Social media, PR and communications work has never been a neat 9–5. News breaks at odd hours. Stakeholders message from different time zones. A single post can spiral into a reputational incident before you’ve finished your tea. For many comms professionals, that unpredictability is part of the appeal: you get to be close to culture, fast-moving stories, and public-facing decisions that matter.
But there’s a modern problem quietly reshaping the sector: the “always-on” expectation is no longer occasional. It’s becoming the default. And when “always-on” becomes normal, it changes what employers ask for, what candidates feel they must offer, and how sustainable a comms career is over the long term.
This article is about staying effective without burning out: setting boundaries that don’t damage your prospects, using better systems to manage urgency, and building a career story that signals judgement rather than constant availability.
Why comms jobs are uniquely vulnerable to always-on creep
In many roles, after-hours work is tied to predictable cycles: monthly reporting, quarterly deadlines, seasonal peaks. In comms, peaks are often triggered externally. You can be perfectly organised and still get hit by:
- breaking news that affects your organisation
- a customer issue turning into a viral thread
- misinformation spreading faster than internal sign-off
- a senior leader posting something “off message”
- a journalist enquiry with a short deadline
- campaign performance dropping suddenly with no obvious cause
Because the pressure arrives from outside, teams often respond by widening availability “just in case”. The intention is good: protect the organisation, be responsive, look professional. The outcome can be grim: constant checking, difficulty switching off, and a sense that your personal time is only borrowed.
Over time, always-on creep shows up as:
- people replying instantly to prove they’re dependable
- late-night “quick edits” becoming routine
- weekends turning into “monitoring” days
- holiday cover being vague or informal
- a culture where speed is praised more than judgement
The real risk: you start optimising for urgency instead of impact
Comms work is full of urgent signals. Notifications, mentions, inbox pings, chat threads, stakeholder nudges. If you treat all urgency as equal, two things happen:
Your work becomes reactive: You do more putting-out-fires and less shaping narratives, building relationships, improving content quality, or planning for risk.
Your personal brand becomes “availability”: That can feel like a strength early on, but it’s a trap. Organisations don’t promote people because they’re always online. They promote people who can make good decisions under pressure and build systems that prevent pressure becoming constant.
A useful mindset shift for comms professionals is this: Your value is judgement, not just responsiveness. Responsiveness is a tool. Judgement is the skill.
What a credible “right to switch off” looks like in comms
The phrase “right to disconnect” is often treated like a wellbeing slogan, but in comms it’s an operational design problem: how do you respond quickly without expecting constant availability from the same individuals?
If you’re interested in whether policy commitments actually reduce stress and improve outcomes, this is a relevant read: The “right to disconnect”: do policy commitments translate into reduced stress and better productivity?
In practical terms, a credible right to switch off in comms includes:
- clear definitions of what counts as urgent (and examples)
- a rota or on-call model for genuinely urgent cover
- agreed response times for non-urgent messages
- decision trees so junior staff aren’t guessing alone
- leadership behaviour that matches the policy (no 10pm “quick one”)
If your workplace says “we support boundaries” but has no clear urgent/non-urgent framework, the policy will struggle. People will still respond out of fear of missing something.
Build a “severity ladder” so not everything is a crisis
One of the most effective changes a comms team can make is to introduce a simple severity ladder for issues. It reduces panic and removes ambiguity.
A straightforward model could look like this:
Level 1: Monitor
Low engagement, limited reach, no legal/safety implications. Log it, keep an eye on it, review in core hours.
Level 2: Respond in working hours
Potential reputational impact, but not escalating rapidly. Draft response, align with stakeholder, reply during core hours.
Level 3: Time-sensitive
High reach or influential account, likely media interest, or customer safety concern. Trigger pre-agreed cover process.
Level 4: Critical incident
Legal risk, safeguarding issues, major misinformation, serious stakeholder concern, or national media interest. Activate incident response.
The point isn’t bureaucracy. The point is to stop living in Level 3–4 mode when most things are Level 1–2. Your nervous system will thank you, and your work quality improves.
Accessibility matters: neurodiversity and the hidden cost of constant switching
The always-on comms culture doesn’t affect everyone equally. Roles with constant switching, rapid context changes, and high social interpretation can be especially draining for neurodivergent staff — and for anyone who does their best work with focus and predictability.
If you’re hiring into comms, it’s worth thinking about how your processes and performance expectations interact with reasonable adjustments and different working styles. This piece is useful for that: How do employers handle neurodiversity adjustments in recruitment and performance processes?
In comms teams specifically, accessibility can mean:
- offering alternatives to “on the spot” verbal brainstorms
- using structured briefs rather than vague last-minute requests
- reducing unnecessary urgency and interruptions
- clarifying what “good” looks like beyond visibility and busyness
- designing rotas so cover is shared fairly, not informally dumped
A good comms team is not one where everyone is constantly online. It’s one where the work is designed so people can perform consistently.
How to set boundaries without looking like you “can’t hack it”
Many comms professionals avoid boundaries because they fear being labelled difficult, uncommitted, or not senior enough. The trick is to anchor boundaries in delivery and risk management.
Instead of “I’m not available”, use “Here’s how this will be covered.”
Examples that work well:
- “If this is Level 3 or above, I can pick it up now. If not, I’ll draft in the morning and send by 10.”
- “I’m offline now. If anything escalates, please follow the rota process so it’s handled quickly.”
- “I can do this tonight if it’s urgent, but we’ll need to deprioritise X tomorrow — which should move?”
- “Happy to support, but I’ll need a clear deadline and a single approver to keep this efficient.”
These phrases signal professionalism. They also train stakeholders to be clearer, which reduces panic work.
A modern skill that separates strong comms professionals from burnt-out ones
There’s a career-defining skill in comms that doesn’t get enough attention: stakeholder boundary-setting.
In practice, it looks like:
- refusing vague, last-minute requests without becoming obstructive
- insisting on a clear brief and a clear approver
- protecting your team from “drive-by” changes
- pushing back on unnecessary urgency with calm alternatives
- escalating appropriately, not emotionally
This is not about being “difficult”. It’s about being accountable for outcomes. In fast-moving environments, boundaries are a quality control mechanism.
What employers can do to make comms roles sustainable
If you hire for social media, PR or comms, you will get better performance and retention if you design the work properly. Three changes make an outsized difference:
1) Formalise cover
If your organisation relies on informal cover, you’re effectively asking people to be always-on. A rota makes expectations explicit and shareable.
2) Reduce tool chaos
Multiple channels create constant interruption. Decide where urgent messages go, where approvals happen, and where briefs live.
3) Measure outcomes, not just activity
If you reward speed and visibility, you’ll get burnout and shallow work. If you reward judgement, quality, and crisis prevention, you’ll get stronger comms.
How to talk about boundaries in interviews (without scaring employers)
For candidates, the goal is not to demand a perfect world. It’s to show maturity and operational thinking.
In interviews, you can frame it like this:
- “I’m comfortable with out-of-hours issues when they’re genuinely urgent. I’ve found teams work best when they define urgency clearly and share cover fairly.”
- “I’m used to fast turnaround, but I’m also proactive about creating processes that reduce panic work and improve quality.”
- “I like being responsive, but I’m careful about stakeholder management so everything doesn’t become a last-minute emergency.”
This positions boundaries as competence, not preference.
Summarising:
Comms work will always include moments of urgency. The problem is when urgency becomes the culture. If you want a sustainable career in social media, PR, or communications, you need more than creativity and speed. You need systems, judgement, and the confidence to protect your time in ways that protect outcomes.
The best comms professionals aren’t the ones who never switch off. They’re the ones who can keep the organisation calm, credible, and consistent — and build a working model that lets people perform well without paying for it with their health.
