Two Different Laws. One Very Confused HR Team.

Victorian employers are about to navigate two separate legal obligations around flexible work and most businesses are mixing them up. Here’s why that’s a problem.

What’s actually changing in Victoria

From 1 September 2026, Victorian employees whose roles can reasonably be performed from home will have a legal right to do so for at least two days a week. This isn’t a request. It’s an entitlement.

The legislation will be embedded in the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 (Vic), not the Fair Work Act. That matters more than most people realise, and we’ll get to that shortly.

For businesses with 15 or more employees, this kicks in on 1 September 2026. Smaller businesses get until 1 July 2027. But given the legislation is being introduced to Parliament in July 2026, the window to prepare is short. Thanks politicians.

And then there’s reasonable adjustments a completely different beast

Reasonable adjustments already exist under anti-discrimination law. If an employee has a disability, medical condition, or health need that affects how they work, employers have an obligation to make adjustments unless doing so would cause unjustifiable hardship.

Working from home is one of the most commonly requested adjustments. So is a modified schedule, reduced hours, or changes to a workspace.

Here’s the stat that should make every employer pause: nearly three quarters of workplace adjustment requests are rejected even though the most common requests cost the business nothing to implement.

That’s not a policy problem. That’s a discrimination risk problem hiding in plain sight.

So what’s the actual difference?

This is where businesses come a cropper. They treat both situations the same way and they shouldn’t.

Reasonable adjustment request:

• Triggered by a health condition, disability or medical need
• Employer must genuinely consider it and document the process
• Refusal must be justified by unjustifiable hardship a high bar
• Falls under anti-discrimination law at both federal and state level
• In Victoria, disputes go to Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission (VEOHRC)

Victorian WFH right (from September 2026):

• A statutory entitlement, no health condition required
• Applies to any employee whose role can reasonably be performed from home
• Employer can refuse, but only with legitimate, documented business reasons
• Sits in the Equal Opportunity Act, not Fair Work
• Disputes go to VEOHRC, then VCAT if conciliation fails

Why the VEOHRC pathway matters

Most HR teams know the Fair Work Commission in their sleep. Strict lodgement timeframes, defined processes, known risks. VEOHRC operates very differently.

Under the Victorian Equal Opportunity framework, a complaint goes to VEOHRC for conciliation first. If that fails, it escalates to VCAT. The documentation requirements, the tone of the process, and the way refusals are assessed are all different.

Blanket “on-site only” policies without genuine role-by-role assessment won’t hold up. If your competitors allow WFH for similar roles, or your team has been working remotely without issue, a flat refusal is going to look very hard to defend.

What you should be doing right now

The bill lands in Parliament in July 2026. You don’t have long. As soon as we get the detail we will be working with our clients to start thinking about the following:

• Review your flexible work and WFH policies now not after the bill passes
• Map your roles: which ones can genuinely not be performed remotely, and why? Document it
• Check your employment contracts for anything that could conflict with the new entitlement
• Build a consistent, documented process for handling reasonable adjustment requests separate from your WFH policy
• Train your managers on the difference between the two. The conversation that follows matters as much as the decision

Frequently Asked Questions

If an employee asks to work from home, how do I know if it’s a reasonable adjustment request or a Victorian WFH right request?
Ask what’s driving the request. If it’s connected to a disability, medical condition, or health need, it’s a reasonable adjustment request under anti-discrimination law, and the bar for refusing is high. If there’s no health condition involved and the employee is simply asking under the new Victorian entitlement, it’s a different process with different documentation requirements. Getting this distinction right at the start matters, because the two pathways are assessed differently.

Can I refuse a reasonable adjustment request if it’s inconvenient for the business?
No, inconvenience alone is not enough. Refusal has to meet the threshold of unjustifiable hardship, which is a high bar. Nearly three quarters of workplace adjustment requests are currently being rejected, even though the most common requests cost the business nothing to implement. That gap between what gets refused and what could reasonably be accommodated is exactly where discrimination risk hides.

Do disputes over these requests go to the Fair Work Commission?
No, and this catches a lot of employers out. Both the reasonable adjustment pathway and the new Victorian WFH right sit outside the Fair Work system. Complaints go to the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission for conciliation first, and then to VCAT if that fails. The process, documentation expectations, and tone are all different from what most HR teams are used to with Fair Work matters.

Can I have a blanket “on-site only” policy for certain roles?
Not without genuine, role-by-role justification. A flat refusal that isn’t backed by documented reasons specific to that role is going to be very hard to defend, particularly if similar roles at your business or at competitors have worked remotely without issue. You need to map which roles genuinely cannot be performed remotely and document why, before a request lands, not after.

Want the full picture?

We’re running a live Q&A session covering exactly this, reasonable adjustments, the new Victorian WFH right, when you can say no, and how to document it properly.

Join us alongside our guest employment lawyer Elizabeth Aitken from SLF Lawyers for a practical, plain-English session with time for your actual questions.

Register here

Not in Victoria? The reasonable adjustments obligations apply nationally. This one’s worth tuning into wherever you are.