Back
Politics

Victoria Introduces Legislation to Grant Work-from-Home Right for Two Days Per Week

Generated on: Last updated: 5 sources
View source

Victorian Government Proposes Right to Work from Home Two Days Per Week

The Victorian government has introduced legislation granting certain employees the right to work from home two days per week, where reasonably practicable.

The bill, introduced by Premier Jacinta Allan, proposes enshrining this right within the state's Equal Opportunity Act and includes provisions for casual and part-time workers on a pro-rata basis. The legislation has drawn criticism from business groups and raised questions about constitutional and legal conflicts.

Key Provisions of the Legislation

Eligibility and Scope

  • The law applies to employees who can reasonably perform their duties from home.
  • Full-time employees would have the right to work from home two days per week.
  • Casual and part-time workers would be eligible on a pro-rata basis, based on their working hours.
  • Casual employees qualify if they work on a regular and systematic basis.
  • Workers on probation, apprenticeships, traineeships, or graduate programs are not eligible.

Employer Obligations and Refusal Criteria

  • Employers may refuse or limit a work-from-home request only if it is deemed "not reasonable."
  • Specific criteria for refusal include: a significant decrease in productivity or efficiency, significant adverse impact on supervision or customer relationships, excessive financial cost, adverse impact on safety, or impractical changes to operations.
  • Businesses must pay reasonable costs for equipment needed for home work.

Implementation Timeline

  • If passed, the laws are scheduled to take effect on September 1, 2026.
  • Businesses with fewer than 15 employees have until July 1, 2027, to comply.
  • The legislation is scheduled for debate when Parliament returns in late July 2026.
  • New employees will not have the right during their probationary period.

Dispute Resolution and Enforcement

Disputes regarding work-from-home requests will initially be referred to the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission for conciliation. If unresolved, matters would escalate to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT). The tribunal may award compensation for unreasonably refused requests.

The legislation embeds the right within the state's equal opportunity laws, which already protect against discrimination based on personal characteristics.

Background and Rationale

The Victorian government states the policy aims to support workforce participation and family savings. Premier Allan has cited potential savings of up to $5,000 per year per worker on transport costs. The government argues the law protects flexible working practices that became common during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Workers currently have the right to request flexible working arrangements under the federal Fair Work Act, which employers can refuse on "reasonable business grounds." The proposed Victorian law sets a higher bar for refusal, making work-from-home a default right for eligible employees.

Industry and Legal Reactions

Business Groups

Business organizations have opposed the legislation:

  • The Council of Small Business Organisations Australia (COSBOA) stated that small businesses were not adequately consulted.
  • The Victorian Chamber of Commerce and Industry CEO Sally Curtain predicted the laws would lead to disputes and called for their withdrawal, stating members expressed interest in challenging the laws' constitutionality in the High Court.
  • The Business Council of Australia described the mandate as "a solution searching for a problem that's not there."
  • The Australian Retail Council CEO Chris Rodwell said the legislation risked creating unequal opportunities between office-based and frontline staff.

Legal Perspectives

  • Employment law partner Chris Gardner (Seyfarth Shaw) said any attempt to define which workers could work from home would be open to interpretation and likely lead to disputes.
  • Employment lawyer Natalie Gaspar (Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer) noted the use of "significant" in refusal criteria demonstrates an intention to set a high bar for refusal.
  • Workplace partner Charles Power (Holding Redlich) noted that the ability to seek interim orders and the absence of costs to launch action at VCAT may increase the tribunal's workload.
  • Employment lawyer Paul O'Halloran (Dentons Australia) contends the law likely conflicts with the federal Fair Work Act 2009 and may be rendered inoperative under section 109 of the Australian Constitution.
  • Monash University professor of constitutional law Luke Beck said a legal challenge would hinge on whether the laws alter, impair, or detract from federal workplace laws.
  • Maurice Blackburn employment special counsel Jessica Dawson-Field said the laws would set two days per week as the assumption, reducing tension over what is "reasonable."

Other Stakeholders

  • Victorian Trades Hall Council assistant secretary Wil Stracke described the laws as a "no-brainer."
  • Treasurer and Industrial Relations Minister Jaclyn Symes said the law would allow more workers to benefit from work-from-home arrangements and positively impact the economy.

Political Stance

The Coalition has not indicated its official position on the legislation. Opposition leader Jess Wilson acknowledged that flexible working arrangements are becoming permanent and indicated the Liberal party would review the proposal once presented by the Premier.