Boundaries · Victorian WFH Bill 2026

Victoria's new WFH law doesn't ban you from saying no. It just makes saying no very hard to do safely.

Enrique Velasco · Velasco HR Advisory · July 2026

The Victorian Government's Equal Opportunity Amendment (Work from Home) Bill 2026 isn't a mandate. No one is forcing you to let everyone work from home. You can still say no.

What the law does — if it passes in its current form — is make "no" a legally complex act that requires documented reasoning, a written response within 21 days, evidence-based assessment of each individual role, and exposure to VCAT if the employee disagrees with your decision.

For a founder running a 10, 20 or 50-person business without a dedicated HR function, that's not a simple compliance box to tick. That's a new operational burden landing on your desk from September 1, 2026 — with no practical guidance on how to manage it.

What the law actually says

From September 1, 2026 (July 1, 2027 for businesses with fewer than 15 employees), eligible Victorian employees whose roles can reasonably be performed from home will have a statutory right to do so for up to two days per week. This isn't a request under the existing Fair Work flexible work framework. It's a presumptive entitlement — the default position flips. The employee doesn't need to justify why they want to work from home. You need to justify why they can't.

To refuse, you must respond in writing within 21 days. Your response must assess whether the arrangement is reasonable, document your reasoning against a prescribed set of factors — productivity, supervision, safety, customer impact, confidentiality, cost, practicality — and offer alternative arrangements if you're not agreeing to the original request. If the employee disputes your refusal, the matter goes to the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission for conciliation, and if that fails, to VCAT, which can order you to allow the arrangement.

And if you do approve the arrangement, you're required to cover reasonable costs — equipment, software, secure system access — associated with the employee working from home.

The law doesn't remove your right to manage your business. It adds a structured, documented, evidence-based process to every decision you make about where your people work. For founders running on instinct and trust, that's a bigger shift than it sounds.

Why this matters more for founder-led businesses than for corporates

Large employers already have HR teams, legal counsel, documented role descriptions, and hybrid work policies. They'll absorb this with a policy update and a manager briefing. Founders absorb it personally.

Most small and medium businesses don't have documented role descriptions that clearly articulate why a role requires physical presence. Most don't have a structured process for responding to flexible work requests in writing, with reasoned grounds, within a defined timeframe. Most haven't assessed their roles individually against a reasonableness test. They've operated on trust, on conversation, on "we'll work it out" — and that approach, whatever its human merits, isn't going to hold up in a VCAT proceeding.

The government framed this as a simple expansion of worker rights. What it is, practically, is a new documentation and process requirement that falls heaviest on the people least equipped to manage it.

What you need to have in place before September

This isn't about being pro or anti working from home. It's about being able to defend whatever decision you make. Here's what that requires:

Role-by-role assessment. Not a blanket policy. You need to be able to articulate, for each role in your business, whether it can reasonably be performed from home — and why. "We prefer everyone in the office" is not a legal ground for refusal. "This role requires daily face-to-face supervision of junior staff, access to on-site equipment, and direct client contact that cannot be performed remotely" is.

A written response process. You have 21 days to respond to a WFH notice in writing. That response needs to be structured, reasoned, and evidence-based. If you don't have a process for this, you're one notice away from scrambling.

A hybrid or remote work policy. Whatever your position on WFH — open, restricted, or role-dependent — it needs to be documented before requests start arriving, not written in response to the first one.

Manager training. The decisions about who works from home and why will be made by whoever manages your team day to day. If they're making those calls without understanding the legal framework, you're exposed regardless of what your policy says.

The honest take

There's a reasonable argument that the Victorian Government has introduced a well-intentioned law without adequately resourcing small business to comply with it. The guidance is thin. The timeline is tight. The legal consequences of getting it wrong — a VCAT order, a discrimination complaint, a claim under the Equal Opportunity Act — are real.

You can have a view on whether this law was the right call. But the law doesn't care about your view. What it cares about — what VCAT will care about — is whether your process was documented, consistent, and evidence-based. That's the work.

Find out where you stand before September.

The 8-minute diagnostic includes assessment across the Boundaries pillar — where WFH policy, flexible work processes, and documented role expectations sit. Find your most exposed area and the one move to make this week.

Take the diagnostic →

This article is general advisory content, not legal advice. The WFH Bill was before the Victorian Parliament as at July 2026 and had not yet passed in final form. Employers should seek specific legal advice and monitor the Bill's progress. For formal legal advice, speak with a qualified Australian employment lawyer.