Premier Jacinta Allan wants workers to have the right to work from home at least twice a week
Industry groups across Australia were quick to share their dismay at proposed legislation to make working from home (WFH) a legal right for workers across Victoria.
In what was described as "little more than pure political theatre" by the Australian Industry Group (Ai Group), the Victorian Government announced it would introduce legislation to protect the ability of an employee to work from home (WFH) in both the private and public sector.
"The proposal is a serious government overreach that undermines business autonomy and further jeopardises economic confidence in the state. It is blatant political opportunism at the expense of Victorian business," Tim Piper, Ai Group's Victorian Head, said in a statement.
Under the proposed law, workers would have the right to work from home at least twice a week – if they can reasonably do their job at home.
The Victorian Chamber of Commerce (VCC) raised concerns about inequality and damaging productivity.
“WFH certainly works well in some contexts, but that should be determined by the employer in consultation with the employee,” VCC Chief Executive, Paul Guerra, argued.
But Victorian Premier, Jacinta Allan, defended the move saying in a statement: “It’s popular…It saves families money…It cuts congestion…it’s good for business."
Legal considerations of WFH changes
The proposed legal changes don't just have implications for businesses, there are legal issues, too.
HRD spoke with Nigel Ward (pictured right), CEO and Director of Australian Business Lawyers and Advisors (ABLA), based in Sydney, who noted the decision creates more problems than solutions – especially legal quandaries.
“Flexible working is – and should be – a privilege. A lot of occupations don’t allow you to be able to work from home, so it being a right just seems unfair. What else is unfair is the fact that modern awards have been written based on bricks and mortar,” he told HRD.
In practice, this means legal considerations such as hours worked and overtime will also need to be reviewed as a result of WFH becoming a right.
“Let’s say I’m a clerical worker and I decide to work from home on a Friday – and I want to go and watch my daughter at soccer practice at 4pm. I clock off and then catch up on my work when I get back later in the evening.”
“Under modern awards – I should be paid overtime, despite the fact this is self-selected and is allowed under the agreement of trust I have with my employer that I will get the work done, even if that means working outside of traditional hours,” Ward added.
It’s instances like this that undermines employment agreements and, therefore, the ability to call WFH a ‘right’ without reassessing the wider legislative process.
“We've got to make sure that all the other regulatory stuff recognizes that I'm moving from a brick-and-mortar office to a world where I work from home and am trusted to do my job. I imagine the employer is going to be comfortable with this as long as they do their job,” Ward emphasised.
Impact on changing WFH status on organisational structure
Amongst the legal issues, Ward argued the proposed changes by the Allan Government undermine the already-established “gentleman’s agreement” of flexible work.
“A lot of organisations have got well-established rules and regulations about working from home – and it doesn’t effect operation. Why are we trying to fix something that isn’t broken?” Ward queried.
“In most workplaces you’ve got managers and employees that work together, they communicate, they engage on working for a common cause. This includes when it comes to working flexibly. Businesses were working it out, I’m anxious about how drastically this will change things.”
The issues also have a negative effect on workplace culture, Ward concluded, and the development of junior staff.
“If I’m young in my career, I’d want to be in the office as much as possible to learn via osmosis, if you like, through just experiencing the work environment. How can I do that if my mentor’s not in the office?”
“You’re going to get a very slow – if not stunted – progression. It’s just not the same having conversations over software like Teams,” Ward emphasised.
The proposed legislation is said to undergo consultation led by the Department of Premier and Cabinet – focusing on ensuring the law reflects real-world experiences of WFH, the Victorian Government say.
