Employment law for employers

Individual Flexibility Arrangements: an overview

by

reviewed by

Malcolm Burrows

Modern awards and enterprise agreements set out the minimum terms and conditions of employment for most Australian workers performing different roles.  The Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (Act) provides a mechanism by which an employer and an individual employee may, by agreement, adjust the operation of certain terms in their Award to better suit theircircumstances.  That mechanism is called an Individual Flexibility Arrangement (IFA).

What is an IFA?

Under section 144 and section 202 of the Act, an IFA is a written agreement between an employer and employee that varies certain provisions in a modern award or enterprise agreement (Award) that otherwise governs the employment relationship.  The arrangement operates only between those two (2) parties.  It does not affect any other employees of the employer.[1]

Under section 144(2)(b) and section 202(2)(b) of the Act, the IFA is treated as forming part of the Award itself, meaning it is enforceable in the same way.

Legal framework

Once an IFA is in place, all the provisions of the Award continue to apply but the operation of the relevant terms is adjusted in the way the IFA specifies.[2]

An IFA can only be made after the employee has commenced employment.  It cannot be offered as a precondition of engagement according to the Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO).[3]

The authority to make an IFA derives from the flexibility clause that every modern Award must contain.[4]  Where an Award does not contain a flexibility term, the model flexibility term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 (Cth) applies automatically.[5]

What can and cannot be varied

There are two (2) categories of provisions which can be amended.  The first are facilitative provisions which, by the express terms of the Award, may be varied by agreement between the employer and either an individual employee or the majority of employees.  The second category are mandatory provisions (minimum conditions) which cannot be varied by agreement and must be implemented as written.

Facilitative provisions

Specific terms differ between Awards, however common facilitative provisions typically include:

  • penalty rates,
  • overtime rates,
  • allowances; and
  • arrangements for when work is performed,

Varying these provisions may be beneficial if the employer is wanting to implement an annualised wage arrangement.  An annualised wage arrangement under section 139(1)(f) or 172 of the Act refers to when an employee receives a fixed annual salary calculated to incorporate, and stand in lieu of, certain entitlements that would otherwise be paid separately under the relevant Award, such as overtime, penalty rates and allowances.  Variation is subject to the condition that the employee is “better off overall” as a result.

Mandatory provisions

The National Employment Standards (NES) are the minimum statutory entitlements set out in Part 2-2 (sections 5960) of the Act.  These cannot be reduced, excluded or modified by any IFA section 55(1) of the Act NES entitlements include:

  • annual leave;
  • personal and carer’s leave;
  • parental leave;
  • notice of termination; and
  • redundancy pay.

Non-Negotiable: The Better Off Overall Test

Employers must ensure that any IFA results in the employee being better off overall than they would have been under the unvaried Award.[6]  This requirement is commonly referred to as the Better Off Overall Test (BOOT).

The BOOT is a global assessment.  A meaningful benefit in one area, such as a higher base rate of pay or additional allowances, can legitimately offset the variation of a specific penalty entitlement, provided the overall position of the employee is genuinely improved.  The IFA BP Guide states that both financial and non-financial benefits may be taken into account when calculating the employee’s overall position, although financial benefits provide the clearest basis for demonstrating compliance.

The consequences of getting this wrong are serious.  In Fair Work Ombudsman v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [2024] FCA 81 (FWO v CBA) the Federal Court imposed civil penalties totalling $10.34 million against the Commonwealth Bank and its subsidiary CommSec.  Among the admitted contraventions was the use of individual agreements that were not implemented in a lawful manner, and a systemic failure to ensure employees were better off overall resulting in approximately $16 million in underpayments to around 7,400 employees over a period of six (6) years.[7]  

Making a Valid IFA

Several requirements must be satisfied for an IFA to be valid under sections 144 and 203 of the Act.  The arrangement must:

  • be in writing and signed by the employer and the individual employee (or a parent or guardian if the employee is under the age of eighteen (18) years;
  • identify the Award terms being varied, set out how each is varied, and explain how the employee is better off overall as a result;
  • set out how the agreement may be terminated;
  • be genuinely agreed, free from coercion or duress; and
  • the employer must give the employee a copy of the arrangement.

Agreement by consent, not compulsion

Employers cannot coerce or compel employees to enter an IFA, employers who attempt to do so risk exposure to general protections claims under section 340 of the Act.

The right to refuse an IFA is a workplace right under section 341 of the Act.  An employee who exercises this right is protected from the employer taking adverse action in response to the refusal (whether by way of dismissal, reduced hours, loss of overtime, or any other adverse treatment under section 342 of the Act).

Key takeaways for employers

An IFA, properly made, can serve the interests of both parties, however, care must be taken to ensure they are lawfully implemented.

Awards are complex, technically drafted instruments that frequently cross-reference their own provisions.

Links and further references

Legislation

Cases

Other material

Further information

If you are an Employer and need advice on implementing an individual flexibility agreement or assistance with BOOT calculations, contact us for a confidential and obligation‑free discussion.

Doyles Recommended TMT Lawyer 2024


[1] Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) section 144(3).

[2] Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) sections 144(2)(a) and 202(2)(a).

[3] FWO Use of Individual Flexibility Arrangements – Best Practice Guide (2013) (IFA BP Guide).

[4] Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) sections 144(1) and 202(1).

[5] Fair Work Regulations 2009 (Cth) reg 2.08 .

[6] Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) section 203(4) or 144(4)(c).

[7] Fair Work Ombudsman v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [2024] FCA 81 [71].

Related insights

  • Individual Flexibility Arrangements: an overview

    Individual Flexibility Arrangements: an overview

    Modern awards and enterprise agreements set out the minimum terms and conditions of employment for most Australian workers performing different roles.  The Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (Act) provides a mechanism by which an employer and an individual employee may, by agreement, adjust the operation of certain terms in their Award to better suit theircircumstances. …

    Read more …

  • White-Anting: An employer’s lawful termination guide

    White-Anting: An employer’s lawful termination guide

    Employees who use White Anting tactics to deliberately undermine management or disrupt workplace harmony may be summarily dismissed, provided the relevant legal conditions are met and a proper process is followed.  Following our 28 April 2026 article “White Anting: serious misconduct?“, this article provides practical “how to” steps for employers to lawfully dismiss employees who…

    Read more …

  • White Anting: serious misconduct?

    White Anting: serious misconduct?

    White Anting is an Australian term meaning to sabotage, undermine, or destroy an organisation, project, or person from within.  White Anting in the workplace often involves the quiet, insidious undermining of a colleague or superior through gossip, withholding information, exclusion, or spreading doubt.  White Anting  has been recognised by psychologists as a psychosocial hazard and…

    Read more …

  • The “right to disconnect” from modern workplaces

    The “right to disconnect” from modern workplaces

    The right to disconnect, as contained in Part 8 of the  Fair Work Amendment (Closing Loopholes No. 2) Bill (Bill), gives employees the right to refuse contact from their employers (or related parties) outside of their working hours, unless the refusal is unreasonable.  The changes in Part 8 amend various sections of the Fair Work…

    Read more …

  • Paid family and domestic violence leave for small businesses

    Paid family and domestic violence leave for small businesses

    The Fair Work Amendment (Paid Family and Domestic Violence Leave) Act 2022 (Cth) (Amending Act) provides that employers must provide 10 days paid leave to all employees. Part-time and casuals also eligible. Confidentiality and ability to take leave in single and separate periods must be respected.

    Read more …

  • Pay secrecy laws come into effect

    Pay secrecy laws come into effect

    The Fair Work Legislation Amendment Act 2022 (Cth) has been passed, introducing workplace laws and changing existing rules. Employers must now ensure job ads include minimum wage info and protect confidential info when determining pay. This article provides an overview of the implications.

    Read more …

  • Employers now required to provide paid domestic violence leave

    Employers now required to provide paid domestic violence leave

    The Federal Government has proposed a bill that provides eligible employees with paid family and domestic violence leave. Find out more about the proposed changes and how they could affect your business.

    Read more …

  • Ex-employees and intellectual property protection

    Ex-employees and intellectual property protection

    Ex-employees can be a threat to a company’s intellectual property, but with the right contractual clauses, employers can protect their trademarks, copyright, patent, and design. Learn more about how to safeguard your company’s intellectual property.

    Read more …

  • Cost awards in unfair dismissal cases – part 4

    Cost awards in unfair dismissal cases – part 4

    This article examines the rare but possible situation in which an employee could be liable to pay the employer’s costs in an Application under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). Find out more about this situation and the case of Ewan Chapman v Ignis Labs Pty Ltd t/a Ignis Labs [2021] FWCFB 932.

    Read more …

Send this to a friend