Tips you can bank on: Navigating requests for flexible working arrangements

Taking the spotlight in this day and age is never easy. For employment law though, it’s safe to say the Fair Work Commission (FWC) decision in Karlene Chandler v Westpac Banking Corporation [2025] FWC 3115 (Westpac Decision) has clearly taken top spot.

The Westpac Decision has generated significant interest among employers navigating flexible work arrangements (FWAs). The matter serves as a timely reminder of the importance of both process and substance when responding to employee requests for a FWA. For this reason, we have outlined a summary of the findings and some key takeaways to support employers with managing FWA requests.

The Westpac Decision

In this decision, the FWC ordered Westpac to approve an employee’s request to work from home to accommodate her caring responsibilities. The decision turned on Westpac’s failure to comply with the procedural requirements under section 65A(3) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act), and its failure to provide a sufficiently detailed explanation of the business grounds for refusal (as required under section 65A(6) of the FW Act).

Interestingly, the FWC found that Westpac’s stated reasons, such as the need for face-to-face engagement and concerns about productivity, were not substantiated. This was particularly the case, as the employee had a strong performance history while working remotely.

What does the legislation say?

Under section 65 of the FW Act, employees who have completed at least 12 months of continuous service may request a flexible work arrangement if they:

(a) are pregnant;

(b) are the parent or carer of a school-aged child;

(c) are a carer under the Carer Recognition Act 2010;

(d) have a disability;

(e) are aged 55 or older;

(f) are experiencing family or domestic violence; or

(g) provide care or support to someone in their household experiencing family or domestic violence.

Employers must respond in writing within 21 days and either approve the request, propose an alternative, or refuse it, having first:

(a) discussed the request with the employee;

(b) genuinely tried to reach agreement;

(c) considered the consequences of refusal; and

(d) based the refusal on reasonable business grounds.

The written response must also include the reasons for refusal, explain how the business grounds apply, outline any alternative arrangements (if applicable), and refer to the employee’s rights under sections 65B and 65C of the FW Act.

Considerations for employers

Responding to a FWA request

Employers must comply with both the procedural and substantive requirements of the FW Act. Implementing a clear Flexible Work Arrangement Policy can pay dividends (pardon the banking pun) and help ensure consistency and transparency. However, it is important to note that, even with a policy in place, each request must still be assessed on its individual merits.

Review position descriptions

Position descriptions should be reviewed and updated to reflect responsibilities that genuinely require physical presence, such as in-person collaboration, access to on-site resources, or supervision. These must be authentic and not artificially constructed, as the FWC may scrutinise whether the role can reasonably be performed remotely.

Maintain records to support business grounds

Employers should maintain internal documentation to support their position on office-based work requirements. This may include (for example):

(a) evidence of the impact of remote work on team dynamics;

(b) records of productivity or service delivery concerns; and/or

(c) operational requirements that necessitate physical presence.