I agree with senior columnist Lin Suling that “right to disconnect” legislation, while well-meaning, is a blunt tool to address workplace burnout caused by the lack of opportunity for an employee to rest, recharge or, to put it frankly, have a life (Push for right to disconnect requires less wishful thinking, Sept 7).

After all, consistently requiring an employee to put in long hours is symptomatic of larger cultural issues at an organisation, which cannot be fixed by top-down legislation.

Given the diverse nature of work found in any mature economy like ours, it is impossible to police work norms and culture. Even what each one of us wants out of a job differs. While some of us may willingly put in more hours early in our career to climb the corporate ladder or become financially independent, others might want a more balanced lifestyle from the beginning.

Instead, employees should be empowered to change jobs in search of better hours, pay or other benefits. In some ways, the upcoming job seeker support scheme will do this by giving a financial buffer to those looking for a job. This will let them better assess the suitability of an opportunity and review the employer’s track record.

Employee self-esteem and awareness are also important considerations. As Ms Lin noted, painting all employers as heartless slave drivers can be disingenuous and counterproductive, as employees stuck with rotten bosses may get the signal that it is no better elsewhere.

A job or a career can be a deeply personal choice. On the flip side, employing people comes with its unique challenges and stresses – just ask Singapore’s small and medium-sized enterprises, which collectively employ over 70 per cent of the workforce. Some things are best left to (labour) market forces to sort out. All we need to do is empower employees to vote with their feet.

Chirag Agarwal