MELBOURNE, SEPTEMBER 11/INDIAN ABROAD NEWSDESK
Victoria’s proposed legislation giving eligible employees a legal right to work from home for up to two days a week has been delayed after the state’s upper house referred the Bill to a parliamentary committee for further examination.
The referral, passed by 18 votes to 17, means the legislation is unlikely to be considered by parliament before Victoria’s November 28 state election. The Guardian reported that the committee is due to report by October 20, while September 24 is the final scheduled parliamentary sitting day before the election.
The development was also reported by Business Standard, which said the legislation had encountered resistance from business groups, the Opposition and crossbench MPs despite amendments made by the government to address concerns from employers.
The proposed law, first announced in 2025 by then-premier Jacinta Allan, would establish a statutory right for employees to work from home for up to two days a week where remote work is reasonably feasible. The Guardian reported that the proposed entitlement would cover full-time, part-time and casual employees.
Premier Ben Carroll has amended the legislation since taking over the Labor leadership, with the changes designed to reduce the impact on employers. According to The Australian, implementation for most businesses has been pushed back to July 2027, while small businesses would receive a further delay until January 2028. The amendments also give employers greater scope to refuse or withdraw remote-work arrangements where circumstances change or working from home has a material impact on efficiency and productivity.
The Herald Sun reported that the committee referral followed a motion supported by the Coalition and crossbench MPs. The Opposition has backed further examination of the Bill but has challenged Carroll to recall parliament if the government wants the legislation passed before the election.
Carroll has criticised the parliamentary move, arguing that the Opposition had previously indicated support for the legislation. The Guardian reported that he has said he does not intend to recall parliament, while the Greens have separately criticised the government for delaying the legislation and changing it to accommodate business concerns.
Business organisations have welcomed the referral. The Property Council has argued that the legislation requires further scrutiny, particularly because of concerns about its legal operation. The Guardian reported that constitutional law advice commissioned by the Property Council concluded that the proposed Victorian legislation could be inconsistent with the federal Fair Work Act and therefore become inoperative under Section 109 of the Australian Constitution.
The legal position remains contested. The Herald Sun reported that constitutional law specialists Nick Wood SC and Leigh Howard, whose advice was commissioned by the Property Council, concluded that the Bill would be inconsistent with the Fair Work Act if enacted. That is the position expressed in the commissioned legal advice, rather than a ruling by an Australian court.
The Business Council of Australia, Australian Industry Group and Victorian Chamber of Commerce and Industry have also opposed the legislation. The Guardian reported that the business groups argued the proposal could create economic and employment risks despite the government’s amendments.
The dispute is now likely to become an issue in the Victorian election campaign. The Herald Sun reported that the Opposition has not committed to a definitive position on the legislation before the committee review, while the government remains committed to the principle of legislated work-from-home rights.
For Victorian workers, the proposed two-day work-from-home entitlement therefore remains a Bill rather than an enforceable right. Its immediate future will depend on the committee’s findings, the outcome of the November election and the position taken by the next Victorian parliament.
