Victoria’s Proposed Right to Work From Home: What Employees and Employers Need to Know

What Has the Victorian Government Announced?

In March 2026, the Victorian Government announced that it would introduce legislation to create a right to work from home. The proposed commencement date is 1 September 2026; however, this will be delayed for workplaces with fewer than 15 employees to give small businesses extra time to adjust. These small businesses have until 1 July 2027 to reorganise. 

The proposal would allow eligible employees to request to work from home for up to two days per working week, as long as their role can reasonably be performed remotely. 

The reform would become part of the Equal Opportunity Act if it’s enacted in its announced form, which is a deliberate design choice that would send disputes through the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission (VEOHRC) and, if unresolved, onto the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT), rather than the Fair Work Commission.

It’s important to keep in mind that this is not yet the law. The bill has not been introduced and the legislative text is not yet public, but everything below is based on what the government has announced and what can reasonably be anticipated, although the details may change when the bill is released.

Who Can Work From Home In Victoria?

This proposed change in legislation would apply to employees in Victoria whose roles can reasonably be performed remotely. However, this immediately raises a practical question: what would ‘reasonably performed remotely’ actually mean?

The government has yet to release detailed eligibility criteria, but based on comparable frameworks there are several factors that would likely be relevant, including:

• If the role’s primary tasks require physical presence at a particular location
• If face-to-face service delivery or in-person supervision is an integral part of the job
• If the role requires access to on-site equipment, materials and/or systems which cannot reasonably be accessed remotely
• If there are health and safety considerations that require the employee to be physically present in order to perform their role

In general, roles that are completely desk-based or screen-based will likely be considered acceptable for remote work. On the other hand, roles that are inherently physical, like trades, hospitality, healthcare requiring patient presence and retail, would be less likely to qualify. 

There will be many roles which fall somewhere in the middle, and this is where disputes are most likely to arise if the proposal becomes law.

When Could an Employer Refuse To Let An Employee Work From Home?

Based on what we know so far, employers may be able to refuse a request if there is a genuine operational reason an employer cannot work from home.

It seems as though refusing without adequate justification may give rise to a complaint or legal claim under the proposed framework, dependent on the final legislation and the facts of the individual case, although the precise enforcement mechanism won’t be clear until the bill is published.

Grounds that could be considered a legitimate basis for refusal might include:

• The role genuinely requiring physical presence that cannot be replaced remotely
• Documented operational reasons, such as remote work having a significant impact on service delivery or team function, that cannot reasonably be managed
• Security or confidentiality requirements that cannot practically be met in a home environment
• A specific and substantiated reason linked to the individual’s role, not simply a blanket policy

The government has indicated that a general preference for in-person work, or a blanket office attendance requirement with no operational basis, would not be enough for a refusal. Employers who want to continue with full, in-person attendance should already be thinking about how to document and justify their position, regardless of how the final legislation looks.

What Could Happen If An Employer Refuses Your Request To Work From Home Without Good Reason?

As these new rules are within the Equal Opportunity Act instead of industrial relations legislation, refusal without proper justification may lead to complaints or other legal claims. 

Based on how the Equal Opportunity Act currently works, possible ramifications could include complaints to VEOHRC, conciliation and, if unresolved, proceedings before VCAT. Possible solutions would depend on the final legislation and tribunal powers, but could potentially involve orders to approve the arrangement, compensation and adverse costs orders.

Any employees who are dismissed or disadvantaged after requesting flexible work may have rights under existing federal employment laws, such as adverse action provisions under the Fair Work Act. These rights are independent of the Victorian proposal.

Would Victorian Employers Still Be Able to Manage the Performance of Remote Workers?

Yes, and this is important for both sides irrespective of how the proposal ends up. The right to work from home being enacted would not prevent an employer from managing performance. 

An employee working remotely would still have to adhere to their performance obligations, so genuine underperformance could still be addressed through normal processes.

The more important factor is consistency. Performance management would have to be applied fairly regardless of whether an employee is working in the office or from home, and it would be unwise for employers to use performance concerns as a reason for revoking WFH if no genuine issue exists.

What Should Employees Do Now?

Now is the perfect time for employees in Victoria to:

• Review their current employment contracts and any existing remote work agreements so they fully understand what is already in place.
• Monitor the progress of the bill when it is introduced in July 2026, as the eligibility criteria and enforcement framework may look different from what has been announced as of now.
• Start the conversation with your employer early. Putting an informal arrangement in place now may make things easier than invoking formal rights later.
• Keep records of all communications about working from home requests with your employer, as well as their responses.

If you are uncertain about your current rights to request flexible work arrangements, you should know that the Fair Work Act already gives certain employees the right to request them, including working from home. An employment lawyer can advise you on what protections you already have, independent of the new Victorian proposal.

What Should Employers Do Now?

Employers have time to prepare for these changes, and those who act now will be in a far better position if and when the new law takes effect. Practical steps to consider include:

• Conducting a role-by-role assessment of the positions in your business which could reasonably be performed remotely, and those which could not. Document your reasoning now before any formal process comes into effect.
• Reviewing and updating your policies on remote work, even under the existing framework.
• Monitoring the bill when it is introduced in July 2026, paying particular attention to the eligibility criteria, employer defences and enforcement mechanisms.
• Training managers and HR staff so they are fully equipped to handle WFH requests consistently and document decisions properly.
• Seeking legal advice if you have any concerns about how your current arrangements would work under the proposed changes.

Regardless of how the final legislation looks, it’s clear that employers who proactively review their working arrangements now will be in a far stronger position than those who wait.

Also read: A Guide Through Unfair Dismissal in Australia

FAQS

Would the proposal apply to part-time or casual employees?

The Victorian government’s announcement doesn’t clearly address whether part-time or casual workers are affected, but we expect those details to be in the bill when it’s introduced in July 2026. Until then, the coverage for non-standard workers remains uncertain. We will update this article once the bill is published.

What if I already have a work-from-home arrangement?

Existing arrangements are likely to remain the same as whatever contractual or policy basis they are currently on. If this proposal becomes law, it may provide an additional layer of protection for arrangements that fall within its scope, but the specifics will depend on how the final legislation affects pre-existing agreements.

Could my employer require me to come in for certain meetings or events?

A two-day-per-week entitlement would not mean an employee can refuse all in-person attendance. The proposal is framed around a right to work from home for up to two days, not avoiding the office entirely. Employers would likely be able to require attendance for specific purposes, but the precise rules will be in the bill.

Would this apply to interstate employers with Victorian employees?

If the bill is enacted within the Equal Opportunity Act, it would only apply to employment in Victoria. Whether an interstate employer with Victorian-based staff would be affected is a question that will depend on the wording of the legislation.

How Kingsford Lawyers Can Help

At Kingsford Lawyers, our employment law team advises both employees and employers on workplace rights and obligations across Victoria and Queensland. Whether you want to fully understand your existing rights around flexible work, or you are a business working through how a potential reform might affect your operations, we can provide clear, practical guidance.

Kingsford Lawyers’ employment law team works with employees and business owners across Australia. Contact us online or call 1300 244 342 for a confidential, obligation-free chat.