THE Victorian Government’s plan to legally entrench the right to work from home has ignited a fierce backlash, with critics accusing the State Government of meddling in the day-to-day operations of businesses already struggling under rising costs and red tape.

Under the proposed changes, employees whose jobs can reasonably be done remotely would gain a legal entitlement to work from home for at least two days a week. The policy would apply across both the public and private sectors and, controversially, would not exempt small businesses.

Premier Jacinta Allan has framed the policy as a modern workplace reform designed to support families, reduce commuting costs and increase workforce participation.

The government argues the measure reflects the reality of post-pandemic working life and gives employees the flexibility many have come to expect.

But critics say the policy represents an extraordinary overreach into how businesses manage their staff.

Business leaders have described the proposal as a blunt, one-size-fits-all approach that ignores the complexity of workplaces and industries across the state. They argue that while flexible arrangements can work in some sectors, legislating them risks creating rigid rules that may ultimately damage productivity and investment.

Industry representatives say the government appears to be legislating workplace culture rather than allowing employers and employees to negotiate arrangements that suit their circumstances.

Master Builders Victoria chief executive Michaela Lihou said the proposal highlighted a growing disconnect between government policy and the practical realities of many industries.

She warned that a blanket work-from-home entitlement was simply unrealistic for sectors such as construction and manufacturing, where the nature of the work requires people to be physically present.

Small business advocates have been even more blunt, warning the policy risks creating yet another layer of compliance for employers already dealing with rising wages, insurance premiums and energy costs. Critics say forcing small operators to justify why staff cannot work from home could open the door to disputes, legal challenges and further bureaucratic oversight.

Some have also questioned the broader economic message the policy sends.

At a time when governments are urging workers back into city offices to revitalise struggling CBD economies, critics argue Victoria appears to be heading in the opposite direction by embedding remote work into law.

Opponents say the policy risks turning Victoria into a regulatory outlier, potentially discouraging businesses from expanding or relocating to the state.

Supporters insist the change simply reflects a permanent shift in the way Australians work and say flexible arrangements have been shown to improve work-life balance and staff retention.

But critics warn the State Government is rushing headlong into a major workplace overhaul without fully considering the economic consequences.

For many in the business community, the question is no longer whether flexible work should exist — it already does — but whether the government should be dictating it at all.