‘Satisfied with rejection’: COSBOA backs Senate decline of WFH amendments

Business advocacy bodies have welcomed the Senate’s rejection of proposed amendments to the Fair Work Act seeking to federally mandate work-from-home entitlements.

At the end of August, the Senate debated and rejected proposed amendments to the Fair Work Act – a move supported by the Council of Small Business Organisations Australia (COSBOA).

The proposed amendments sought to federally mandate work-from-home entitlements for employees and were pushed by Greens Senator Barbara Pocock in the Senate before it was rejected.

It was suggested that the existing definition of workplace flexibility in the Fair Work Act be changed to explicitly reference working from home, which comes after the Victorian Labor government said it would introduce legislation in 2026 to give employees the right to work from home two days a week.

Matthew Addison, COSBOA chair, said that despite the recent increase in conversations around mandating work from home, these changes would create a “blanket obligation” that disregarded the operational realities of many industries, adding compliance pressure and complexity for small-business employers.

Addison also noted that even though small businesses made up such a large proportion of all Australian businesses, 97 per cent, they were often treated as if they had the same capacity as large corporates.

Additionally, small-business employers remain concerned about the “cumulative impact” on ongoing workplace reform, which continues to be a relevant and topical conversation.

“Mandating remote work in circumstances described as ‘practical’ – without clear, real-world guidance – risks exposing small employers to legal disputes and absolutely undermines their capacity to meet customer and client expectations,” Addison said.

“We are satisfied that the Senate recognised these risks and did not proceed with the amendments. Since 2022, there have been 35 major changes to the Fair Work Act, with all but one applying equally to small businesses. A business with five staff is treated the same as a corporation with 10,000. That imbalance must be addressed.”

On the note of workplace law, reform and differing opinions, the small-business body revealed its view that workplace laws must support genuine flexibility while remaining practical and proportionate for small businesses.

The disadvantages that came hand in hand with flexible work arrangements, which COSBOA outlined concern around, included weakened good faith through no requirement to provide reasons for flexible work requests and competitive disadvantages for businesses unable to offer remote work.

The Senate’s decision to reject the proposed amendments avoided an outcome that would have delivered more rigidity and red tape; however, a “wider challenge” still remained, according to Addison.

“Small businesses want workplace laws that are fair, balanced and workable in practice. They already go to great lengths to accommodate flexibility where possible,” he said.

“What we need now are reforms that genuinely support cooperation and productivity, not blanket rules that small businesses cannot realistically implement.”