Karlene Chandler wins landmark WFH case against Westpac

Veteran Westpac employee Karlene Chandler has won a pivotal Fair Work case after the bank rejected her work-from-home request to help manage the school run.

Westpac argued Karlene Chandler’s presence in the office allowed for ‘more effective team communication’, which included ‘team ‘huddles’. Picture: Brendon Thorne/Getty Images

A mother has won a landmark case against Westpac after the bank refused to allow her to work from home, in a decision that is likely to have major implications for lenders’ return-to-office mandates.

Karlene Chandler, who has worked for Westpac for 23 years and is currently a part-time employee in the lender’s mortgage operation team, asked the bank in January if she could work from home to allow her to pick up and drop off her two young daughters from school.

But Westpac refused, with a senior manager telling her “working from home is no substitution for childcare”.

Ms Chandler proposed an alternative of working two days at a branch closer to her home, which was also rejected by the bank.

Now, in a ruling published on Monday, the Fair Work Commission has ordered Westpac to accede to Ms Chandler’s demands, noting she had a track record of working from home “very successfully”.

“Whilst I accept that Westpac may obtain some benefit from minimal levels of in-office attendance in Ms Chandler’s case, I also think that the consequences of not making an order are seriously prejudicial for the applicant and her family,” FWC deputy president Tom Roberts said.

A Westpac spokesperson said the bank would consider the ruling.

“Westpac has a large, diverse workforce and our policies remain consistent with the Westpac Group enterprise agreement,” the spokesperson said.

Ms Chandler had a history of working from home, with the ruling noting that from 2017 she was only required to attend a corporate office once a week.

From about mid-2018, she worked remotely full-time until she went on maternity leave. She was allowed to continue working remotely until August 2022 when she was required to attend Westpac’s office in Kogarah, Sydney once a week.

In 2021, Ms Chandler and her husband moved to Wilton, about 70km from the Kogarah office. Her daughters, both six, attended a private school about a half-hour drive in the opposite direction.

This meant that it was a two-hour drive to the Kogarah office. Ms Chandler had sole responsibility for the school run because her partner worked interstate.

In December last year, her request to work in the bank’s Bowral branch was initially approved as a short-term “olive branch”.

But it was reversed by a senior manager a month later, triggering Ms Chandler to lodge a formal request for a flexible working arrangement under the Fair Work Act, which was rejected the following day.

Ms Chandler was eventually told in March that Westpac’s working policy required her to be in a corporate office at least two days a week, with a senior manager adding “working from home is no substitution for childcare” and “your arrangements for working remotely may change at any time at Westpac’s discretion”.

The bank argued her presence in the office allowed for “more effective team communication”, which included “team ‘huddles’ and activities, training sessions and the use of ‘call boards’ at the corporate premises, which convey key messages to staff and which are not accessible to employees working from home”.

But Mr Roberts said “the evidence shows that team ‘huddles’ can be and are conducted by Microsoft Teams and that training sessions are available online”.

He also said Ms Chandler had “successfully trained two employees remotely during the pandemic”.

“There is no question that Ms Chandler’s work can be performed completely remotely. She has been working remotely for a number of years and doing so very successfully,” Mr Roberts said.

The Finance Sector Union, which took up Ms Chandler’s case, said the decision demonstrated “working from home is a right, not a privilege”.

“Westpac not only failed to meet its obligations to consider Ms Chandler’s request to work from home in accordance with the Fair Work Act, but Westpac’s refusal of her request was found to not be based on reasonable business grounds,” FSU national secretary Julia Angrisano said.

“Employers in the banking and finance industry are increasingly relying on the supposed benefit of ‘face-to-face’ contact as a reason to refuse requests for flexible working arrangements, and that’s unacceptable.

“This decision puts all employers on notice that they will need to have genuine business reasons to refuse a flexible working arrangement request; employers will also need to demonstrate that they have met all their obligations under the Fair Work Act before any refusal.”