The Victorian Premier has lobbed a grenade into the great work from home (WFH) debate. Jacinta Allan wants to make it a legal right for every Victorian who can reasonably do their job remotely to work from home at least two days a week.

If that sounds like music to your ears, you’re probably one of the thousands of workers already logging in from the kitchen table, saving a motza on train fares and lunchtime takeaway. Allan’s pitch is simple: WFH works for workers, so why would you take it away?

“It saves them time. It saves them money. It’s also good for the economy,” she told ABC News Breakfast, adding that more than a third of Australians are already working from home regularly.

But while the Premier is busy waving the flexibility flag, the business community is reaching for the Panadol.

The WFH pushback is loud

Small business groups, property lobbyists, and legal experts have lined up to take a swing. The Council of Small Business Organisations Australia (COSBOA) has been particularly vocal about the lack of consultation and the risks for small business owners.

Matthew Wilson, Chair of COSBOA, said small businesses in Victoria have not been adequately consulted on this proposed legislation.

“Many operate with limited resources and rely on close collaboration and in-person interaction — a one-size-fits-all WFH mandate overlooks this and risks imposing costly burdens,” he said.

“The existing Fair Work Act already provides employees the right to request flexible working arrangements. Mandating a blanket two-day WFH rule just adds unnecessary complexity, especially when many small businesses are still grappling with economic pressures.”

The Property Council’s Victorian Executive Director, Cath Evans, has her doubts too, warning the policy could undermine Melbourne’s CBD recovery. She told Property Australia that flexibility is important, but forcing everyone to work from home two days a week is an overreach.

“What’s not in dispute is that flexibility is now a cornerstone of modern workplaces. No one seeks to argue this point,” Evans said.

“Many organisations have embraced hybrid models that deliver tangible benefits, while others rely on in-person collaboration to drive innovation, support staff development, and maintain a strong workplace culture.

“A one-size-fits-all approach simply doesn’t reflect the diversity of Victoria’s businesses or their operational requirements.

Stefan Di Benedetto, cofounder of  Victorian based Lemoncello brand, Solbevi. told Smart Company the Victorian economy is already under pressure and the mandate could see businesses shed staff.

“A mandate like this will only make it more difficult for small to medium businesses to employ and invest money into our economy,” Di Benedetto says.

“We will be forced to utilise more AI or offshore staff for a fraction of the price to achieve a similar outcome.”

The politics (because of course there’s politics)

The announcement couldn’t be timed better for the upcoming state election. Labor is banking on WFH being a voter-friendly wedge issue, particularly after the federal Liberals took flak over their return-to-office push.

Tony Barry, director of RedBridge Group, suggests this is good politics but poor public policy.

“It’s popular with many voters, but it’s legally dubious, and it removes employer discretion. The government is playing a risky game.”

Legal experts point out that under the Australian Constitution, workplace relations for private employers are mostly a federal jurisdiction, so Victoria might not even have the power to enforce this law for private businesses. Still, Premier Allan says the state will lean on anti-discrimination laws if needed to push the agenda.

Why I’m torn

I’ve been living the hybrid work life for years, and when done right, it’s a cracker. The best of both worlds: the focus and quiet of home, with the buzz and collaboration of the office. No Monday morning commutes? Bliss.

But blanket rules make me twitchy. What works for a digital media agency in the city won’t work for a family-run café in the burbs. And while Allan says this is about protecting workers from losing their WFH perks, it could mean small businesses forced to reshuffle just to comply, which isn’t always practical.

So who’s really going to win?

White-collar workers with Zoom-friendly jobs will cheer. Parents, carers, and those with disabilities could genuinely benefit from this boost in flexibility. Regional Victorians might get better access to city jobs.

But losers? CBD cafés and retailers that rely on office foot traffic. Small businesses that can’t afford the inefficiencies of remote working. If the warnings are right, Victoria’s reputation as a business-friendly state, which already faces challenges, could also take another hit.

The carrot and the stick

Seek co-founder Paul Bassat nailed the mood, telling the AFR.

“Why does the government have to make rules for everything? It’s a reminder of how tough it is for small businesses.”

And I think he may be right. I’m all for workplace flexibility. It should be encouraged and protected, but a one-size-fits-all approach never works for anyone or anything. You just end up in an ill-fitting jumper that looks ridiculous.

If the Premier wants to safeguard WFH rights, why not strengthen current Fair Work provisions, make it harder for employers to claw back good arrangements, and help small businesses figure out workable hybrid models? That seems a more sensible option.

The pandemic taught us that workers don’t have to be chained to a desk five days a week to deliver meaningful work. Still, everyone can see that hybrid models don’t suit all businesses. Maybe it’s time for a rethink?

Want more? Get our newsletter delivered straight to your inbox!  Follow Business Builders on Facebook , X , Instagram , and LinkedIn.