Steward Faces Unfair Termination After Sharing Personal WhatsApp Meme

Published : September 1, 2025

In Mr Gennaro Romano v Norwich City Football Club plc, a football steward has been awarded over £8,000 following a successful unfair dismissal claim. The employment tribunal found that he’d faced an unfair termination after he accidentally sent WhatsApp memes to a colleague instead of a friend.

In our latest article, we examine exactly what happened and discuss the employment tribunal’s decision. We then explore unfair dismissal, including what makes it unfair, and the steps those affected can take to seek justice.

If you believe you’ve experienced an unfair employment termination, contact Redmans Solicitors now. As specialists in the employment sector, our team can answer your queries and provide expert advice.

It only takes a moment to discover how we could help you, simply:

The Facts in Mr Gennaro Romano v Norwich City Football Club plc

Background to Unfair Termination of Employment

Mr Gennaro Romano (“the Claimant”) worked as a safety steward for Norwich City Football Club plc (“the Respondent”) from October 2011. He is of Italian ethnicity. Although there was no documentary evidence, the employment tribunal accepted that the Respondent promoted him to “section head” some years before the proceedings.

While this wasn’t his primary job, over time, the Claimant took on an increasing amount of work for the Respondent. He also had an impressive attendance record, having missed only two football matches in his 12 years of service.

Investigation into Alleged Inappropriate Messages

Issues arose on 25 September 2023, when the Claimant was invited to an investigation meeting. This was scheduled for 27 September and concerned “messages of an inappropriate nature” that he’d allegedly sent to a colleague.

During the meeting, the Claimant was asked whether he recalled sending a WhatsApp message to Mr Neil Hunter, Head of Academy Operations. The Claimant stated that he didn’t, prompting screenshots of two images to be revealed.

The first purportedly depicted Nicola Sturgeon, and the second Diane Abbott. Both contained crude sexual language referencing Russell Brand. For context, these images were shared at a time when Russell Brand was facing allegations of sexual assault, as reported in the media.

After understanding more about the message in question, the Claimant realised that he’d made a mistake. He explained that he’d received the images from a friend and intended to forward them to another friend, not realising he’d sent them to Mr Hunter. When asked why he wanted to forward the images in the first place, he stated that he found them funny.

As the meeting went on, the Claimant asked, “Are you saying I shouldn’t send these in my personal life?” He was then told that the Respondent wasn’t judging him and simply wanted to “understand the facts of the situation.” However, as it became clear to the tribunal, that is precisely what the Respondent was saying.

The meeting concluded with an acknowledgement that the Claimant had made a “genuine mistake.” Nonetheless, it was determined that a disciplinary hearing was appropriate due to “exacerbating factors.” It later turned out that these factors regarded the Claimant’s apparent lack of remorse for individuals who may consider his messages discriminatory.

Employment Tribunal Proceedings Brought Following WhatsApp Meme Dismissal

On 29 September, the Claimant was invited to a disciplinary hearing, scheduled for 5 October. When the hearing went ahead, there was a significant focus on his alleged lack of remorse during the investigation. The Claimant again asked whether the Respondent was stating that he couldn’t “forward things personally,” but a direct response wasn’t provided.

The Respondent then claimed that the images potentially constituted harassment and discrimination, including sexism, transphobia and racism. It also emphasised its view that the Claimant hadn’t shown a sufficient lack of remorse. The Claimant disputed this notion, though, stating, “I have shown remorse…“I will say it again, I am sorry. What I did was wrong…”

Despite this, the Claimant was dismissed, with a letter dated 9 October confirming the decision. The Respondent reasoned that there had been a fundamental breakdown of trust, emphasising the “discriminatory” nature of the messages. It further stated that a disproportionate amount of time had been spent discussing the mistake rather than the content itself, calling the Claimant’s integrity into question.

Believing he’d faced an unfair termination of employment, the Claimant appealed the decision on 23 October. Unfortunately, this proved unsuccessful when his appeal was dismissed on 6 November. Having exhausted all internal avenues, he then turned to the employment tribunal on 21 November, raising race discrimination and unfair dismissal claims.

The Employment Tribunal’s Judgment

Following the proceedings, the employment tribunal determined that the Claimant was an employee and brought his claim in time, satisfying the criteria to raise an unfair dismissal claim. It subsequently turned to assessing the merits of his claim, first looking at the Respondent’s justification for dismissal.

Tribunal’s Assessment of Unfair Termination

The tribunal held that the Respondent’s reason for dismissal was conduct, which is a potentially fair reason. It therefore looked to determine whether the Respondent acted reasonably and whether the Claimant’s conduct was a sufficient reason to dismiss him.

In addressing this, the tribunal looked at the Respondent’s decision-making process, which it found was “riddled with unfairness.” For starters, the Respondent asserted that the Claimant’s messages were potentially discriminatory and could amount to harassment.

Under the Equality Act 2010:

  • Discrimination occurs when someone is treated less favourably because of a protected characteristic, such as race, sex or age.
  • Harassment arises when a person is subjected to unwanted conduct related to a protected characteristic, which has the intent or effect of violating their dignity or creating an intimidating or offensive environment.

The tribunal determined that the accidental WhatsApp messages met neither of these definitions. It further ruled that the Claimant’s conduct didn’t amount to any form of gross misconduct set out in the Respondent’s disciplinary policy. Although the tribunal accepted that the list of misconduct wasn’t necessarily exhaustive, it held that the Respondent should have made its position clear if it intended the policy to extend with such an “Orwellian” reach.

But that’s not all. When deciding to dismiss the Claimant, the Respondent ignored his previous positive 12-year disciplinary record. Furthermore, it continuously focused on his apparent “insufficient remorse,” despite him repeatedly stating things like, “I will say it again, I am sorry. What I did was wrong, you can’t say I’m not sorry enough…”

Given these facts, the tribunal determined that the Claimant’s conduct didn’t amount to a sufficient reason to dismiss him, and the Respondent failed to act reasonably. It consequently upheld his unfair work dismissal claim.

Race Discrimination Claim and Compensation Award

The tribunal then swiftly rejected the Claimant’s race discrimination claim. It found that his confusion during the Respondent’s disciplinary process wasn’t due to English being his second language but rather because of the Respondent’s “inherently confusing” approach and questioning. Race, the tribunal concluded, played no part in the Respondent’s treatment of the Claimant.

In a subsequent remedy hearing, the Claimant was awarded a total of £8,299.72 for his successful unfair termination claim. His compensation consisted of a basic and compensatory award, in addition to four weeks’ gross pay. While the Claimant requested reinstatement in his role, the tribunal deemed that this wasn’t possible.

Understanding Unfair Termination and How to Challenge It

Unfair dismissal claims can arise in different situations, either because the reason for dismissal is unjust or because the process leading up to it was flawed. For example, a dismissal may be unlawful if an employee is dismissed due to a protected characteristic, such as pregnancy. Similarly, a dismissal may be unfair if the employer fails to follow a fair procedure, like skipping a proper investigation.

If an employee believes they have been dismissed unfairly, there are several steps they can take to seek justice. Firstly, it’s typically advised to explore internal options, such as appealing the employer’s decision through the company’s appeal procedures. If a satisfactory outcome cannot be reached, though, the next step is usually to engage in Acas early conciliation. This free and impartial service is mandatory before bringing an employment tribunal claim, and it provides both parties with the opportunity to resolve the dispute without incurring the costs or stress of litigation.

If, however, all other avenues have been exhausted, it may then be necessary to bring an unfair work dismissal claim. To do so, individuals must meet strict eligibility requirements and adhere to specific time limits.

If you’ve faced an unfair termination of employment or are being treated unfairly, reach out to us today. Redmans Solicitors are employment law specialists. Following a brief consultation, we can provide the answers you’re looking for and offer expert advice.

It only takes a moment to learn how we can help you, simply:

The information on this page is intended for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.