Personally I read that title of Jesus in light of him being our ‘high priest’ (since we call all our priests ‘father’, and insofar as Jesus is the high priest above all priests, he certainly deserves that title too).
The relationship Jesus has with humans can also be considered ‘fatherly’ in another sense: that is, insofar as he is the new Adam (like Mary is the new Eve), and they (in a sense) ‘parent’ all Christians. While at the same time Jesus is also the Son and relates to us (the Church) from the position of spouse.
God is God, and when we humans try to understand our relationship with God (including with each person of the Trinity), lots of different images work (and no single image is necessarily ‘sufficient’). Insofar as Jesus is our high priest and all Christians are ‘fruit’ that he bears, he is like a father to us. Insofar as Jesus invites us to Communion with himself who is the bridegroom, he is like a husband to us. In other ways he is our brother.
None of these elements of the relationship between God and man take away from the fact that, in Himself (in the Trinity itself which precedes creation entirely), God is one God in three persons and their identity can be known as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Though Jesus (the Son) might in some ways aptly be called a father by us (because he is our high priest, though really we use other language at a much higher ratio than that), we usually keep terms distinct by saying ‘Father’ mostly when we mean God the Father. Not Christ as regards him technically being considerable as our ‘father’ in the sense of high priest obedient to the Father, or ‘father’ in the sense of the one who bears the fruit of Christians (since bearing fruit is a thing that fathers and mothers do). It’s much more typical (at least in my region) to simplify terms by referring to Christ as the high priest but not explicitly saying ‘father’ (so as to not be confusing), and mostly referring to Christ in his aspect of the bridegroom. But yeah it’s still fair for us to refer to Jesus as a ‘father’ in some senses (for the reasons given above; and maybe more that I’m unaware of), it’s just not that common.