Availability demands are explicit or implicit expectations that employees remain reachable and responsive outside ordinary work hours (Dettmers et al., 2016). In Australia, these expectations now sit in the context of Right-to Disconnect legislation, yet policy alone is unlikely to resolve the issue (Hopkins, 2024; Josserand & Boersma, 2024). For frontline supervisors working in remote mining environments, the issue may be especially pronounced because continuity of operations can conflict with the discontinuous nature of Fly-In/Fly-Out (FIFO) rosters. This creates conditions in which work may remain psychologically and behaviourally present at home on their time off (Parker et al., 2018).

Initial findings and future steps of a research project focused on availability demands in frontline mining supervision will be presented. Drawing on Job Demands-Resources theory (Bakker & Demerouti, 2017), boundary theory (Ashforth et al., 2000; Kossek et al., 2023), and organizational safety research, the project examines how availability demands arise, what sustains repeated boundary breaches, and how they affect supervisors personally and in their leadership role. The central proposition is that availability demands may reduce opportunities for psychological detachment and recovery, reinforce a felt responsibility to remain available, and shape fatigue, rumination, wellbeing, and leadership-related processes (Barber et al., 2024). This can have potential downstream implications for safety and wellbeing (Stempel et al., 2022).

Conceptually, the proposed research asks whether availability demands should be understood as an underexamined job demand that extends beyond time-based intrusion into a broader pattern of boundary breaches, reduced boundary control, and impaired recovery in frontline supervisory work. It also asks how Job Demands-Resources theory and boundary theory can be brought together to explain why some supervisors remain psychologically and behaviourally available during off-rostered time, which individual, relational, and organisational conditions sustain this pattern, and how these processes may carry through to leadership practice and team safety outcomes. This includes examining whether a mismatch exists between formal expectations about supervisory availability and the realities of supervisory work in practice. Planned research activities include qualitative interviews to map how these dynamics are experienced in context, survey research to test the proposed pathways and conditions, and intervention-focused work to identify practical organisational responses.

Through my research, I will offer practical guidance for mining and other safety-critical organisations on how to better manage availability demands in frontline supervision, reduce harmful boundary breaches during off-rostered time, and better support supervisors to maintain recovery, wellbeing, and safety-relevant leadership.