especially when urgent matters arise.

“Enforcing strict ‘switch-off’ rules could undermine service levels and responsiveness, potentially damaging client relationships and disrupting business operations,” Sheth warns. 

His concerns are not unfounded. The ability to work outside regular hours has long been an unofficial but essential part of the accountancy profession. Introducing rigid rules around out-of-hours contact could lead to delays in addressing client needs and erode the trust that many firms have worked hard to build.

Moreover, accountancy firms – particularly smaller ones – may face a conundrum: to ensure compliance with the new regulations, they might need to increase staffing or overhaul team structures, both of which would add to costs. “To adapt, firms might need to increase staffing levels or restructure teams, leading to higher costs and added complexity in a profession already grappling with margin pressures and a significant skills shortage,” Sheth notes. This comes at a time when the profession is already contending with a tight labour market and rising operational expenses, potentially exacerbating the strain on profitability.

The government’s intentions are clear: to avoid the negative impact of work-from-home practices turning employees’ homes into ‘24/7 offices’ and to promote productivity through proper rest. However, as Ben Smith, senior associate at employment law firm GQ Littler, points out, “there isn’t going to be a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach.” The government acknowledges that different sectors will require different applications of the law, and the accountancy profession is a prime example of an industry where a blanket approach could do more harm than good.

For accounting firms, flexibility is a two-way street. Accountants benefit from flexible working arrangements, but their clients also expect accountants to be available when it matters most. In this context, the ‘right to switch off’ could lead to unintended consequences: reduced operational efficiency, client dissatisfaction, and increased complexity in managing workloads. Echoing Smith, Sheth agrees that “a more nuanced, tailored approach is necessary — one that balances employee wellbeing with the specific demands of accountancy.” This could mean implementing policies that protect employees’ right to disconnect while maintaining coverage during critical times, such as tax season or year-end reporting.

The legislation, if enacted, would mark a significant shift in the accountancy landscape. For firms that have traditionally relied on the dedication of their staff to meet tight deadlines and provide real-time support, this change could be disruptive. A balance will need to be struck between adhering to the law and maintaining the level of service clients expect. Firms might find themselves investing in new systems and processes, not just to manage workloads but to comply with the law, potentially adding another layer of complexity to an already challenging profession.

Ultimately, as Sheth argues, while the spirit of the law is commendable, its application in the accountancy sector could create unforeseen difficulties. “The ‘right to switch off’ might sound beneficial in theory,” he says, “but if implemented poorly, it could become a burden the accountancy sector just cannot afford.”

The proposed Employment Rights Bill represents a bold step towards redefining modern work practices in the UK. For accountants and the firms they work for, it is likely to require a delicate balancing act — one that prioritises both employee wellbeing and the high standards of service that clients expect. Whether or not the profession can navigate these changes successfully will depend on how effectively the nuances of the sector are factored into the final legislation.