Why most businesses struggle with positive duties

Why most businesses struggle with positive duties

Latest News & Events

Why most businesses struggle with positive duties

money changing hands

The introduction of positive duties relative to both sexual harassment and related behaviours and psychosocial hazards is resulting in quite a bit of confusion for small business owners in particular.That is understandable and here is why and what to do about it. 

The problem

Last week, I attended the Workplace Health and Safety Expo at Jeff’s Shed along with thousands of others working in or interested in what’s new in workplace health and safety.

Many of the presentations were in or around d the subjects of psychosocial hazards and psychological safety.

And a majority of the exhibitors were selling tech solutions, many of which were said to help you to meet your positive duties re psychosocial hazards.

We know that the regulators have opted to apply the risk management model that has been used for decades as the foundation for control of psychosocial hazards.  

The reality is that one of the reasons that the positive duties have been introduced has been that the traditional risk management model hasn’t worked in management of risks from psychosocial hazards.

Why is this so?

There are good reasons for that. We need to do it differently because you can’t create psychological safety and meet the positive duty with deficit thinking.

That’s what the traditional risk management approach is – what’s wrong, who and what caused it and how do we fix it. 

If people think that they will be blamed or disciplined if they put their hand up, they won’t feel psychologically safe …… and that means that you can’t actually meet the [positive duty obligation.

So are you going to get out the compliance hammer and do it the old way or are you going to turn the light on for everyone to see what good looks like?

How can we help?

We saw this problem coming over a decade ago and we went looking for and found a stack of tools that can help you meet your compliance obligations for real and build great employee engagement and psychological safety.

Our Practice Leader, Peter Maguire, is available to facilitate discussions with your management group or your Safety or Consultative Committee to work through these questions and tailor the right approach for your business and your people.  If you would like to know more about this, please let us know via the “Tell us what you need help with” Form below.

 

CONTACT US

Ridgeline Human Resources Pty Ltd
ABN : 24 091 644 094

enquiries@ridgelinehr.com.au

0438 533 311

PARTNER LINKS

TELL US WHAT YOU NEED HELP WITH

Our HR Triage Service

Our HR Triage Service

Latest News & Events

Our HR Triage Service

money changing hands

Do you need assistance with an HR issue but don’t know where to go? Should you go to the Fair Work Ombudsman or to an employment lawyer or a workplace health and safety specialist or a HR consultancy? Need someone to help you find the right option for your business and your circumstances? That’s where our HR Triage Service comes in. 

What’s the problem?

We have been helping organisations of all sizes and industries with HR matters for 26 years and there are a few key lessons that we have learned along the way:

  1. Employment and safety law and modern awards and related employer obligations and exposures get more complex and harder to manage every year.
  2. That’s just gone up a notch with the introduction of positive duties in relation to psychosocial hazards and sexual harassment and gender-based behaviour plus the emergence of hybrid working in recent years.
  3. Similarly, areas which in the past might have been seen as specific to WHS or to HR or to zones like equal opportunity are now crossing multiple jurisdictions requiring multi-faceted and integrated management.
  4. And, of course, people have an amazing capacity to give us surprises and new challenges to address which is added to by the creative capacity that AI brings to the conversation.
  5. Plus there are all of the challenges that people have today in a less secure world with political upheaval, global tensions, mental health and financial stress adding to the mix.

And we know that the pace of change just gets faster and faster.

All of that gives rise to a difficult question for SMBs: “Where do I go to access the support that I need for the particular issue that I have in such a complicated landscape?” 

Trying to answer that question can be very costly in time, money and worry.

How can we best help?

Over the past year, we have undertaken a review of how we operate in helping our clients with the full range of HR needs (PEOPLE BUSINESS) as well as continuing to develop and deliver value through our PosWork suite of positive psychology based interventions and our new multi-media communications arm, Flashtales Creative.

With that review came the realisation that we have over many years developed a robust network of generalist and specialist service providers across the full spectrum of HR, WHS and related services – lawyers, consultants, mediators, injury management services and more.

One of the strengths that we have is our ability to diagnose the problem and identify the intervention options for the particular enquiry.

So, rather than try to be the everything HR service ourselves, it makes more sense for us to leverage our network and our diagnostic abilities to provide clients with the right service and connection. 

What’s in it for you?

You don’t have to waste your time and money searching for a solution to a need that you probably don’t fully understand yourself.

And you can rest easier knowing you can “phone a friend” to do that for you – call 0438 533 311 or fill out the “Tell us what you need help with” form below.

 

CONTACT US

Ridgeline Human Resources Pty Ltd
ABN : 24 091 644 094

enquiries@ridgelinehr.com.au

0438 533 311

PARTNER LINKS

TELL US WHAT YOU NEED HELP WITH

How coherent is your connection

How coherent is your connection

Latest News & Events

How coherent is your connection

money changing hands

With the advent of the positive duty to eliminate or reduce psychosocial hazards, an area that has been getting a lot of attention in both Fair Work and Workplace Health and Safety jurisdictions is that of organisational practices on consultation about workplace change and its effects on workers. So what are the obligations, the risks and the practices, good and bad? 

The duty to consult

Organisations have had duties to properly consult workers about the introduction of changes under workplace health and safety laws for decades. The same can be said for consultation provisions under modern awards and enterprise agreements in relation to the introduction of changes that affect workers, their jobs and their hours of work. They have been around for a long time.

So why all of a sudden are these provisions in the spotlight? 

One is that these duties to consult are now overlapping through the introduction of the positive duty to eliminate or reduce risks from psychosocial hazards. Hazards like poor organisational justice, poor support, low job control and lack of role clarity can all come into play in a poorly designed or executed change management process. In turn, that can lead to disputes in the Fair Work Commission and Workplace Health and Safety Regulator interventions on psychological safety grounds. 

Another has been the heightened attention that the Fair Work Commission is paying to the genuineness of consultation in enterprise bargaining processes and the flaws that it is finding that  cause an agreement not to be approved on procedural fairness grounds.

That has triggered considerations of exactly what good consultation practice actually looks like and organisations have been found wanting.

 Our 4C model of coherence

Why use the term “coherence”?

Because it  refers to the state of being logically connected, consistent and easily understood. It describes a situation where different parts fit together to form a unified, sensible whole.

When people complain about communications or change management, it is most often a lack of coherence that they are pointing to eg it wasn’t logical or didn’t make sense to them, it wasn’t consistent or uniform in messaging, it wasn’t easily understood.

Often, the reason is that the organisation is just trying to comply with a duty to consult and/or it is trying to manage a real or perceived risk. That mindset influences both the objectives of the process and the language used in it and those factors can compromise coherence and acceptance.

That then led to the question: “How do we show people how to optimise the effectiveness of change management by building coherence into consultation and communication processes?”

The 4Cs

The 4C Model essentially sets out a hierarchy of coherence in consultation and communication processes.

The 4Cs are:

C1: Communication: the base level is where we just tell people that something is happening. It is simply a management direction and doesn’t even satisfy award or statutory obligations in relation to consultation requirements. That makes the level of coherence very low.

C2: Consultation: this is the compliance level; where affected workers are advised about proposed changes and are given the opportunity to consider them, to ask questions and to make representations in relation to the proposed changes and related matters such as how the effects might be mitigated. Results can be dependent on how well explained the changes are and how logical and substantial and real the case for the proposed changes are. If these are not done well (as is often the case), the level of coherence will be low.

C3: Cooperation: this is where consultation and communications are undertaken in accordance with statutory or award compliance but there is also a positive business culture which is centred on transparency and trust. Because workers have confidence in management, they are more likely to accept the validity of changes proposed and to cooperate with management in implementing them. The level of coherence is moderate.

C4: Collaboration: this is the best practice level where management and workers go through a collaborative process of talking about needs for change, working together on solutions, co-designing the change program and co-owning implementation.  Employees are part of the whole process from the first question through to the solution and ongoing management and review so the level of coherence is high.

Where do you your change management practices fit on this scale? 

How this interacts with positive duties

In Victoria, there are two standards published by government agencies that are relevant, namely:

The former is the compliance instrument – what the regulator requires Persons Conducting a Business or Undertaking to be doing to eliminate or reduce risks from psychosocial hazards. It spells out the fundamental compliance obligations including the consultation obligations and suggests ways to satisfy them. It is a good starting point consistent with Level C2 to C3 of our 4C model.

The Victorian Mentally Healthy Workplaces Framework was developed as a best practice guide by the Victorian Government in response to recommendations that came out of the Royal Commission into Victoria’s Mental Health System as per the final report tabled in 2021. It advocates a collaborative approach of co-design and a number of other features consistent with level C4 of our 4C model. 

Many other components in the framework are highly consistent with our recommended processes for building BETTER workplaces in our PosWork suite of services.

The advantages of adopting the Victorian Mentally Healthy Workplaces Framework as the instrument to guide you in the exercise of the positive duty is that it deals with some of the root causes of risks from psychosocial hazards. It enables this through the redesign of the psychology of the workplace to build psychological safety through positive leadership and collaboration (rather than purely addressing positive duties through a risk management/compliance focus).

How we can help

Whether you need support in undertaking your own psychosocial hazard assessment to identify your strengths and areas for development or you aspire to be a great employer constant with the Victorian Mentally healthy Workplaces Framework, we can help with:

  • Tailored workshops and education programs for Boards, leadership groups and workplace improvement teams or safety/consultative  committees
  • Independent assessment of the business status re psychosocial assets and hazards and provision of independent reports for creation of psychosocial hazard control and business improvement plans
  • Establishment, onboarding and facilitation of representative Workplace Improvement Teams to partner with employees in code sign and ongoing management of the workplace improvement agenda
  • Creation of engaging communications using multimedia with our Flashtales Creative affiliate
  • Coaching HR and WHS professionals in addressing the psychosocial hazard agenda with a positive and creative and inclusive mindset for optimal engagement and results 
  • Customised programs based on your particular support needs

Idk you would like to explore ways that we can be of assistance, just fill out the “tell us what you need help with” form below and we’ll give you a call to talk about it.

 

CONTACT US

Ridgeline Human Resources Pty Ltd
ABN : 24 091 644 094

enquiries@ridgelinehr.com.au

0438 533 311

PARTNER LINKS

TELL US WHAT YOU NEED HELP WITH

Beyond Compliance: The Construction Culture Standard

Beyond Compliance: The Construction Culture Standard

Latest News & Events

Beyond Compliance: The Construction Culture Standard

money changing hands

A few years ago a Construction Industry Culture Taskforce was established via a collaboration between the Australian Constructors Association and the NSW and Victorian Governments with the help of a few academic experts. That has led to the creation of a Culture Standard for the industry with the aim of improving the character of the industry relative to mental health, gender equality and life balance 

Background

As the construction industry faces mounting pressure to deliver critical infrastructure, it has reached a crossroads. Issues like chronic overwork, high suicide rates, and a severe lack of diversity are no longer just “part of the job” – they are systemic risks costing the Australian economy approximately $8 billion annually.

That’s why the Construction Industry Culture Taskforce (the CICT) was formed – to look at what the key barriers are that need to be overcome to create a better industry culture and to devise ways to overcome these barriers.

That work undertaken by the CICT has led to the release of the 2025 Culture Standard for the Construction Industry. This framework is designed to move the industry from “whispering” about health to making it a core pillar of project success.

 What is the Culture Standard?

The Culture Standard is a procurement-based framework that establishes clear requirements for how construction projects should be managed to prioritise people. It is built upon three interrelated pillars:

  • Wellbeing: Prioritising mental health through stigma-free support programs and schedules that manage workload pressures. 

  • Time for Life: Ensuring workers have adequate rest by targeting a 5-day work week (5 days in 7), capping hours at 50–55 per week, and providing consecutive days off 

  • Inclusion & Diversity: Creating workplaces free from offensive material, providing proper amenities, and setting transparent targets to increase female participation and close gender pay gaps.

Why was it developed?

The industry’s current performance in these areas is among the poorest in Australia. Key drivers for the Standard include:

  • The Wellbeing Crisis: Construction workers face suicide rates double the national average, with 75% reporting high stress.

  • The Diversity Gap: As the most male-dominated industry in the country, construction is missing out on a massive talent pool during an acute labor shortage.

  • The Productivity Myth: Research from CICT pilot projects proved that reducing hours does not harm productivity; instead, a rested workforce is safer and more efficient.

How will it be used?

The CICT’s goal is for the Standard to become a mandatory part of public sector procurement and the Australian Constructors Association has been lobbying governments to adopt it for that purpose. This would mean that:

  • Clients (government agencies) would prioritise the Standard in requests for tenders.
  • Contractors would need to demonstrate exactly how they will meet the Standard’s requirements as part of their bid.
  • Compliance would be monitored throughout the project life cycle, from delivery to handover.

How to implement the Culture Standard

Successful implementation requires a shift in how projects are planned and led:

  • Project Scheduling: Instead of 6- or 7-day site operations being the default for workers, schedules must be built around a 5-in-7 model with “healthy programming” that allows for recovery.

  • Flexibility Plans: Each project must develop and promote a specific “Project Flexibility Plan” to support workers with personal and family commitments.

  • Leadership Commitment: Leaders must move beyond “safety banter” and proactively advocate for the Standard, ensuring mental health first aiders are available and that gender-biased hiring is eliminated.

How this interacts with positive duties

In recent years, new positive duties have been legislated federally and by each State and Territory to eliminate or reduce risks from psychosocial hazards. Many of these hazards relate directly to the three pillars in the standard (wellbeing, time for life and inclusion and diversity).

A positive duty to prevent sexual harassment and gender-based behaviour and related victimisation and workplace environmental factors is also in place under both federal land State legislation.

So there are already multiple statutory duties on employers and others to address the issues that the Culture Standard has been developed to fix.

Other related duties

In addition to those positive duties, organisations with 100 or more employees have to lodge annual returns on Gender Equality/Pay Gaps with the Workplace Gender Equality Agency and this year, organisations with 500 or more employees have to provide plans detailing targets and action plans for improvement against these targets.

The WGEA publishes information on every respondents’ pay gap each year.

Our thoughts

We have been providing HR service to construction businesses for over 25 years and we are well aware of the challenges that the industry has in each of the 3 pillars in the Culture Standard.

We believe that the right approach to addressing the positive duties to eliminate or reduce risks from psychosocial hazards and to prevent sexual harassment and gender-based behaviour will go a long way towards addressing the matters contained in the Culture Standard.

Mostly, it requires a fundamental change in the way that industry stakeholders think and act. That starts with government and major (head) contractors in how they design work and engage others (eg sub-contractors and other service providers). Educating them and creating a psychologically safe environment for them to engage in the conversation and be part of the solution is critical.

How we can help

Ridgeline HR has been helping organisations including many construction businesses with compliance and cultural matters since 2000.

We have a strong record of working effectively with Government and with industry associations as well as in conducting compliance and cultural assessments of client organisations.

We can help you to design and implement an integrated cultural change program that will address your obligations as set out above and will help you to demonstrate that your organisation meets the Culture Standard. 

Our Practice Leader, Peter Maguire, is available to facilitate discussions with your management group or your Safety or Consultative Committee to work through these questions and tailor the right approach for your business and your people.  If you would like to know more about this, please let us know via the Contact Form below.

 

CONTACT US

Ridgeline Human Resources Pty Ltd
ABN : 24 091 644 094

enquiries@ridgelinehr.com.au

0438 533 311

PARTNER LINKS

TELL US WHAT YOU NEED HELP WITH

Changing gears on consultation

Changing gears on consultation

Latest News & Events

Changing gears on consultation

money changing hands

We are long used to having obligations to consult employees on matters that affect them under Workplace Health and Safety laws and under modern awards and in other jurisdictions but, in recent years, the focus on consultation has intensified and has become more complex than employers have been used to. Plus, with the introduction of positive duties, the lines are getting a bit blurred between jurisdictions. So what does that all mean going forward?

Our traditional consultation obligations

For decades, awards have required employers to consult employees on matters that affect them like restructures and introduction of new technology and, more recently, a specific obligation to consult employees about variations to hours of work has been introduced.

Similarly, Workplace Health and Safety laws and regulations and codes of practice have imposed obligations on “Persons Conducting a Business or Undertaking” to consult workers about matters that might affect their health and safety.

These duties were largely interpreted as meaning that it is necessary to:

  1. Inform people about a proposed change, why it is happening and what the potential effects on people are
  2. Recognise any representative that employees might have like a Health and Safety Representative or a Union Representative
  3. Listen to what the employees/workers and/or their representatives had to say and consider their views
  4. Having done so, make a final decision and advise people of the outcome and reasons for it.

The duties also extended to responding to any concerns that people or their representatives might raise via WHS Issue Resolution Procedures or workplace relations dispute settlement procedures.

So what has changed? 

In short …. lots.

Fair Work Reforms

In recent years, the following changes have been made by the current federal Labor government:

  • In relation to requests for flexible working arrangements for designated eligible employees under s65 of the Fair Work Act 2009 and for requests for extension of parental leave beyond 12 months, new consultation obligations and a passage to the Fair Work Commission for determination in the event of a dispute
  • Similar obligations re consultation and avenues for dispute resolution in respect to the new FWC jurisdiction regarding “the right to disconnect”
  • Increased scrutiny of the genuineness of consultation in enterprise agreement making, especially in relation to employees properly understanding the effects of approving the enterprise agreement (ie how it will affect them) and the employer’s obligation for full disclosure.

Positive Duties 

Essentially, these up the ante on what were already obligations to protect people from risks of injury and illness from sexual harassment and gender-based behaviour and psychosocial hazards.

The positive duties arose from a series of investigations and studies that showed that these risks were common and having serious effects on people’s psychological, emotional and physical wellbeing. Associated with that were ballooning costs in WorkCover claims and escalating demands on systems and resources for treatment of psychological injuries and illnesses.

As a result, we now have much more defined obligations re what we must do protect people from those risks and an increased regulator focus on those areas of risk with additional resources to prosecute them.

The other element is that there is a blurring of the lines in the sense that, with respect to certain matters such as the management of change or issues around sexual harassment (to name a couple), they can be prosecuted in multiple jurisdictions.

The Decisions

Governments make changes and then courts and tribunals decide how they should work.

There have been a number of cases that have been instructive in this regard:

  1. SafeWork NSW intervened in a restructuring program at the University of Technology Sydney that was initiated to reduce costs and involved the potential loss of 150 jobs. On 2 September 2025, a Safe Work Inspector issued a prohibition notice in the belief that UTS workers would be exposed to a “serious and imminent risk of psychological harm” as a result of UTS’s Academic Change Proposal, in contravention of the Work Health and Safety Act and the Work Health and Safety Regulation. They had to pause the process and go through a process of adjustments and convincing SafeWork NSW that they were going through an appropriate process.
  2. At around the same time, the Finance Services Union lodged a dispute with the Fair Work Commission over extensive job cuts at ANZ and the consultation process associated with them putting a similar matter into a different jurisdiction, but with the union making reference to psychosocial hazards around poor change management being in play.
  3. In another case, Westpac was found wanting relative to a request for a flexible working arrangement from an eligible employee under s65 of the Fair Work Act 2009 in that they didn’t have genuine business grounds, they didn’t consult properly (in considering the employee’s compromise proposal) and they didn’t comply with their statutory obligation to respond to the request within 21 days.

What can we learn from this?

There are quite a few takeaways:

  1. Psychosocial hazards are a hot issue for WHS regulators and the positive duty on employers means that you have to be able to show that you are actively managing them and properly consulting people, not just reacting when something happens.
  2. The lines between different jurisdictions are becoming increasingly blurred and people will access the one that they feel offers the best avenue for a win for them as has happened with the WHS pathway in the UTS case and the FWC pathway in the FSU/ANZ case.
  3. Gone are the days when you could just treat consultation as a tick box exercise, rather than as an active, inclusive and genuine consideration with real employee voice and wellbeing components.
  4. When implementing significant change in your business which affects people’s roles or the way that they perform their duties, ensure that you plan and execute the changes carefully, understanding the real effects for people and allowing adequate time and proper consideration of employees’ questions and views.
  5. You should also have due regard for employees’ wellbeing, your consultation obligations under both WHS and workplace relations law (and any other relevant jurisdiction) and how you support people individually and collectively through the change process.
  6. Change is complicated and it is something that you should get professional assistance with from someone who understands the legal obligations in the various jurisdictions and is also adept in communicating with employees and helping the business, managers and people through the process.

One of the key challenges for large employers is how they reintegrate their HR and WHS functions so as to manage relevant matters consistently across jurisdictions and with their management teams and workforce in general. Establishing an ongoing Workplace Consultative Group to deal with these matters collaboratively is a good option and one that is recommended by some regulators.

For smaller businesses, it is how they manage the expectations of multiple jurisdictions in a practical and effective way within their businesses and resources. The focus should be on keeping it simple in process, active in education and communication and having access to professional support to do that and deal fairly and quickly with any issues that arise.

The positive duties also extend consultation obligations to contractors and their employees, so you need to include them as well.

Our Practice Leader, Peter Maguire, is available to facilitate discussions with your management group or your Safety or Consultative Committee to work through these questions and tailor the right approach for your business and your people.  If you would like to know more about this, please let us know via the Contact Form below.

Note: this article was originally published in Timber Trader Magazine.

 

CONTACT US

Ridgeline Human Resources Pty Ltd
ABN : 24 091 644 094

enquiries@ridgelinehr.com.au

0438 533 311

PARTNER LINKS

TELL US WHAT YOU NEED HELP WITH

How to deal with Working From Home

How to deal with Working From Home

Latest News & Events

How to deal with Working From Home

money changing hands

The Victorian Government has announced an intention to legislate a right to work from home for up to two days per week which will operate effectively from 1 September 2026 and 1 July 2027 for small businesses. What does this mean in reality and what should organisations be doing in preparation for the legal changes?

Is this legislation good?

This legislation is absolutely unnecessary and is solely motivated by an unpopular government desperately trying to garner votes at the upcoming State election.

Victoria transferred its workplace relations powers to the Commonwealth decades ago and matters like this should and are being dealt with in the federal jurisdiction. For example:

  • Certain categories of employees already have statutory rights to request a flexible working arrangement (which can include working from home) and have access to the Fair Work Commission in the event of a dispute with their employer over that request
  • All modern awards have provisions on Individual Flexibility Arrangements and Requests for Flexible Working Arrangements and Facilitative Provisions which provide a variety of negotiable flexible arrangements
  • During COVID lockdowns, modern awards were varied to specifically address the question of working from home through additional flexibilities
  • The Fair Work Commission is currently running a case on model clauses for working from home arrangements 

So the question of working from home arrangements is being comprehensively dealt with in the jurisdiction which should have carriage of it.

The Allan Government is electing to use the Equal Opportunity jurisdiction to pass the legislation  which will just mean that there is an extra jurisdiction that we have to deal with because it will still be part of the Fair Work system too.  

Smart employers are already offering flexible work arrangements including WFH options where they can make that work in practice. Even the Premier acknowledges that “more than a third of workers – including 60 per cent of professionals – regularly work from home”.

Add all of that up and that’s why the legislation is just a bad idea on so many counts.

Existing rights to request flexible working arrangements

Employees who have clocked up 12 months service with an employer already have a statutory right to request a flexible working arrangement which can only be refused on reasonable business grounds if they:

  • are pregnant
  • are the parent, or have responsibility for the care, of a child who is of school age or younger
  • are a carer (within the meaning of the Carer Recognition Act 2010)
  • have a disability
  • are 55 or older
  • are experiencing family and domestic violence, or
  • are caring for or supporting an immediate family or household member who requires care or support because they are experiencing family and domestic violence.

So a fair slice of your workforce probably already have these rights – just consider:

  • How many of your people are parents with children up to 17 or 18 years old and still at school?
  • How many of your people might have ASD or ADHD or Tourettes or dyslexia or other neurodivergent conditions that could be classified as disabilities? Or other forms of disability?
  • How many fall into one of those other categories?

Admittedly, the request has to be related to the particular attribute that the employee is seeking flexibility for (eg parental or carer requirements).  

But does this existing right mean that this legislation perhaps doesn’t have as big an impact as you thought might be the case?

What are reasonable business grounds for refusal of requests?

According to the Fair Work Ombudsman, what counts as reasonable business grounds for refusing a request for flexible working arrangements will depend on the individual circumstances, including the nature and size of the business, the employee’s role and duties and the requested arrangements. Examples of reasonable business grounds include but are not limited to:

  • cost – the requested arrangements would be too costly for the employer
  • capacity – there’s no capacity to change the working arrangements of other employees to accommodate the request
  • practicality – it would be impractical to change the working arrangements of other employees, or take on new employees, to accommodate the request
  • inefficiency or impact – the requested arrangement would be likely to result in significant loss in efficiency or productivity, or have a significant negative impact on customer service.

We have yet to see the detail of the proposed legislation and it doesn’t sound like we will for a few months yet but hopefully it will not be inconsistent with what we understand to be reasonable business grounds. 

And if the job really can’t be done from home?

There are lots of jobs that can’t be done from home and there are going to be people who resent the fact that others get that flexibility and they can’t have it.

We have already heard the Victorian Police Association flag that they want some compensation for their members because they can’t access that workplace right. We might see that come up as a claim in enterprise agreements.

Think about ways that you might be able to offer this people some flexibility eg an RDO or a 4 day week or flexible starting times  or ….  talk about it. 

What should you be doing?

No doubt, you are hearing from lots of lawyers and consultants that you need to rush off and review your flexible working or WFH polices and procedures.

Before you do that, let’s have a little reality check. We haven’t seen the legislative detail yet but it won’t be long after we do that it takes effect so what can we do now to prepare.

Remember that positive duty to eliminate or reduce risks from psychosocial hazards that legally took effect in Victoria on 1 December 2025?  There are a few hazards that are in play here like, for starters:

  • Change management
  • Support
  • Remote or isolated work
  • Organisational justice

That positive duty means that you need to consider the question of how you ensure that employees are able to competently perform their roles in a psychologically, emotionally and physically safe manner.

So here are some questions for you to think about: 

  1. If you currently have working from home arrangements in place, what is working well and what needs improvement and why (in each case)?
  2. Looking at the various roles in your organisation, are there any that cannot be done from home and why or are there ones where some functions can be but others can’t and why? 
  3. Looking at your workforce, how many of your people already have a statutory right to request a flexible working arrangement?
  4. If you have been insisting on people coming to work rather than working from home, what are the reasonable business grounds that you would be relying on for refusal of a WFH request and would they stand up? That is, are they really reasonable at law? Consider position by position and employee by employee.
  5. If you have people whose jobs simply cannot be done from home, what flexibilities might you be able to offer them so that they feel like you recognise their needs too?
  6. Bearing in mind the real obligations that employers have to properly consult people about matters that affect them under both workplace relations and workplace health and safety law, what consultative processes do you have in place to do that at organisational, team and individual levels and how well do they work?
  7. What internal processes do you have in place for people to raise grievances if they have concerns about your policies or their particular situation and how you are dealing with that and again how well do they work?
  8. How do you integrate your WHF practices into your performance and development management processes?
  9. What support and training and resources do your line managers and supervisors need to effectively play their parts in the process in a psychologically safe way for them?
  10. Then, once you have been through all of these steps and you have seen what the new legislation requires (expected in July), have a look at what you need to do with your policies and procedures.

These are all questions that should have been considered in relation to exisiting rights that workers have – the new legislation just gives us another reason to ask them. 

Our Practice Leader, Peter Maguire, is available to facilitate discussions with your management group or your Safety or Consultative Committee to work through these questions and tailor the right approach for your business and your people.  If you would like to know more about this, please let us know via the Contact Form below.

 

CONTACT US

Ridgeline Human Resources Pty Ltd
ABN : 24 091 644 094

enquiries@ridgelinehr.com.au

0438 533 311

PARTNER LINKS

TELL US WHAT YOU NEED HELP WITH