United Workers' Union v Origin People Pty Ltd T/A Padre Coffee

[2025] FWC 1769

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order

United Workers' Union

Origin People Pty Ltd T/A Padre Coffee

(B2025/962)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT HAMPTON

ADELAIDE, 24 JUNE 2025

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Origin People Pty Ltd T/A Padre Coffee

This is an application by the United Workers’ Union (UWU or Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Origin People Pty Ltd trading as Padre Coffee (Padre Coffee or Employer).

On 23 June 2025, the Commission was advised that the Employer did not object to the Application.

One of the original ballot questions in Clause 5 was amended from the proposed order by the UWU following statutory matters being raised by the Commission. I observe that the Employer, in effect, reserved its rights in relation to that revised question.

In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matter on the papers without holding a hearing.

On the basis of the material before me, including the declaration of Fin Mulveney, Organiser, setting out the steps taken by the UWU in bargaining with the Employer and that it has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach agreement with Padre Coffee, I am satisfied that there is a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement and that all of the requirements in s.443(1) of the Act have been met.

The ballot is to be conducted by the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC).

For the purposes of s.443(3)(c) of the Act, the Commission has determined that the date by which voting is to close is 6 August 2025.[1] This also establishes the ballot period for the purpose of s.448A(2) of the Act.

An Order has been separately issued in PR788478.

This matter will be assigned to another Member of the Commission to conduct the s.448A compulsory conciliation conference. That Member will issue an Order requiring the attendance of all bargaining representatives for the proposed enterprise agreement at the conference. It is likely that Directions will also be issued to ensure that the parties attend the conference ready to conduct meaningful negotiations.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

[1] This is, in effect, 30 working days from the making of the Order and was the period sought in the application.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of United Workers’ Union versus Origin People Pty Ltd trading as Padre Coffee, the Fair Work Commission (FWC) was presented with an application for a protected action ballot order. The United Workers’ Union (UWU) sought this order under Section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 for specific employees of Padre Coffee. Notably, the employer did not object to the application, and one of the original ballot questions was amended following statutory considerations raised by the FWC. The employer, however, reserved its rights concerning the revised question.

The legal issues the court needed to decide revolved around whether the UWU had met the notification time for the proposed agreement and if all requirements under Section 443(1) of the Fair Work Act were fulfilled. The UWU's declaration, stating their genuine efforts to reach an agreement with Padre Coffee, was central to the decision. The court had to ensure that the notification period was appropriate and that all procedural requirements were adhered to for the ballot to proceed.

The Deputy President of the FWC concluded that the UWU had indeed satisfied the notification time requirement and fulfilled all necessary conditions under the Act. The decision to determine the matter on the papers without a hearing was based on the employer's non-objection and the UWU's declaration. The Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) was tasked with conducting the ballot, with voting to close on August 6, 2025. This decision also triggered the initiation of a compulsory conciliation conference under Section 448A of the Act, which would be handled by another member of the FWC.

The FWC issued an order setting the ballot period and assigning the conciliation conference to another member. This order, PR788478, mandated the attendance of bargaining representatives for the proposed enterprise agreement. The court's final order ensured that the parties would be ready for meaningful negotiations, likely accompanied by specific directions to facilitate this process.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established