When is Reasonable Relocation considered Reasonable or Unreasonable?
Job relocation can have an immense impact on both the employer and employee. When businesses need to move due to expansion or financial constraints, it’s crucial for employers to understand reasonable job relocation guidelines and carefully consider the associated legal implications.
This article examines what constitutes reasonable relocation, focusing on factors that influence its fairness, legal remedies, and key considerations for employers.
What is Considered Reasonable or Unreasonable Relocation
The court has considered a multitude of factors when assessing reasonable job relocation guidelines, including the geographical location of the move and whether the new workplace is easily accessible.
One of the prime factors is the geographical location of the move. The farther away the move is, the more likely the employer will deem the relocation unreasonable. The new workplace should be easily accessible. Ideally, it should have access to public transport and offer short commute times.[1] However, if an employer does provide support such as compensation for moving (e.g paying for hotels) and allowing time to prepare, then there’s justification that relocation is appropriate. [2]
Additionally, if the contract allows for relocation to a required area, then the Fair Work Commission would also be more inclined to note that the employer’s demands are reasonable.[3] This includes the circumstances where the relocation is over 30km away and may require one to move their residence.[4]
Consequently, prior to the relocation an employer should seek to have meaningful discussions with their employees, allowing them to express their concerns and negotiate for flexible working arrangements. Failing to consult or provide adequate notice may lead the employer to deem the relocation unreasonable.[5]
Legal Implications of Not Following Reasonable Job Relocation Guidelines
Employers must understand that when directing employees to relocate, they may desire to demonstrate that the relocation causes undue hardship and difficulty. This being that an unreasonable relocation gives rise to the following claims;
- Redundancy: When an employee is relocated due to the unavailability of their position at the previous workplace, they may be entitled to a redundancy payout.[6] The Fair Work Commission will evaluate whether the relocation impacts the employee’s conditions and responsibilities. If the employer deems the move unreasonable, the employee’s ability to claim redundancy will increase. However, in the alternate where there’s a reasonable alterative to provide relocation, then employers may be exempt from paying redundancy.[7]
- Breach of Contract: If the employment contract specifies that an employee is required to work in a specific location or area, they might have grounds to claim a breach of contract. This being that employers may need to review their contract for any provisions regarding relocation, as the Commission will consider this in their test for reasonableness.
- Dismissal: An employee who must resign because they cannot meet the relocation requirements and faces limited opportunities to respond from their employer may have experienced constructive dismissal[8]. If workplace discrimination forces an employee to move or if they relocate after making a complaint against someone, they may also have a claim for general protections.
Best Practices for Employers to Ensure Reasonable Job Relocation Guidelines Are Met
To ensure relocation is fair, employers should clearly communicate reasonable job relocation guidelines and provide flexible working arrangements where possible. This is because any changes to one’s working hours can have a profound impact on their lifestyle and family or caregiver obligations.
The employer should reflect on the relocation terms in the employment contract to avoid abrupt notice. They should seek feedback when relocation arises. Introducing a hybrid working model, such as 3 days in the office and 2 days working from home, can help accommodate travel issues. It’s essential to establish this consultation process to ensure employee retention. This approach will also help employees grow within the company. The employer can then document the new agreement to ensure a fairer process if a dispute arises.
Lastly, if travel causes financial hardship, such as increased costs or the need to relocate, the employer should consider remuneration. The employer should cover reasonable travel expenses, such as transportation and accommodation. They should also allow the employee time to prepare for the move
Conclusion
In conclusion, relocation is challenging for both employers and employees. By understanding the legal implications, employers can navigate relocations carefully. Ensuring reasonable relocations fosters a positive working environment. This approach minimizes the risk of legal claims related to dismissal, redundancy, or breach of contract. Flexible working arrangements and open communication can help solve relocation dilemmas. These practices also maintain strong working relationships and support career growth.
This article is not legal advice and serves the purpose of providing generalised legal information regarding the relocation of employment. If you require qualified legal advice, our experienced team of solicitors at Jake McKinley are here assist. Please get in touch with us on 02 9232 8033, office@jakelaw.com.au or on https://jakelaw.com.au/contact/ to make an enquiry.
[1] Evans v Oxford Shop P/L [2020] FCCA 2730.
[2] Parkes v Fat Prophets Pty Ltd [2017] FWC 6121.
[3] Ghate v Winder Controls Australia Pty Ltd [2017] FWC 5831.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Parkes v Fat Prophets Pty Ltd (n 1).
[6] DL Employment Pty Ltd v Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union [2014] 4486.
[7] Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) s 120.
[8] Parkes v Fat Prophets Pty Ltd (n 2).
