In a case currently before the Federal Circuit and Family Court, a senior manager at supermarket chain Aldi is claiming that Aldi discriminated against him on the ground of sex by denying him access to parental leave and then allegedly reneging on a redundancy deal by bringing forward his date of redundancy.

Contents of claim

The manager is claiming that he agreed to a delayed redundancy date in 2024, with the deal to include an increased severance payment of 42 weeks’ pay. But he then applied for five months’ paid carer’s leave to be followed by three months’ paid and seven months’ unpaid parental leave. His wife had major complications with her pregnancy, including illness, for which he submitted medical evidence.

While awaiting Aldi’s response to the above, he was diagnosed with work-related stress. Eventually, he was told that the paid carer’s leave policy only applied to women who were pregnant and needed to take leave before giving birth. He was instead offered only the two weeks’ paid parental leave available to fathers, the reason being that he was not a “primary carer”. 

The manager is claiming that because Aldi’s policy did not specify that a primary carer had to be female, it discriminated against men who had to take on a primary carer’s role. He noted that when Aldi had recently updated its policy, it became a “parental leave” policy instead of a “maternity leave” one. 

Then, one month into his period of carer’s leave, Aldi brought forward the plans to restructure its business. It gave him three months’ notice of redundancy and said it would pay out the balance of his entitlement to six months’ notice. The manager claimed that his increased severance payment was reduced to 16 weeks on the basis that he was “not physically working” at the time. He claimed that if he had been allowed to return to work, he would have kept the extra severance pay, as other employees did so.

His claim against Aldi alleges adverse action and discrimination on the grounds of sex and family/carer’s responsibilities,. He is seeking compensation of $263,000 for economic loss plus $50,000 for damages and non-economic loss.

At the time of preparing this report, Aldi was yet to file a defence.

Michael Mason v Aldi Foods Pty Limited as General Partner of Aldi Stores (A Limited Partnership) MLG1674/2022

Mike Toten

Freelance Writer

Mike Toten is a freelance writer, editor and media commentator who specialises in research and writing about HR best practices, industrial relations, equal employment opportunity and related areas. Mike has over 30 years' writing experience, including writing and editing Human Resources Management