What counts as suitable duties under Australian law?

Suitable duties are tasks that a worker can perform within their functional capacity as described by their treating practitioner. They must be meaningful, not artificially created, and consistent with the employer's operational needs. Each state workers compensation scheme defines suitability slightly differently, but the common thread is that duties must match the worker's current physical or psychological capacity and must not aggravate the injury.

Is an employer legally required to provide suitable duties?

Yes. In most Australian jurisdictions employers have a statutory obligation to provide suitable duties where reasonably practicable. This obligation exists in the workers compensation legislation of each state and territory — for example, the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW), the Workplace Injury Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2013 (Vic), and the Workers' Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1986 (SA). Failure to offer suitable duties can trigger penalties and increase insurer liability.

Who decides whether duties are suitable — the employer or the doctor?

The treating medical practitioner sets the functional capacity parameters (e.g. no lifting over 5 kg, no repetitive bending, restricted hours). The employer then identifies tasks within those parameters. Ideally this involves an occupational health professional who can translate clinical restrictions into actual workplace tasks, particularly where the workplace is physically demanding or the capacity limitations are complex.

Can a worker refuse suitable duties?

A worker who unreasonably refuses genuine suitable duties may have their weekly compensation payments reduced or suspended under most state schemes. However, refusals are sometimes reasonable — for example if the proposed duties are physically outside the medical certificate, require travel the worker cannot manage, or take place in a psychologically unsafe environment. Employers should document all offers and responses carefully.

How long must an employer maintain suitable duties?

Duration obligations vary by scheme. In NSW, the obligation to provide suitable duties generally applies for the first 12 months of a claim. In Victoria under the WIRC Act 2013, the employer obligation runs for 52 weeks of incapacity. In Queensland under the Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003, the obligation is ongoing while the worker has capacity to perform some duties. Always check the specific scheme rules and seek advice from your insurer or an occupational health consultant.

What is the difference between suitable duties and a return-to-work plan?

Suitable duties are the specific tasks assigned. A return-to-work (RTW) plan is the formal document that records those duties, hours, review dates, treating practitioners, and the graduated pathway back to pre-injury duties. The RTW plan is the mechanism; suitable duties are the content. Both are required elements under most Australian workers compensation schemes once a worker has an incapacity lasting more than a few days.

Suitable Duties: Employer Obligations and How to Implement Them

Why Most Suitable Duties Failures Happen Before Day One

The problem usually starts with a certificate of capacity that says something like "modified duties" and nothing else. No hours. No weight limits. No guidance on posture or environment. The employer, now holding a certificate that tells them almost nothing, either does nothing or offers something generic — light filing, or answering phones — that bears no relationship to the worker's actual job or capabilities.

A suitable duties offer that is not grounded in a clear functional capacity assessment is not really a suitable duties offer. It is a guess. And guesses are how you end up with a worker who reinjures themselves on day three, or who legitimately refuses the offer because the tasks are outside their medical restrictions.

The fix is straightforward in principle: get a specific capacity statement from the treating practitioner, map those restrictions against actual workplace tasks, and document the offer in writing. In practice, this requires someone who understands both clinical restrictions and the physical demands of the work environment — which is where occupational health support earns its keep.

The Legislative Framework: State by State

There is no single national suitable duties law. The obligation sits in each state and territory workers compensation scheme, alongside the model Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (WHS Act) duty to ensure worker health and safety so far as is reasonably practicable. The interaction matters: even where a worker's compensation obligation has a defined duration, the WHS Act duty to provide a safe return applies throughout the employment relationship.

Jurisdiction	Governing Legislation	Employer Obligation Duration
NSW	Workers Compensation Act 1987	Up to 12 months of incapacity
VIC	Workplace Injury Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2013	52 weeks of incapacity
QLD	Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003	Ongoing while capacity exists
SA	Return to Work Act 2014	Up to 2 years from claim date
WA	Workers' Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981	Reasonable and practicable test applies

The Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth) also has relevance where a worker's injury has become a disability. Refusing to consider suitable duties for a worker with a compensable condition that qualifies as a disability — when doing so would not cause unjustifiable hardship — may constitute unlawful discrimination independent of any workers compensation obligation.

What Actually Makes Duties "Suitable"

Four tests, applied together, determine suitability. If any one fails, the offer is not suitable regardless of intent.

1
Capacity match
The physical and cognitive demands of the proposed duties must sit within the limits described in the current certificate of capacity. A worker cleared for "sedentary duties, no lifting over 4 kg" cannot be rostered to a role that involves walking 6,000 steps per shift, regardless of how the job is labelled.
2
Non-aggravation
The duties must not be reasonably likely to aggravate the injury. This is a clinical question and should be confirmed with the treating practitioner or an occupational physician before the worker commences. Do not assume that staying within stated restrictions automatically means no aggravation risk — particularly for psychological injuries.
3
Operational legitimacy
The role must be real work. Fabricating tasks that serve no business purpose is demeaning to the worker and legally fragile. If challenged by the insurer or a tribunal, a list of tasks that any observer can see is a holding exercise will not be treated sympathetically.
4
Safety of the work environment
Under the WHS Act 2011, the employer's primary duty of care does not pause because a worker is on modified duties. The environment in which suitable duties are performed must be safe — including psychosocially safe, particularly where the injury itself is psychological or where workplace relationships are a relevant factor.

Building a Suitable Duties Offer That Holds Up

A suitable duties offer that cannot withstand scrutiny from an insurer, a regulator, or a tribunal is a liability, not an asset. Here is a process that produces offers that hold up.

Step 1

Obtain a specific certificate of capacity

Contact the treating practitioner directly — with the worker's consent — to request quantified restrictions: hours per day, weight limits in kilograms, postural tolerances (sitting, standing, walking), cognitive load considerations. Vague certificates should be followed up before any duties are assigned.

Step 2

Conduct or obtain a physical demands analysis

Match the worker's current role and any proposed alternate tasks against the functional restrictions. An occupational health professional can complete a workplace task analysis in 2–4 hours for most industrial or office environments.

Step 3

Identify genuine tasks from within the business

Look first at the worker's own team. Can they perform part of their normal role? Then look laterally — administration support, quality checking, training facilitation, equipment inspection, data entry, mentoring. Document why each task is operationally legitimate.

Step 4

Write the formal RTW plan

The plan must include: duties description, daily hours and days per week, review dates (minimum fortnightly in early stages), named contacts on both sides, and a graduated pathway back to pre-injury duties with specific milestones.

Step 5

Get sign-off and communicate

The plan requires sign-off from the worker, employer, and treating practitioner. The insurer and RTW coordinator must receive a copy. The worker's direct supervisor needs a briefing — not a copy of the certificate, but a clear brief on what the worker can and cannot do during the duties period.

The Psychological Injury Dimension

Suitable duties for psychological injuries are harder to get right and more consequential when you get them wrong. A worker returning from burnout, anxiety, or a workplace trauma claim faces a fundamentally different set of suitability considerations than someone recovering from a rotator cuff tear.

ISO 45003:2021 — the international standard on psychological health and safety at work — frames the return-to-work environment as a psychosocial hazard in its own right. The work design, supervisor behaviour, team dynamics, and workload of the suitable duties role all require assessment. Returning a worker with a stress claim to the same supervisor, the same team, and the same workload at reduced hours is not a suitable duties plan. It is a relapse waiting to happen.

Practical considerations for psychological injury RTW include: involving a treating psychologist in task selection, assigning a supportive contact person rather than the direct manager, starting with two to three days per week regardless of stated capacity for full-time work, and scheduling explicit debrief check-ins at 2, 4, and 8 weeks. Document every communication. Psychological injury claims have a higher rate of tribunal referral than physical claims, and contemporaneous records are your primary protection.

Common Mistakes and the Cost of Getting It Wrong

After 26 years of reviewing RTW files across manufacturing, mining, logistics, healthcare, and office environments, the same mistakes appear repeatedly.

✕Treating the RTW plan as an administrative compliance form rather than a clinical tool — plans signed and filed on day one, never reviewed.
✕Assigning hours without checking whether the worker can travel to work for those hours (a worker on 2 hours per day at a site 90 minutes from home is being asked to spend 4 hours travelling for 2 hours of work).
✕Not briefing the supervisor — the most damaging conversations in RTW happen in the first week, between the returning worker and a supervisor who was not told anything and makes a poorly judged comment.
✕Using "suitable duties" as a cost-reduction mechanism by keeping workers on reduced wages indefinitely rather than progressing the graduated return.
✕Failing to update the duties when the certificate of capacity changes — a worker cleared from 3 hours to 6 hours per day requires a plan amendment, not just a verbal instruction.

The cost of these failures is measurable. Workers who do not receive a timely, genuine suitable duties offer have claim durations that are, on average, 3.2 times longer than those who do, according to data published by Safe Work Australia. Longer claims mean higher premiums, higher indirect costs, and — most significantly — worse health outcomes for the worker.