AMA VICDOC_Spring 2026_09.09.2026 - Flipbook - Page 48
K E N N E DY S
L AW
The federal star ting point:
requests must be assessed
on their merits
Under the FW Act, eligible employees –
including parents of school-age children,
carers, employees with a disability, and
employees aged 55 or over – can request
flexible working arrangements, whether
clinical or non-clinical. An employer must
genuinely consider the request, respond
in writing within the required timeframe, and,
if refusing, provide specific and reasonable
business grounds. A blanket policy requiring
all staff to work on-site is unlikely to be
sufficient.
Chandler v Westpac:
the lesson for practices
In Chandler, an employee sought to work from
home full-time, given her nearest office was
around two hours away, and offered a partial
in-person alternative. Westpac refused, relying
on its standard hybrid policy and general
assertions about the value of in-person work.
The Commission rejected that approach
and ordered Westpac to grant the request.
For medical practices, this means requests
such as telehealth-only sessions for GPs
or work-from-home arrangements for
/
PA R T N E R
they rely on being on-site. Practices don't
have to accept every request, but must
explain any refusal on specific, role-based
grounds rather than a general “reception
is a front-desk job” statement, having first
considered alternatives such as remote
administrative tasks or a partial arrangement.
Victorian reform:
a moving target
The Equal Opportunity Amendment (Work
from Home) Bill 2026 (Vic), as drafted,
would give employees whose roles can be
performed remotely a right to work from
home up to two days a week, with disputes
going to VEOHRC and VCAT rather than
the Fair Work Commission.
Following Ben Carroll's appointment as
Premier, the Government is reportedly
considering amendments after businessgroup consultation, potentially scaling back
the reforms. The proposed 1 September
2026 start date is unchanged for now, but
employers should hold off on final policy
decisions until the legislation is settled.
WHS obligations don't
disappear when work
moves home
administrative staff must be evaluated against
A practice's WHS duties continue to apply to
the actual requirements of the role – patient
staff working remotely, whether under the FW
care, rostering, supervision, systems access
Act or, eventually, a Victorian statutory right.
and privacy obligations. Legitimate operational
This covers physical set-up and psychosocial
concerns may justify refusal, but reliance on
hazards – isolation, blurred boundaries, and
existing workplace norms alone will not.
reduced informal supervision, which matters
for clinicians managing complex presentations
Reception and front-ofhouse staff
Reception roles are where this issue is
most likely to arise, given how heavily
48
remotely. For doctors delivering telehealth
from home, this sits alongside clinical
governance: a private, secure consulting
space, IT security for patient records, and
a plan for managing a clinical emergency
when the doctor isn't at the practice.
