Flexible Working Arrangements: Key Requirements and Business Considerations

| October 28, 2025

The Fair Work Commission (FWC) has reinforced that employees must demonstrate a clear connection between their circumstances and the requested arrangement.  

In Terry Hutchinson v Cleanco Queensland,1 the employee failed to establish how their caring responsibilities connected with the requirement to perform remote work for one week per month and was rather a personal preference due to the employee’s family being split between two places.  

Background

A utility worker at a Far North Queensland power station requested to work remotely from Townsville one week per month. The employee’s family had split their living arrangements between two locations with his wife and son in Tully, and his daughter in Townsville. The request was made to allow the employee to spend time with his daughter and provide respite from caring for his son. 

The employer, CleanCo, refused the request citing operational requirements and costs, but offered an alternative of up to two weeks remote work every six months. 

Legal Requirements

“Because of” Test 

The Commission confirmed that flexible working requests must satisfy a cause-and-effect relationship. The employee’s circumstances under section 65(1A) of the Fair Work Act must be an operative reason for making the request. 

What this means:  Simply having children and wanting to spend more time with them is insufficient. Employees must articulate how the flexible arrangement relates to specific care needs, such as school drop-offs or particular care requirements. 

The operative reason for the request is that the employee’s family is split between Tully and Townsville, and the employee wants to spend more time in Townsville following his family’s own decision to have different living locations. 

Valid Discussion Requirement

Despite, the employee not satisfying the requirements of a FWA request under the FW Act, the Commission consider other matters such as the requirements of CleanCo when considering and declining a request.  

CleanCo did provide its response to the request out of time. However, they were able to demonstrate that they met the requirements to discuss the request by asking the employee for further information and responding to emails from the employee’s representative. 

Reasonable Business Grounds for Refusal

The Commission upheld CleanCos refusal based on several reasonable business grounds: 

Key Takeaways

Here’s what employers should keep in mind when managing flexible working arrangement requests:

1. Past Approval Doesn’t Always Create Precedent
Previous approval of flexible working requests doesn’t obligate employers to approve future requests. Each request must be assessed on its current circumstances and business grounds. 

2. Document Business Grounds Thoroughly
Clearly articulate specific operational, financial, or practical reasons for refusal, including: 

3. Respond Within Timeframes
Ensure requests are addressed within the required 21-day period taking into account employee leave and other matters which may affect this.  

4. Consider Alternatives
Provide reasonable alternatives where possible, such as modified arrangements or different leave options. 

5. Maintain Proper Discussion
Provide genuine opportunity for discussion, which can include email exchanges with the employee or their representative. 

Final Thoughts

The decision in Hutchinson v CleanCo Queensland shows that flexible work requests must be tied to genuine, practical needs—not personal preferences. Employers should assess requests carefully, keep records, and offer reasonable alternatives where possible.

Need help managing flexible work arrangements? IRiQ Law’s HR Retainer services can support your business with tailored advice and compliance strategies. Contact us today.

1 [2025] FWC 2887.