State employee? At the bottom: how to request flexible work or a disability accommodation, and where to turn if your request is mishandled.
Vermont state employees who regained more work-from-home time this summer could be called back to their offices at least three days a week after a Vermont Supreme Court ruling Friday, Sept. 25.
The unanimous decision, written by Justice Nancy Waples, upheld the Scott administration’s authority to impose the requirement under a telework policy the state and its employees’ union negotiated in 2012.
It reverses an April 1 Vermont Labor Relations Board order. That order required the state to:
drop the three-day rule
let affected employees return to their earlier telework schedules
offer reinstatement to employees who left because of the requirement
reimburse workers for resulting financial losses
The opinion itself sets no new return-to-office date. Employees will need instructions from the administration about what happens next.
What changed this summer
The requirement affected roughly 3,000 employees, about a third of the executive branch workforce. It took effect Dec. 1, 2025, after a Superior Court judge refused to block it, as Compass reported.
The labor board ruled against the administration in April. The state then asked to keep the three-day rule in place while it appealed. The board said no, and so did the Supreme Court.
The state rescinded the three-day standard on June 21, according to VSEA’s June 26 update. The union said some employees had returned to their previous schedules, while others were running into obstacles.
Friday’s ruling clears the way for the administration to restore the requirement. For employees who went back to working more days from home, that could mean another change in commuting and family arrangements.
What it means for taxpayers
The ruling overturns the board’s requirement to reimburse employees for financial losses caused by the three-day rule. In April, Scott’s office objected that the board’s order would ask Vermont taxpayers to pay for “commuting costs and other expenses.”
The labor board had already put the compensation requirement on hold on May 8 while the appeal proceeded. Friday’s decision removes that requirement in this case.
Office space is a separate expense. The state committed to a five-year, $2.3 million lease for 22,000 square feet at Pilgrim Park in Waterbury to accommodate returning workers, as Compass reported in April. That averages about $460,000 a year, or $1,260 a day over the lease term.
Why the court ruled the way it did
Both sides agreed that telework is a working condition subject to bargaining. The question was whether their existing agreement already allowed the state to impose the three-day requirement.
The 2012 agreement, known as Policy 11.9, makes telework voluntary and gives management “sole discretion” over approval. It also says either the employee or employer can end a telework arrangement “at any time, with or without cause.”
The labor board read the policy as giving department and agency leaders authority to make those decisions based on their operations. It concluded that the governor’s blanket requirement went beyond that agreement.
The Supreme Court disagreed. It found that the policy gave the state broad authority to approve, limit or end telework, and that the governor could exercise that authority directly. The policy guaranteed neither an existing work-from-home schedule nor approval of a new one.
The court also said the policy did not require the state to prove an operational need before ending a telework arrangement. It found Scott’s assessment of his administration’s needs reasonable, and said judging the wisdom of his decision was outside the court’s role.
The ruling therefore settles the authority question in this case. It does not establish that three days in the office will improve productivity or public services.
Because it reversed the board’s underlying decision, the court did not decide whether the board had exceeded its authority in ordering reimbursement and other remedies.
The positions behind the dispute
Scott has argued that more time in the office strengthens collaboration and service to Vermonters. His office said the three-day standard “balances the interests of state employees with Vermonters’ expectations and our goals for team collaboration and communication.”
VSEA challenged the administration’s right to impose a statewide requirement without further bargaining, and argued publicly that state offices lacked room for everyone being called back. “The governor cannot unilaterally change policies that have been bargained,” VSEA Executive Director Steve Howard told WCAX after the April ruling.
Friday’s decision rests on the court’s conclusion that the three-day requirement was allowed by the policy already negotiated.
If you’re a state employee seeking to work from home
Flexible working arrangement. Vermont law, 21 V.S.A. § 309, lets employees request changes such as working from home or adjusting their hours.
Employers must consider requests at least twice per calendar year, discuss them in good faith and communicate a decision.
Approval is not guaranteed.
Put your request in writing to your supervisor. If a written request is denied in whole or in part, the denial must also be in writing.
Disability accommodation. Working from home can be a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act, depending on the disability and the job’s essential duties.
Ask your supervisor or HR to begin the accommodation process.
The employer may offer another effective accommodation, and telework is not required if it would cause undue hardship.
The state’s telework process. Policy 11.9 provides a process for requesting telework but does not guarantee approval. Ask your supervisor or HR which forms and instructions apply following the ruling, or check humanresources.vermont.gov.
If you believe a request was mishandled. State employees can contact the Vermont Human Rights Commission at (802) 828-2480 about flexible-work procedures or disability discrimination.
A denial by itself does not establish a violation.
Union members can also contact their VSEA staff representative.
The Supreme Court expressly left compliance with the flexible-work statute outside this appeal.
Compass Vermont is independent and reader-supported.