The Fair Work Commission has ruled in favour of a long-serving Westpac employee who sought to work remotely to care for her young children, finding that the bank failed to meet key legal requirements before refusing the request.
Deputy President Roberts found that Westpac had not genuinely engaged with mortgage operations employee Karlene Chandler over her request to work from home in Wilton, south of Sydney, or from the bank’s Bowral branch two days a week. The commission ordered Westpac to grant her flexible working arrangement, concluding that the bank’s refusal was unsupported by “reasonable business grounds” and was procedurally deficient under the Fair Work Act 2009.
Chandler, a part-time employee in Westpac’s Mortgage Operations team since 2002, requested in January this year to work remotely to manage school pick-ups and drop-offs for her six-year-old twins. Her partner’s interstate work commitments left her as the primary carer.
Westpac rejected her request in March, citing its Hybrid Working Model, which generally requires staff to attend a corporate office at least two days a week. Chandler proposed a compromise, offering to work from the Bowral branch instead of travelling to the Kogarah head office – a journey of nearly two hours each way – but that too was refused
The commission heard that the initial refusal was issued without reasons, and that Westpac failed to meet its statutory obligation to respond within 21 days or consider the personal consequences for Chandler. Roberts found no evidence that the bank had “genuinely tried to reach agreement” or discussed alternatives prior to its decision
The ruling emphasised that Westpac’s reliance on broad efficiency and collaboration arguments did not amount to reasonable business grounds. The evidence showed that Chandler had worked effectively and productively from home for several years, achieving high performance ratings.
“The evidence confirms that both Ms Chandler and her team have performed at a very high level,” Roberts wrote. “A loss of productivity or efficiency or a negative impact on customer service has not materialised as a consequence of the existing remote working arrangements.”
Westpac argued that allowing one employee to depart from its hybrid attendance policy could undermine its ability to enforce consistency across its workforce. It also pointed to the family’s decision to relocate further from the Sydney office. But the commission found that Chandler’s circumstances, including limited access to childcare and her partner’s long hours, justified accommodation under the Fair Work Act’s flexible work provisions.
Westpac further submitted that granting the request would be inconsistent with the Westpac Group Enterprise Agreement 2025, which classifies employees as “hybrid workers” who must divide time between home and office.
However, the commission rejected that argument, finding that the Fair Work Act’s National Employment Standards (NES) take precedence over enterprise terms that detrimentally restrict employee rights. Roberts cited a recent Full Bench decision, Paper Australia Pty Ltd v May, which confirmed that enterprise agreements cannot override NES entitlements to flexible work requests.
“I do not consider that an order that the respondent grants the FWA request… would be inconsistent with the terms of the Westpac Agreement,” he wrote in concluding remarks.
The decision serves as a reminder for employers – and mortgage broking businesses with flexible work policies – to ensure procedural compliance and genuine consultation when responding to flexible work requests.
For lenders, aggregators and broker groups managing hybrid teams, the ruling reinforces that broad policy consistency cannot trump statutory entitlements. It highlights the growing scrutiny under the post–Secure Jobs, Better Pay reforms, where employers must show detailed, evidence-based reasoning if refusing such requests.
For the mortgage industry – where many operations, settlements and verification tasks can be completed remotely – the case underscores how evolving workplace rights are shaping the balance between operational control and workforce flexibility.
