Continuity of learning trumps Senior Teacher’s part-time work request

A Catholic primary school has satisfied the Fair Work Commission (FWC) that it had reasonable grounds for refusing the request of a teacher who sought to return to her leadership position on a part-time basis following parental leave, with the FWC accepting the “risk of detriment to learning outcomes” outweighed the potential negative impacts on the employee’s financial position and career progression. This decision was successfully appealed on 22 April 2025.

The experienced teacher had requested to return to her executive position of religious education coordinator (REC role) on a part-time basis (three days per week) for the first semester of 2025, flagging an intent to resume the role full-time for semester two. The teacher’s request to work Wednesday to Friday during terms one and two aligned with the care arrangements the employee’s mother and husband would be able to deliver, whilst juggling their own employment, facilitating the teacher’s staged return to work.

The employer rejected the employee’s request for flexible working arrangements, maintaining that the REC role, as an executive position, could not be sustained on a part-time basis, instead offering to facilitate her return on the days she desired in a classroom teacher role, either for the first semester or a full school year. The employer was also open to the teacher resuming her REC role in a full-time capacity from term three, if she elected to return to a part-time classroom teaching position for terms one and two.

The teacher, being dissatisfied with her employer’s response, lodged a dispute with the FWC prior to Christmas, with the matter heard in late-January to be “determined urgently”, two days prior to the teacher’s parental leave concluding. The teacher, represented by the Independent Education Union, ran several points of argument under the employer’s enterprise agreement and NES, seeking determinations in respect to whether the employer had properly consulted with her in refusing the request and whether the decision had been made on reasonable business grounds.

Despite agreeing with the employee’s general “policy considerations” that, “flexible working arrangements play a critical role in our society” in “addressing imbalance and supporting women to obtain and maintain leadership positions”, Commissioner Alana Matheson upheld the employer’s grounds for refusing the teacher’s request, notwithstanding some procedural shortcomings in communicating the refusal.

In determining the employer’s decision had been made on reasonable business grounds, Commissioner Matheson acknowledged the teacher’s personal circumstances involved “the management of a substantial mortgage and other financial concerns”, adding that “the financial loss of the REC Role would have a serious impact on her and her family” but fundamentally concluded that “there is a need for continuity of learning and teaching across these subjects and that [the proposed arrangement] would likely detract from this outcome”.

After wading through opacity in the employer’s submissions as to the unviability of the proposed part-time arrangement, Commissioner Matheson accepted the REC role constituted a “critical role for the School and is a role that needs to be available across the School week”. Although it was not entirely clear on the evidence how “significant” the potential negative impact on learning would be if the part-time REC role was implemented, the Commissioner ultimately accepted the employer’s explanation that facilitating the employee’s request would necessitate the engagement of “three teachers” to cover the full-time teaching load, which would not be conducive to positive learning outcomes. In concluding, Commissioner Matheson observed:

“I accept that there is a need for continuity of learning and teaching across the [employer’s] key learning areas and that having three teachers spread across the teaching of these subjects would likely detract from this outcome, particularly as different teachers have different teaching styles and students would need to adapt to this, it may be confusing as to who is ultimately responsible for learning outcomes in the subject and who a student or parent should seek assistance from if a child encounters difficulties with the subject. I accept that three teachers would lead to a lack of continuity in teaching a child in a subject and would make it more difficult to track daily learning outcomes and make adjustments where students need them. The [employer] is not serving customers who are buying widgets. Its product is of critical value to society, being the provision of education to primary school children in the formative years of their life, and proposals that impact the School’s capacity to effectively deliver education effectively and which risk detriment to student learning should not be taken lightly.”

Noting that an urgent resolution was required in advance of the teacher’s “imminent” return to work, Commissioner Matheson recommended that, “if the [employee] does not wish to return to her role on a full-time basis in terms 1 and 2 that she be permitted to return in a classroom teacher capacity working on a 0.6 FTE basis Wednesday to Friday for terms 1 and 2 until her return to the REC Role on a full time basis in terms 3 and 4 of the 2025 school year”.

Naden v Catholic Schools Broken Bay Limited as Trustee for the Catholic Schools Broken Bay Trust [2025] FWC 317 (4 February 2025)

UPDATE – Appeal successful

The Applicant and her representatives successfully appealed the above decision on 22 April 2025, winning the right (albeit, on a technicality) to have her request for flexible working arrangements implemented by her employer from Term 2, 2025 – catch up with our updated news post here.