Fair work warns everybody

The Fair Work Commission has rejected a flexible working arrangement request made by a FedEx employee who continually flouted an office return. The worker claimed that he needed to work from home to care for his disabled wife and children. When his requests were knocked back, he decided to take leave on mandated office days. Eventually, he simply decided to work from home full time against FedEx’s wishes.

In its decision, the Fair Work Commission provided a warning to workers not to disobey lawful and reasonable directions. Also, to clearly provide their employer with all necessary information about their circumstances when making a flexible working arrangement request.

The commission also warned employers that they should not merely provide “generic and blanket HR answers” when refusing a flexible working arrangement request. Let’s take a look at the events of this Fair Work Commission case Peter Ridings v Fedex Express Australia Pty Ltd T/A Fedex [2024].

Defiant FedEx worker gets WFH request denied

Peter Ridings began working for FedEx in April 2015 as a full-time Clearance Classifier. Working at the company’s Brisbane office, he worked five days per week from 6:00 am to 2:00 pm.

In July 2019, Mr Ridings made a request to FedEx to work four days per week from 9:54 am to 6:00 pm. This request was granted and would see him work in-person at FedEx’s Brisbane office.

During the COVID-19 lockdown, FedEx mandated remote work for employees wherever possible. From April 2020 to September 2022, Mr Riding worked entirely from home. Although the formal flexible work agreement expired on 1 December 2019, an informal agreement with his manager allowed Mr Riding to continue working from home full time.

Subsequent flexible work requests

In October 2021, Mr Riding requested another flexible working arrangement to continue working four days per week from home. This was approved by FedEx and became a permanent arrangement from March 2022. Supporting this request were several documents detailing his family’s health issues, including medical certificates and psychologist reports.

However, in August 2022 Mr Riding was told via email that he would be required to work in the office for two days a week starting the following month. This coincided with FedEx announcing its adoption of a hybrid work model that would require all employees to work on site two days per week.

Mr Riding obeyed this in-office requirement until July 2023, during which he took several days of annual and carers leave, particularly on days he was required to be in the office.

Requests WFH arrangement to care for autistic wife and kids

In July 2023, Mr Riding submitted a new flexible working arrangement request. He requested to work from home three days a week and in the office one day a week. Mr Riding cited his family’s medical conditions as the primary reason for his request. He said that “both my teenage children are intellectually disabled and autistic.” This situation qualifies him as a carer under Section 65(1A)(b) of the Fair Work Act 2009.

He also said that his wife is autistic. That she suffers from a condition that includes osteoarthritis, scoliosis and multiple joint dislocations. Mr Riding claimed that he needed to care for his home-schooled kids and his wife, who also suffers from anxiety and depression. He said that he could not leave his 13 year old daughter unattended “even for 10 minutes.” Given this, he claimed that “some days it’s impossible to leave the house.”

To back up these claims, Mr Riding provided documentation that included developmental and guidance reports about his children, rheumatologist’s reports and letters from a clinical psychologist.

Despite this, FedEx rejected his request on 1 August 2023, citing business and operational requirements, including concerns about efficiency and productivity. In late July 2023, the company had mandated all employees to work on-site for three days per week. But Mr Riding was allowed to continue working under his existing arrangement of two days in the office and two days at home.

Continued dispute and mediation attempts

Following the rejection, Mr Riding sought clarification on the cited loss of efficiency and productivity and raised issues regarding the impact of the office requirement on his personal and leave balance. For many weeks in August and September 2023, he took annual leave every Wednesday, which was an office day.

On 18 September 2023, Mr Riding told FedEx he sprained his ankle and could not drive. He then took unpaid leave until December 2023. He began working again, however as he could not drive, Mr Riding claimed he could not work in the office. The Fair Work Commission noted that Mr Riding has not worked in the FedEx office since 18 September 2023 to the date of his flexible work arrangement hearing.

Final flexible work arrangement rejection

In January 2024, Mr Riding made another flexible work arrangement request. This time he sought to work four days a week from home indefinitely. Mr Riding referenced his right to seek an exemption to FedEx’s in-office mandate under the Carers Recognition Act.

He said that “I understand in part that FedEx only wants us in the office to ensure our mental wellbeing.” He therefore said he was “happy to continue logging into our teams meeting every day” and fulfil obligations to collaborate with his team.  

However, FedEx formally rejected Mr Riding’s request to work entirely from home. The company stated that his role as classifier benefits from in person discussions on regulatory changes and problem shipments that it claimed don’t take place on Teams. FedEx emphasised adherence to the company’s hybrid working policy and said that travelling to and from work was “not unreasonable.”

Worker flouts in-office requirement

Mr Riding contested this decision, arguing that there were no substantial productivity issues when he worked from home during the COVID-19 period. He also claimed that his family’s medical needs were not adequately considered. Mr Riding subsequently lodged a flexible working arrangement request via the Fair Work Commission.

During the Fair Work Commission proceedings, FedEx proposed a compromise allowing Mr Riding to work one day a week in the office and three days at home. However, he did not attend the office as directed.

Fair Work Commission makes decision

The Fair Work Commission found that there was “sufficient evidence” to support Mr Riding’s status as a carer under the Fair Work Act 2009. It noted that his children were intellectually disabled and had level 3 autism. It also acknowledged that his wife had “signs” of Ehlers Danlos Syndrome and had level 2 autism.

However, the commission took issue with Mr Riding’s refusal to obey FedEx’s lawful and reasonable direction to work on-site one day per week. It said that he had “no authority” to work “according to his own preference.”

The Fair Work Commission noted that Mr Riding deemed FedEx’s order to work on-site “was not lawful and reasonable.” And for this reason, he decided not to comply with the order until his flexible work arrangement case had concluded. The commission, however, also noted that Mr Riding felt entitled to a flexible work arrangement “without an approved request.” And that this “assumption was incorrect.”

“Future employees seeking this process should ensure that they are following lawful and reasonable direction from the employer,” the Fair Work Commission said.

Worker didn’t properly communicate his domestic situation

The Fair Work Commission also called out Mr Riding’s failure to provide FedEx with adequate information to fully comprehend why he was seeking a flexible work arrangement. It was acknowledged that he had only explained that his “carer demands” had increased during the Fair Work Commission proceedings.

Mr Riding had claimed that his wife’s medical condition had been getting worse, which included difficulties swallowing food. The commission said that it was “sympathetic” to the suffering of his wife. That Mr Riding was genuine in detailing her situation.

However, it stated that Mr Riding had “not clearly put” details about his wife’s deteriorating medical condition to FedEx when he made a request. It was noted that an employer can’t “genuinely consider a request” when they are not given all relevant information.

Employer could have done more to consider request

Turning to FedEx’s role in the matter, the Fair Work Commission acknowledged that the company “did try to genuinely attempt to reach agreement” with Mr Riding. However, it stated that FedEx failed to adequately consider his personal situation when determining how approving his request would be detrimental to the company.

The commission said FedEx “could have considered” the effect of full time work from home arrangements on Mr Riding, which it said can be “isolating, particularly in a potentially stressful home environment”.

It was noted that it would be “beneficial” for Mr Riding “to have further collaboration” with his workmates. However, the Fair Work Commission found that FedEx did not provide Mr Riding with “a sufficient explanation” for rejecting his flexible work arrangement on business grounds.

“Generic and blanket HR answers are not sufficient alone to establish a reasonable business ground for refusing a request,”

stated the Fair Work Commission.

It was noted that FedEx did not have reasonable business grounds to refuse the request based on efficiency and productivity concerns. However, the commission had “legitimate concerns” about Mr Riding’s “situation” and the requirements of his role.

Fair Work rejects flexible work arrangement request

Ultimately, the Fair Work Commission decided to refuse Mr Riding’s request “given his lack of cooperation with FedEx in seeking an arrangement which could work for both parties.” It noted that Mr Riding had “avoided attending the office at all possible costs.” And the commission felt he was likely not to follow any arrangement in good faith.

The Fair Work Commission warned future workers who contest their employer’s decision to “ensure that they are following lawful and reasonable direction from the employer.”

Conclusion to: Fair Work Warns

We at a Whole New Approach are Australia’s leading workplace mediators. (note we are not lawyers). We have helped over 16,000 workers in every state and territory seek reinstatement or compensation through the Fair Work Commission.

If you need to lodge and unfair dismissal or adverse action claim, call us today. Our team can guide you through making an application and provide the support you need throughout the conciliation and hearing process.

Make sure you act fast, as you only have 21 days from the date of your dismissal to lodge a claim with the Fair Work Commission. Call us today on 1800 333 666 for a free and confidential conversation.

Articles similar to: Fair Work warns employers to consider flexible work requests

When lying and cheating gets you dismissed

Can you be terminated for resisting change