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

  • Electronic service of legal documents

    Electronic service of legal documents

    The decision in Conveyor & General Engineering Pty Ltd v Basetec Services Pty Ltd [2014] QSC 30 examined validity of service of documents via email and Dropbox. Find out judgement and “take-aways” to help navigate complex legal process of document service.

    Read more …

  • Enterprise agreements – key considerations for employers

    Enterprise agreements – key considerations for employers

    Enterprise bargaining is an intricate process. The key obligations of employers, from notification to voting, lodging, and approval, are explained. This article examines pre-bargaining, union representation, and good faith bargaining, as well as relevant cases and legislation.

    Read more …

  • Why employers must follow correct processes

    Why employers must follow correct processes

    Employers may be surprised to learn that a valid dismissal can still be deemed unfair by the Fair Work Commission if procedural fairness and natural justice requirements weren’t met.

    Read more …

  • Restraint of trade & commercial contracts – a systemic approach

    Restraint of trade & commercial contracts – a systemic approach

    This article provides an invaluable overview of restraint of trade clauses (ROTs). It examines the enforceability of ROTs, their test of reasonableness, and the role of the Court in determining their reasonableness, providing a valuable guide for those wishing to draft and enforce them.

    Read more …

  • New anti-bullying legislation

    New anti-bullying legislation

    The Fair Work Amendment Bill 2013 (Cth) was passed, introducing anti-bullying measures to protect workers. Employers must take steps to prevent bullying and face fines for contravening orders.

    Read more …

  • Superannuation changes – are you prepared?

    Superannuation changes – are you prepared?

    The Australian Government has introduced significant changes to superannuation, with gradual increases in the compulsory superannuation rate set to impact both employers and employees. Starting in July 2013, employers will be required to contribute more to their employees’ superannuation funds, with the rate rising to 12% by 2019. This article breaks down the key changes,…

    Read more …

  • Employee Share Scheme (ESS) offering through options

    Employee Share Scheme (ESS) offering through options

    Offering employees shares or options to acquire securities can be a great way to reward, retain, and entice them. Discover the different types of employee share schemes, their associated tax implications, the reporting and withholding obligations employers must satisfy.

    Read more …

  • Federal Court implies a new duty in employment contracts

    Federal Court implies a new duty in employment contracts

    The landmark Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Barker [2014] HCA 32 ruling has changed the way employers must manage their employees. Find out how this Federal Court decision could affect your business and what you need to do to ensure compliance.

    Read more …

  • Employee or contractor – impact on intellectual property

    Employee or contractor – impact on intellectual property

    This article explores the legal implications of determining whether an individual is an employee or contractor. Learn how a multi-factor test can help to identify the correct status, and understand the potential impact on intellectual property.

    Read more …

Send this to a friend