Victoria’s landmark work-from-home laws are delayed as premier makes it harder for employees to avoid the office
Developed over time first seen 2 months ago
Victorian Premier Ben Carroll is set to water down and delay Labor's work-from-home laws after sustained pushback from businesses, giving employers greater scope to reject or revoke remote-working arrangements. Amendments to be moved on Thursday will push back the proposed employee right to work from home for at least two days a week until 1 July next year, with small businesses exempted until 2028. The changes mark a significant concession from Carroll, who has sought to present Labor as more business-friendly since replacing Jacinta Allan as premier, and follow his earlier decision to withdraw the bill from debate to reopen talks with industry.
Under the revised threshold, employers can reject requests if remote work would have a "material adverse impact" on productivity, a lower bar than the previous "significant adverse impact" test, and can revoke existing arrangements if circumstances change. Businesses will get 28 days to respond to requests instead of 21, will only need to supply essential hardware and IT access rather than covering internet costs, and eligibility will be limited to Victorian residents, with part-time entitlements applied pro-rata. Despite the concessions, industry groups say the amendments do not fix what they call a fundamentally flawed bill, citing legal advice from the Property Council of Australia suggesting it is inconsistent with the Fair Work Act and could be constitutionally invalid, and are calling for the legislation to be scrapped entirely.
- Sources
- 2
- Outlets
- 1
- Left · Centre · Right
- 0 · 0 · 2
In short
- Victoria delays and softens work-from-home laws after business backlash
- Employers gain more power to reject or revoke remote work
- Industry groups still want the bill abandoned over legal concerns
How this story developed
- 2 months ago Victorian Premier Ben Carroll is set to water down and delay Labor's work-from-home laws after sustained pushback from businesses, giving employers greater scope to reject or revoke remote-working arrangements.
Steelman: both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
A statutory right to request regular remote work could give employees more predictable access to flexibility, helping them balance work with caring responsibilities, disability or long commutes. Supporters could argue that a clear process and minimum entitlement would spread access beyond workers whose employers already offer it, while the revised rules still let businesses refuse arrangements that materially harm productivity.
The case against
Employers could argue that remote work needs to be agreed case by case because some roles depend on in-person collaboration, supervision or service delivery, and a lower refusal threshold gives them more room to manage those needs. They may also see the delayed start, small-business exemption and reduced equipment obligations as insufficient, while legal uncertainty over the bill could impose costs and disrupt workplace planning.
Explained simply
Victoria is a state in Australia, where workplace rules are set by both state and national laws. The proposed law would give eligible employees who can work remotely the right to work from home for at least two days a week, subject to conditions.
Premier Ben Carroll leads Victoria’s Labor government, which introduced the proposal after replacing Jacinta Allan as premier. Employers and business groups have argued that the rules could make it harder to run businesses; unions and workers have backed stronger rights to work remotely.
The debate matters because the changes would affect how employers assess and manage remote-working requests across the state. It also raises questions about how far Victoria can set workplace rules when national law applies.
Coverage · 2 sources
Bias meters
From 2 rated sources.