Work from home is not flexible work, Australian experts warn

NEW YORK, UNITED STATES — A Greens bill to give Australian workers the right to request two days of work from home a week has drawn expert warnings that legislating work from home as the default form of flexibility risks discriminating against workers who cannot do their jobs remotely, ABC News reports.

WFH bill risks sidelining workers without remote options

“By focusing on just one aspect of flexibility, you could be making things harder for some people,” said Rowena Ditzell, a future-of-work specialist at the University of Technology Sydney — adding that centering flexibility on location alone ironically makes work less flexible for workers who cannot access remote options.

The Fair Work Ombudsman recognizes four types of flexible work — working from home, flexible start and finish times, split shifts, and job sharing — but the Greens bill addresses only the first. The bill, introduced in November 2024 and currently before a Senate inquiry reporting August 27, would give employees the right to request up to two remote days a week. About 36% of Australians currently work from home, with about half doing so between one and four days a week, according to the Productivity Commission.

Bill may deepen gender and disability divides

Bruce Baer Arnold, an associate professor in law at the University of Canberra, said the bill’s eligibility changes risk repeating patterns of workplace discrimination against people with disabilities. 

“Fitting you into our work practices might involve a bit of effort,” Dr Arnold said. “It’s easier just to exclude you right up front.”

The Working with Women’s Alliance said roles in female-dominated industries — early childhood education, healthcare, and community services — cannot be done from home.

Higher-income, male-dominated roles can accommodate remote work more easily and would benefit most from the bill’s changes, the group said.

“Without deliberate measures, this amendment risks widening existing gender and income disparities across the workforce,” the Working with Women’s Alliance submitted.

The Australian debate captures a tension that BPO providers know well: WFH-centered flexibility policies favor white-collar, desk-based workers — the same demographic that offshore staffing models are already losing to AI automation. 

The roles dominating BPO demand, including healthcare, customer support, and community services, are precisely those the Working with Women’s Alliance flagged as unable to work from home. 

Providers that build genuine schedule and hours flexibility into their employer value proposition — not just remote work — will recruit and retain more effectively in the markets where offshore staffing demand is actually growing.