In a significant decision for Australian employers, the Fair Work Commission (FWC) in Karlene Chandler v Westpac Banking Corporation [2025] FWC 3115 ordered that a long-serving employee be allowed to continue working from home on a permanent basis.
The case offers important guidance on how businesses including those in the civil construction sector must handle requests for Flexible Work Arrangements (FWAs) under section 65 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). It underscores that employers must follow the correct procedure, provide evidence-based reasons, and genuinely consider the personal impact of refusing a request.
The Facts
Ms Karlene Chandler had worked part-time for Westpac for over 22 years in its Mortgage Operations Team. For several years, she worked remotely “very successfully.”
Her team members were spread across Australia and rarely met in person. In January 2025, Ms Chandler formally requested to continue working permanently from home in Wilton, NSW, to manage school drop-offs and pick-ups for her two young children.
Westpac refused her request, relying on its Hybrid Working Policy, which required employees to attend the office two days per week. Ms Chandler offered a compromise working from the Bowral branch but this was also rejected.
The matter was escalated to the FWC for arbitration.
The Decision
Deputy President Roberts found that Westpac had breached its obligations under the Fair Work Act and failed to justify its refusal on reasonable business grounds.
The Commission ordered that Ms Chandler be permitted to work remotely on a permanent basis, citing three key reasons:
1. Procedural non-compliance
Westpac failed to meet several mandatory steps under the Act, including:
- Not responding to the request within the required 21 days;
- Failing to provide written reasons for refusal;
- Not engaging in genuine discussions about alternative arrangements; and
- Ignoring the potential consequences of refusal for Ms Chandler and her family.
2. Lack of evidence for business grounds
Westpac’s argument that in-office work improved collaboration and productivity was considered too general. The company provided no evidence of lost efficiency or customer impact from Ms Chandler’s remote work which had been operating effectively for years.
3. Failure to consider personal impact
The FWC found that the financial and practical consequences of forcing Ms Chandler back to the office (including childcare costs and travel time) far outweighed any business impact on Westpac.
The Deputy President also confirmed that enterprise agreements and internal policies cannot override the minimum entitlements under the National Employment Standards (NES). This means a company policy mandating office attendance does not automatically justify refusing a flexible work request.
Lessons for Employers
Although this case involved a bank, it carries valuable lessons for NSW civil contractors, especially those managing engineers, estimators, or administrative staff who may request flexible or hybrid work.
1. Follow the process — every step matters
Under section 65 of the Fair Work Act, employers must:
- Respond within 21 days;
- Provide written reasons for any refusal; and
- Genuinely discuss options before deciding
A procedural failure alone can make an employer’s refusal unlawful, regardless of its business rationale.
2. Base decisions on evidence, not assumptions
General statements about “team collaboration” or “business efficiency” are not enough. Employers must demonstrate, with evidence, why the specific role or team requires physical attendance.
3. Consider the employee’s circumstances
Employers must actively weigh the impact on the employee, including family or financial consequences — against operational needs. The FWC will balance these competing interests, and where the employee’s hardship is greater, the Commission may side with them.
4. Company policies don’t override the NES
A business cannot rely solely on a policy or enterprise agreement mandating attendance. The right to request flexible work under the NES stands independently and must be assessed case-by-case.
5. Document and consult
Thorough documentation including meeting notes, emails, and written responses is essential to prove compliance if a dispute reaches the FWC.
Key Takeaways for NSW Civil Contractors
- Procedural compliance is critical: follow the Fair Work Act’s steps for handling flexible work requests.
- Refusals must be evidence-based, not just policy-driven.
- Consider personal impacts such as travel time, family commitments, or financial strain.
- Engage in genuine consultation before refusing or modifying a request.
- Review workplace policies and contracts to ensure they align with NES requirements.
Final Word
The Chandler v Westpac case is a clear reminder that process and genuine consideration matter just as much as business needs.
For civil contractors where hybrid work requests may arise among office or support staff this decision reinforces the need to balance operational efficiency with individual circumstances, and to ensure all flexible work requests are handled fairly, lawfully, and transparently.
For assistance, please contact CCF NSW on 9009 4000.