This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies. Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility: The Australian state of Victoria was due to enforce a legal right to work from home starting in September 2026. But just weeks away from its implementation, the new premier, Ben Carroll, announced a year's delay in response to fierce business opposition.
Thousands of miles away, in Portugal, parents of young children already have a legal right to work from home without needing their employers' approval. All of these developments raise the question: Should workers be given a legal right to work from home? There is an argument that firms should have full discretion over their employees' working arrangements, including whether they can work remotely.
However, by giving bosses complete control over such decisions, we are in danger of affirming the importance of profitability over well-being and ignoring the needs of working parents. One justification for taking remote work policy out of bosses' hands is to boost workers' well-being. There are plenty of reasons why you might want to work remotely.
Maybe you want to avoid a long, sweaty and costly commute. Maybe you like to go on a jog during your lunch break. Maybe you need to pick up your child from school.
When bosses have full control over their remote work policy, your preferences can be treated as irrelevant to that decision. Skeptics might push back that if bosses were to bend to workers' will, this would harm productivity. The pursuit of profit is arguably the best way to guarantee productivity growth.
This expands the economic pie, from which we all benefit; a rising tide lifts all boats. The question of whether remote work is bad for productivity is hotly contested. But let's suppose that it is.
Extract — continue reading at the source.
