[2025] FWCFB 82
Citation: [2025] FWCFB 82
What happened
Elizabeth Naden, a teacher at Sacred Heart Primary School Pymble, requested a flexible work arrangement to return from parental leave. She sought to work part-time in term 1 and continue in term 2, initially not returning to her Religious Education Coordinator (REC) role until full-time. The school refused, proposing she return as a classroom teacher only. Ms. Naden challenged this refusal, leading to a dispute resolved by Commissioner Matheson, who ruled the refusal should stand. Ms. Naden appealed this decision.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission Full Bench (FWCFB) overturned Commissioner Matheson’s decision. They found the school was not entitled to refuse Ms. Naden’s request under section 65A of the Fair Work Act 2009. The FWC determined the school must implement a flexible working arrangement as requested by Ms. Naden for term 2 of 2025. The decision highlights the importance of employers genuinely considering the consequences of refusing a flexible work request and attempting to reach an agreement with the employee.
What it means for employers
Employers must genuinely try to reach an agreement with employees regarding flexible work requests and consider the consequences of refusal for the employee. Simply offering an alternative arrangement (like a classroom teacher role) does not satisfy the requirement to genuinely attempt an agreement. The specific circumstances of the employer, including size, are relevant when assessing reasonable business grounds for refusal.
What it means for employees
Employees returning from parental leave have the right to request flexible working arrangements. If an employer refuses a request, the employee should ensure the employer has genuinely considered the consequences of the refusal and attempted to reach an agreement. Employees can appeal decisions if they believe the employer has not met their obligations under the Fair Work Act.
Every statement above is drawn from the published decision. Read the original here:
https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/decisionssigned/pdf/2025fwcfb82.pdfWant more cases like this?
FairWork Mate tracks Fair Work Ombudsman, Fair Work Commission and Federal Court decisions across Australia. The full dataset, with structured fields for awards cited, industry, penalty amounts and affected employee counts, is available through the Business API. FairWork Mate AI answers plain-English questions grounded on the full corpus.
Individual case summaries on this site are free. API + AI access is a paid product. Contact us for pricing or a 50% off first month.
Get notified on new Fair Work cases
Free email alerts when we publish new underpayment decisions, penalty orders, and workplace law updates.
Free forever. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
This summary was drafted by AI from the published decision and reviewed before publishing. It is general information, not legal advice. For your specific situation, speak to the Fair Work Ombudsman (13 13 94) or a qualified lawyer. About these summaries & corrections →