A University of New South Wales (UNSW) employee’s request to work from home permanently has been rejected by the Fair Work Commission.

UNSW staff member Kellie Fitzpatrick challenged the university’s refusal of her request to work all of her days remotely so she could relocate interstate and support her partner taking up a new job.

However, the Commission sided with the university as commissioner Sarah McKinnon found there was not a strong enough connection between the request and Fitzpatrick’s role as a parent.

More WFH rights

The case is another test of the Anthony Albanese government’s recent workplace reforms expanding the right to request flexible working arrangements.

Changes that took effect in mid-2023 give Australians greater ability to request arrangements such as working from home, and allow them to challenge an employer’s refusal through the Fair Work Commission.

Under Section 65 of the Fair Work Act 2009, employees who have worked for an organisation for at least a year can request changes to their working arrangements if they are parents, carers, aged over 55, pregnant, or experiencing family violence.

As of last year, Fitzpatrick lived in Sydney and worked part-time for UNSW three days per week.

Since returning from parental leave she had been working under a flexible arrangement that allowed two days from home and one day on campus each week.

Fitzpatrick, the mother of a young child, later sought approval to work from home full-time.

She made the request on the basis of being a parent, but also said remote work would allow her family to move interstate so her partner could pursue a “significant job opportunity”.

The possible relocation was initially Adelaide or Queensland, before Queensland eventually became the preferred option.

Fitzpatrick argued she needed the permanent work-from-home arrangement because it would be difficult to find equivalent part-time flexible work elsewhere. She also said the new role would improve her partner’s health and career prospects.

“If the request is not granted, Ms Fitzpatrick says her partner will have to return to an unsafe work environment or face ongoing employment instability affecting her household’s financial security and stability,” McKinnon said in the decision.

Needing a causal link

The Fair Work case ultimately hinged on whether Fitzpatrick’s request to work from home permanently was made “because of the circumstance of being a parent of a young child”, as required under the Fair Work Act.

But McKinnon found that there was a “tenuous connection” between the parenting role and the need to work from home.

“Other than a passing reference to the need to make plans for childcare and a rental property, there is no reference to Ms Fitzpatrick’s parenting responsibilities in the body of the request,” the decision stated.

The commission also found that Fitzpatrick’s existing flexible arrangement adequately met her parenting needs.

“Ms Fitzpatrick wants, but is not required, to move to Queensland to support her partner’s health and career while also improving the family’s financial position,” the ruling said.

“Her reasons are understandable, but they are not circumstances of the kind that engage the right to request.

“There is…no certainty as to what a move to Queensland might entail, or what childcare arrangements might be required, or even when these pieces of the puzzle would start to come together.”

“The request could not have been made ‘because of’ circumstances that did not yet exist.”

The decision comes amid a growing number of disputes over working-from-home rights as employers push for more office attendance.

In October last year, the Fair Work Commission ordered Westpac to allow an employee to work from home full-time after it was found the bank did not have reasonable grounds to refuse the request.

Fair Work also ruled in favour of a father who requested an extra day from home to care for his young child, rejecting his employer’s argument that the arrangement would create “distractions” and lower his productivity.

Under upcoming state government reforms, Victorians working for large companies will have a legal right to work from home two days per week from the start of September, with the same right applying to workers at small businesses from mid-2027.