Sainsbury's Manager Awarded £12k After Being Excluded from Male Leaders Social Media Post
Sainsbury's Manager Wins £12k Over Social Media Exclusion

Sainsbury's Manager Awarded Nearly £12,000 in Landmark Tribunal Ruling

A veteran Sainsbury's store manager has been awarded compensation of £11,852 after an employment tribunal ruled he was subjected to unfair treatment when his boss deliberately excluded him from a social media post celebrating male leaders within the company.

"Excluded, Humiliated and Violated"

Darren Cooper, who managed the supermarket's Pontypridd branch in south Wales for over a decade, told the Cardiff tribunal that the omission from the November 2022 post left him feeling "excluded, humiliated and violated" while he was already on sick leave due to anxiety. The panel accepted his evidence and awarded him £7,500 specifically for injury to feelings.

Cooper had worked for Sainsbury's since 1993, telling the tribunal he effectively had "orange blood" in his veins after nearly three decades of service. He became manager of the Pontypridd store near Cardiff in 2010 and had overseen the branch for more than twelve years before going on sick leave in July 2022.

The Controversial International Men's Day Post

The dispute centered on a post shared by Cooper's regional director, Matt Hourihan, on LinkedIn and the company's internal Yammer platform. In the message celebrating International Men's Day, Hourihan stated he wanted to "celebrate the male leaders" across Sainsbury's stores in south Wales and England.

The post included photographs of every regional store manager who was named and tagged—except Cooper. When he later saw the post online while on leave, Cooper said the omission caused significant distress and led to "untold further damage" to his health.

He described the "angst" of having to respond to friends and colleagues who contacted him to ask whether he had left the company, compounding his existing anxiety issues.

Tribunal's Findings on Disability Link

The tribunal concluded that the decision to leave Cooper out of the post stemmed from what it described as the "conscious thought process" of his manager. According to the panel, this meant the treatment amounted to "unfavourable treatment because of something arising from disability."

Employment Judge Rhian Brace stated: "He gave statement evidence that he felt excluded, humiliated and violated by the post and that he had felt he had been excluded because he was absent." She added that it was reasonable for him, as a senior store manager, to feel humiliated in those circumstances.

The judge noted that nothing had prevented Hourihan from mentioning the post when speaking to Cooper the day before it appeared online, making the exclusion even more significant.

Manager's Defense and Tribunal's Response

Hourihan argued that Cooper had deleted WhatsApp and indicated he did not wish to be contacted while on leave, which led him to believe it would be inappropriate to include him in the post or ask for a photograph. He also claimed he did not have a picture of Cooper available to use.

While the tribunal expressed sympathy for Hourihan's position, it ultimately concluded that the decision still resulted in unfavourable treatment linked to Cooper's disability. The panel emphasized that the manager's actions, however well-intentioned, had discriminatory consequences.

Legal Outcome and Compensation Breakdown

After several discussions about returning to work, Cooper was dismissed by Sainsbury's in June 2023. He subsequently brought a comprehensive case against the supermarket giant alleging:

  • Disability discrimination
  • Harassment
  • Unfavourable treatment arising from disability
  • Unfair dismissal

The tribunal ruled in his favor on two key claims:

  1. Harassment related to disability
  2. Unfavourable treatment arising from disability

The £11,852 compensation award included:

  • £7,500 for injury to feelings
  • Additional amounts for other losses

However, the tribunal rejected Cooper's claims for direct disability discrimination and unfair dismissal, focusing specifically on the social media incident as the basis for their favorable ruling.

This case highlights the growing importance of inclusive communication practices in the workplace, particularly when using social media platforms that can have significant emotional impact on employees, especially those dealing with health issues.