[2025] FWCFB 82
Citation: [2025] FWCFB 82
What happened
the Applicant, 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. the Applicant challenged this refusal, leading to a dispute resolved by the Commissioner, who ruled the refusal should stand. the Applicant appealed this decision.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission Full Bench (FWCFB) overturned the Commissioner’s decision. They found the school was not entitled to refuse the Applicant’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 the Applicant 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.
Want this applied to your situation?
Reading the decision is free. FairWork Mate goes further — it reads the full case library and applies precedents like this one to your specific facts, citing the cases as it reasons. General information, not a guaranteed outcome or legal advice.
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 AI advisor answers plain-English questions grounded on the full corpus — awards cited, industry, penalty amounts and affected employee counts — with a citation to the underlying decision on every answer.
Individual case summaries on this site are free. The full FWC and Federal Court library behind every advisor answer is on Pro.
FairWork Mate AI
This is one decision. Pro reads all of them.
Free case pages cite the top 250 decisions. Pro opens the full Fair Work Commission and Federal Court library, cross-references your own situation against it, and cites the decision behind every answer — plus document upload, so it can read your letter or contract line by line. 150 questions a month, cancel anytime.
Just need today sorted? A Day Pass is 25 questions over 24 hours, no account. Get a Day Pass — $4.99
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 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