Council’s rejection of fourth day of remote work appropriate, FWC finds

The Fair Work Commission has determined that a 55-year-old employee’s application for greater remote work privileges was inconsistent with his organisation’s objectives.

A planning and building liaison officer who twice requested an extension to his work-from-home privileges by account of his age and inability to travel has been thrice rejected by Macedon Ranges Shire Council, and had the rejection upheld by the Fair Work Commission.

The applicant, who has access to flexible work arrangements whereby he works remotely three days a week and in the office two days a week, initially sent an email on 26 November 2024 requesting four days at home and one day in the office for three weeks a month, and three days at home and one day in the office every four weeks.

The request was rejected on 26 November by the Macedon Ranges Shire Council.

In discussion with a supervisor, a dispute over the core reason for the fourth remote day also emerged.

While a second request on 1 December 2025 – following the initial request on 26 November 2024 – allegedly outlined the reason being his age – over 55 years old – as well as apparent work-related fatigue and a dependent needing to use his car for university, the person he reported to, the supervisor, claimed the principal outlined explanation concerned vehicle use.

On 17 December 2025, the supervisor emailed a rejection to the applicant, indicating her continued support of remote work three days a week. She also cited the operational needs of the statutory planning team as requiring consistent, onsite presence, as well as ongoing team engagement and in-person collaboration.

In this email, the supervisor also proposed that the applicant give a week’s notice regarding the intended in-office days to allow him greater flexibility and time to arrange transport.

Having made an appeal of this decision on 28 January 2026, the applicant received a rejection from the respondent.

In considering the evidence, FWC deputy president Kalam Farouque said the only issue is whether the Macedon Ranges Shire Council had reasonable grounds to refuse the December 2025 request. In this way, it was determined that the respondent complied with the requirement of s 65A(3)(a) and (c) of the Fair Work Act.

Farouque said: “The respondent wishes to have the applicant’s experience available to the planning team and build team connection by having him work in the office for two days a week. The respondent considers that having the applicant in the office two days a week facilitates those objectives.”

“In the circumstances and having regard to fairness, pursuant to s 65C(1)(b)(i) of the act, I order that it is appropriate for the grounds upon which the respondent refused the applicant’s request made 1 December 2025 for a flexible working arrangement to be taken to be reasonable business grounds.”

Want to see more stories from trusted news sources?
Make HR Leader a preferred news source on Google.