Hybrid Working: The Big Considerations for SMB’s
Debbie Morrison • April 3, 2022

For the food & beverage and manufacturing industries, the COVID-19 pandemic created widespread challenges —everything from a surge in demand for food and beverage products, the manufacture and supply of packaging, raw materials and ingredients to staffing, distribution and logistics.


Rampant illness resulted in a reduction in workforces for many consumer goods organisations compounded the issues, forcing them to temporarily rely on untrained, unskilled workers or hire temporary help. Of course, this impacts efficiency, quality and potentially, food safety through mistakes in manufacturing or a potential lack of proper process controls, leading to higher risks, especially for food processing or manufacturing.


While close contact in food manufacturing environments is inevitable, social distancing is especially difficult on production lines where workers are typically within inches of each other. Measures like slowed production lines and socially distanced workers, whilst a feasible solution is difficult to maintain when high consumer demand pressures production facilities to operate at full capacity.


Manufacturing challenges aside, dispersed or remote working teams add another layer of difficulty to properly maintaining compliance with regulatory and best practice safety measures. Naturally, this throws up a range of safety, compliance and legal concerns for HR teams and business owners.


It’s been widely publicised and accepted that ‘hybrid’ work is predicted to continue, if not become the new norm. New COVID variants remain an ongoing risk, as such home working may well remain a critical safety measure for FMCG businesses. Moreover, employees increasingly value and expect some degree of working from home or flexible working at the least.


Given the continued pressures on businesses, there are a number of important factors start-ups and scale-up consumer goods companies must heed when making decisions around long-term hybrid-working, especially if they don’t have in-house HR or legal teams. Start-Up & Scale-Up FMCG Leaders need to be across a range of legal and HR regulatory and compliance requirements to successfully manage hybrid working over the long term.

 

The complexities of Industrial instrument restrictions on flexible work

Food & beverage manufacturers need to navigate the many industrial instruments that may restrict when and where work can be performed, when breaks must be taken and what amounts have to be paid to employees for work at different times. This adds a layer of complexity for hybrid working policies, which can make the retention of staff and casual workers challenging for executives and business leaders. Furthermore, attracting new employees can be difficult if restrictions that impact awards such as the Food, Beverage and Tobacco Manufacturing Award are not clearly communicated.

 

Cross-border hybrid work: The risks to compliance and insurance

For Australian FMCG businesses, it’s crucial to work closely with supply chain, distribution and 3PL partners in addition to managing employees working interstate or across jurisdictions since border restrictions create a number of challenges. Cross-border work, especially supply and distribution of goods or raw materials can impact state-based compliance requirements, including, for example, any changes regarding the jurisdictional coverage under discrimination and work health and safety laws and confirming the correct payroll tax and workers compensation arrangements are in place. 


According to a study conducted by Aberdeen Group, 45% of supply chain executives say that they are experiencing increased pressure for regulatory compliance and internal compliance to contracts. To avoid the risk of bad reputation, ethical or compliance issues with suppliers, organisations need to carefully assess their suppliers both new and existing since supply chain risks have a direct impact on the firm’s profitability according to 69% of supply chain executives. In addition, the ability to meet customer demand (54%) and supply disruptions (50%).

 

Avoid Hybrid-Working Prejudice

The flexibility afforded by hybrid working can be considered one way in which employers can meet some employee expectations when it comes to diversity and inclusion. However, Start-Up & Scale-Up consumer goods organisations that employ a mix of office and site-based staff need to navigate hybrid working with care to ensure the pros don’t become cons.


Having learned to live with COVID-19, the sense of a return to normality in recent months could see a swift move by consumer goods companies to mandate a return to the office. Physically present employees will feel like a boon for employers, however, employee attitudes have changed and for many office workers, that will not be welcome news. 

Navigating the tensions resulting from the paradox of low paid, casual staff who have had to work on-premise versus office workers who’ve enjoyed the flexibility of working from home needs careful handling by executives.


The COVID-19 pandemic put these casual workers in the front line, those in manufacturing, food and beverage production and retail were classified as essential. In contrast to office workers who could work from home, in effect protecting themselves from COVID-19 risk, many front-line workers had no choice but to work on site. HR leaders have been challenged to balance the safety and wellbeing of these workers while keeping them motivated and ensuring business continuity. 


Employer responses such as paying bonuses have been band-aid reactions at best. Whilst bonuses may help to motivate workers in the short-term, broader, more considered approaches from HR are required to avoid longer-term problems. For example, base pay has generally not improved for these workers according to a study by Corkery & Mahashwari,
2020). Furthermore, access to sick pay and better health insurance or support for health & wellbeing hasn’t improved, despite employees facing increasing workloads and greater exposure to COVID-19 as consumer demand continued to rise. Needless to say, the mismanagement of this can be costly. Employers should give consideration to how they can help to support employees return to the office rather than implementing blanket policies on a full-time return to the office.

 

Managing Health & Safety Remotely

The benefits of ‘hybrid’ work don’t come without risk. Employers often have much lower visibility and practical control of remote working environments, in addition, the excess work hours, stress, anxiety, isolation or loneliness all need to be considered.


It’s the responsibility of business leaders to proactively take the necessary steps to support employees working remotely, through the regular communication of health and wellbeing messages addressing risks to physical safety and mental health. 
 

Inclusivity and Wellbeing for remote staff

Whilst there are tangible benefits to hybrid-working, there is also the potential for unintended cultural consequences for teams who rarely interact in person. With employees and job seekers alike expecting greater efforts from employers to not only build diverse and inclusive company cultures but to empower and support the health and wellbeing of staff.
Ensuring employees feel connected and engaged has never been so important. Business leaders must proactively work to implement initiatives that bring employees together in ways that are meaningful and enjoyable for them. Setting aside the time and resources for public recognition, regular communication (especially for remote staff) and team building or social activities can help employees to feel included and valued. 


Whilst technology and collaboration tools can certainly be useful to help enable greater communication, the onus is on leaders to ensure the initiatives and practices are established in the first place, ensuring these tools are used effectively. The key to success here is flexibility. Giving employees a role in determining what initiatives are implemented and how they are managed is critical. Organisations should be cognisant of the desires and expectations existing employees and future generations have of workplace culture. Both are increasingly interested and perceptive of what organisations are doing to safeguard health and well being and promote diversity and inclusion in the workplace, especially in light of what has been termed the ‘Great Resignation’ and the current war on talent.


How ELR Can Help

At ELR Executive, we recognise that FMCG Start-ups and Scale-ups may not have the in-house HR and Legal expertise to safely navigate the complicated legal and compliance  regulations to properly manage and safeguard staff and themselves in a hybrid working environment over the longterm. We work closely with our partners to help them identify talent who are skilled in handling the complexities of human capital management for the consumer goods industry. 


If you’re interested in understanding how we can help develop a talent pool of future leaders, you can arrange a confidential discussion with one of our experts today by clicking this link '
chat'.

By John Elliott June 26, 2025
You don’t hear about it on the nightly news. There’s no breaking story. No panic. No protests. Just rows of vegetables being pulled out of the ground with no plan to replant. Just farmers who no longer believe there’s a future for them here. Just quiet decisions — to sell, to walk away, to stop. And if you ask around the industry, they’ll tell you the same thing: It’s not just one bad season. It’s a slow death by a thousand margins. 1 in 3 growers are preparing to leaveIn September 2024, AUSVEG released a national sentiment report with a statistic that should have set off alarms in every capital city: 34% of Australian vegetable growers were considering exiting the industry in the next 12 months. Another one-third said they’d leave if offered a fair price for their farm. Source: AUSVEG Industry Sentiment Report 2024 (PDF) These aren’t abstract hypotheticals. These are real decisions, already in motion. For many, it’s not about profitability anymore, it’s about survival. This isn’t burnout. It’s entrapment. Behind the numbers are people whose entire identity is tied to a profession that no longer feeds them. Many are asset-rich but cash-poor. They own the land. But the land owns them back. Selling means walking away from decades of history. Staying means bleeding capital, month by month, in a system where working harder delivers less. Every year, input costs rise, fuel, fertiliser, compliance. But the farmgate price doesn’t move. Or worse, it drops. Retail World Magazine reports that even though national vegetable production increased 3% in 2023–24, the total farmgate value fell by $140 million. Growers produced more and earned less. That’s not a market. That’s a trap. What no one wants to say aloud The truth is this: many growers are only staying because they can’t leave. If you’re deep in debt, if your farm is tied to multi-generational ownership, if you’ve invested everything in equipment, infrastructure, or land access, walking away isn’t easy. It’s a last resort. So instead, you stay. You cut your hours. Delay maintenance. Avoid upgrades. Cancel the next round of planting. You wait for something to shift, interest rates, weather, prices and you pretend that waiting is strategy. According to the latest fruitnet.com survey, over 50% of vegetable growers say they’re financially worse off than a year ago. And nearly 40% expect conditions to deteriorate further. This isn’t about optimism or resilience. It’s about dignity and the quiet erosion of it. Supermarkets won’t save them, and they never planned to In the current model, supermarket pricing doesn’t reflect real-world farm economics. Retailers demand year-round consistency, aesthetic perfection, and lower prices. They don’t absorb rising input costs, they externalise them. They offer promotions funded not by their marketing budgets, but by the growers’ margins. Farmers take the risk. Retailers take the profit. And because the power imbalance is so deeply entrenched, there’s no real negotiation, just quiet coercion dressed up as "category planning." Let’s talk about what’s actually broken This isn’t just a market failure. It’s a policy failure. Australia’s horticulture system has been built on: Decades of deregulated wholesale markets Lack of collective bargaining power for growers Retailer consolidation that has created a virtual duopoly Export-focused incentives that bypass smaller domestic producers There’s no meaningful floor price for key produce lines. No national enforcement of fair dealing. No public database that links supermarket shelf price to farmgate return. Which means growers, like James, can be driven into loss-making supply contracts without ever seeing the true economics of their product downstream. But the real silence? It’s from consumers. Here’s what no one wants to admit: We say we care about “buying local.” We say we value the farmer’s role. We share those viral posts about strawberries going unsold or milk prices being unfair. And then we complain about a $4 lettuce. We opt for the cheapest bag of carrots. We walk past the "imperfect" produce bin. We frown at the cost of organic and click “Add to Cart” on whatever’s half price. We’re not just bystanders. We’re part of the equation. What happens when the growers go? At first, very little. Supermarkets will find substitutes. Importers will fill gaps. Large agribusinesses will expand into spaces vacated by smaller players. Prices will stay low, until they don’t. But over time, we’ll notice: Produce that travels further and lasts less. Fewer independent growers at farmer’s markets. Entire regions losing their growing identity. National food security becoming a campaign promise instead of a reality. And when the climate throws something serious at us, drought, flood, global supply shock, we’ll realise how little resilience we’ve preserved. So what do we do? We start by telling the truth. Australia is not food secure. Not if 1 in 3 growers are planning to exit. The market isn’t working. Not when prices rise at the shelf and fall at the farmgate. The solution isn’t scale. It’s fairness, visibility, and rebalancing power. That means: Mandating cost-reflective contracts between retailers and suppliers Enabling collective bargaining rights for growers Building transparent data systems linking production costs to consumer prices Introducing transition finance for smaller producers navigating reform and climate pressure And holding supermarkets publicly accountable for margin extraction But more than anything, it means recognising what we’re losing, before it's gone. Final word If you ate a vegetable today, it likely came from someone who’s considered giving up in the past year. Not because they don’t care. But because caring doesn’t pay. This isn’t about nostalgia. It’s about sovereignty, over what we eat, how we grow it, and who gets to stay in the system.  Because the next time you see rows of green stretching to the horizon, you might want to ask: How many of these fields are already planning their last harvest?
By John Elliott June 20, 2025
If you're leading an FMCG or food manufacturing business right now, you're probably still talking about growth. Your board might be chasing headcount approvals. Your marketing team’s pitching a new brand campaign. Your category team’s assuming spend will bounce. But your customer? They’ve already moved on. Quietly. Like they always do. The illusion of resilience FMCG has always felt protected, “essential” by nature. People still eat, wash, shop. It’s easy to assume downturns pass around us, not through us. But this isn’t 2020. Recessions in 2025 won’t look like lockdowns. They’ll look like volume drops that no promo can fix. Shrinking margins on products that no longer carry their premium. Quiet shelf deletions you weren’t warned about. The data’s already there. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, consumer spending is slowing in real terms , even as inflation eases. The Reserve Bank confirmed in May: household consumption remains subdued amid weak real income growth . And over 80% of Australians have cut back on discretionary food spending , according to Finder. They’re still shopping, just not like they used to. A managing director at a national food manufacturer told me recently: “We won a new product listing in April. By July, it was marked for deletion. The velocity wasn’t there, but neither was the shopper. We’d forecasted like 2022 never ended. Rookie mistake.” That one stuck with me. Because I’ve heard it before, just in different words.