Victoria’s peak business and employer groups have issued a stark warning to the State Government over its proposed Equal Opportunity Amendment (Work from Home) Bill 2026, cautioning that the legislation in its current form could trigger an exodus of investment, severely damage local hiring, and create a costly legal minefield for employers.
The Victorian Congress of Employer Associations (VCEA) and the Victorian Chamber of Commerce and Industry have both released an aligned ten-point plan demanding urgent, structural amendments to the Bill before it passes through Parliament.
The proposed laws, slated to commence as early as September 1, 2026, seek to establish a legislated right for employees to request work-from-home (WFH) arrangements.
However, employer groups argue the policy is a “solution looking for a problem,” pointing out that 77 per cent of Victorian businesses already offer flexible working arrangements voluntarily.
For the real estate sector, an industry inherently reliant on local market activity, physical asset management, face-to-face mentorship, and physical office footprints, the proposed legislation poses significant operational and structural hurdles as business anxiety escalates dramatically across the state.
New data released by the Victorian Chamber of Commerce and Industry reveals a sharp deterioration in business sentiment since the policy was first announced in late 2025. In October of last year, 56 per cent of surveyed businesses believed Victoria was a harder place to operate in than other states, but that figure has now surged to 72 per cent.
Worse still for local economic activity, nearly half (47 per cent) of businesses say they are now more likely to start, expand, or invest outside Victoria due to the legislation, while 42 per cent are more likely to hire staff interstate.
This looming flight of capital and jobs is accompanied by a severe threat to the next generation of property professionals.
To mitigate these risks of systemic industry disruption, the VCEA and the Victorian Chamber are advocating for a comprehensive package of amendments to ground the bill in reality.
Central to their ten-point plan is a hard two-day cap per week on the legislated WFH right to ensure it does not “stack” on top of existing enterprise agreements and create an entitlement to work remotely for the majority of the week.
Alongside this cap, business groups are demanding delayed and phased commencement – pushing the start date back to March 1, 2027, and delaying it further for businesses with fewer than 200 employees to prevent boutique real estate agencies from being overwhelmed.
The plan also seeks to broaden the grounds on which a business can refuse a request to explicitly include impacts on productivity, while giving employers the clear power to pause or revoke arrangements if performance issues arise or if staff are needed in person for peak auction seasons, training, and team days.
Furthermore, the amendments call for tighter definitions around what constitutes a “reasonable employer cost” for home office setups and stronger provisions for managing occupational health and safety obligations in a residential setting.
The urgency of these amendments is underscored by a “dangerously compressed” timeline that could see the legislation receive Royal Assent just days before the compliance deadline; this timeline would leave principal practitioners scrambling to rewrite workplace policies, audit home safety compliance, and train property managers under an entirely new legal regime.
Vague legislative definitions will almost certainly trigger an immediate spike in workplace disputes, placing immense pressure on the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission, an agency whose own data indicates only 42 per cent of complaints are currently resolved within six months.
Victorian Chamber of Commerce and Industry Chief Executive, Sally Curtain, warned the state framework is inherently flawed.
“These results should be a wake-up call for the Government. Businesses are not rejecting flexibility – 77 per cent already allow their employees to work from home. They are rejecting legislation that adds cost, complexity and uncertainty without solving a genuine problem.
Last year, she warned these laws risked driving jobs and investment out of Victoria and the latest data shows those warnings are becoming more serious, not less.
“Almost half of businesses surveyed are now more likely to invest outside Victoria, 42 per cent are more likely to hire outside the state and 44 per cent are less likely to hire Victorians. Those are consequences no Government should dismiss. The impact on young Victorians should be particularly alarming. Almost half of businesses say the proposed laws would reduce their willingness to employ younger or less experienced workers who need training, supervision and mentoring.
“The devil is in the detail – and unfortunately that is where this Bill falls apart. Instead of providing certainty, it creates legal grey areas and asks businesses to comply with obligations that are not clearly defined. If everyone is left arguing over what ‘reasonable’ means, the legislation has not done its job. The winners will not be employees or employers – they will be employment lawyers.
“We are asking for sensible amendments that recognise different industries, protect small businesses, clarify employer obligations and reduce unnecessary disputes. Victoria does not need another workplace experiment. We need practical laws that support both jobs and flexibility.”
This legislative pushback arrives at an incredibly fragile time for the Victorian property sector and the broader economy.
For commercial real estate professionals, industry groups warn an un-amended mandate that reduces office occupancy could further soften CBD and suburban office markets, while residential agency leaders may face administrative burdens that divert time and capital away from core sales and property management operations.
Business groups are collectively urging the Government to halt the current progression, release draft regulations urgently, and collaborate with the business community to deliver practical laws that support both jobs and flexibility rather than embarking on another workplace experiment.