An incident involving a "gender-fluid" dog has cost taxpayers £63,000 after a social worker and another colleague referred to the pet as a male. The assertion left the dog's owner outraged, prompting him to file a formal complaint accusing the pair of "transphobia," which resulted in disciplinary action.
Elizabeth Pitt, a 62-year-old lesbian social worker, was subjected to harassment by her colleagues at Cambridgeshire County Council after she was accused of making "non-inclusive and transphobic" remarks about the dachshund owned by her colleague, Gleicon Analha, as reported by The Telegraph.
The incident occurred when Analha chaired a Zoom call of the authority's LGBTQ employee group last year. During the call, Analha dressed his dachshund in a dress to spark a "debate about gender." He claimed to the group that his dog was "gender-fluid."
Pitt immediately denied that Analha's dog was gender-fluid saying, "Your dog is male!" Another lesbian coworker agreed with Pitt and doubled down that the pooch is not, in fact, gender-fluid.
The pair reportedly proceeded to express gender-critical views, such as their criticism of trans-identified biological men competing in women's sports and using female-only spaces.
The comments resulted in Pitt receiving disciplinary action from managers.
However, the authority was forced to pay £63,000 in costs and compensation after it eventually acknowledged being liable for blatant discrimination based on her beliefs after Pitt filed a tribunal complaint.
Analha claimed in the complaint to the authority, according to documents reviewed by the Daily Mail, that the two women made several "transphobic comments" about his dog Pablo Vittar which "caused an emotional impact on the peer group."
The assertion that Pablo Vittar was a male, he said, left the group "silent and shocked," adding that it felt like a personal attack on his "choices and lived experiences."
"I found a way to bring awareness regarding gender and sexuality through my dog via Instagram and informal conversation on the streets," Analha said. "I identify my dog as gender fluid, and I actually enjoy speaking with people about human gender expression and how we - as a society - imprinted this in animals and culturally we repeat the gender expressions and stereotypes to the young generation."
"When the other employee stated, 'Your dog is male!' with a provocative and angry tone," he continued, "The group was silent and shocked. She ignored our previous conversation and I felt this was the first attack on my personal choices and lived experience."
The incident, he said, left people "shaking, feeling threatened and horrified with the disrespectful comments."
Management implemented a formal disciplinary action against Pitt.
In formal complaints filed against her, her comments were characterized as "offensive" and "nasty opinions," while another individual described her tone as "really aggressive."
Pitt was ordered to refrain from making "comments or taking actions in the workplace that might discriminate against others on grounds of a protected characteristic." She was also banned from contacting members of the LGBTQ group.
However, Pitt raised a complaint arguing that she was subjected "to harassment/direct discrimination" from the council based on her personal beliefs. An employment judge ruled in her favor and ordered the county council to pay her £30,000 in loss of earnings and £22,000 compensation for injury to feelings. The county council was also ordered to pay her £8,000 in legal fees.
Elizabeth Pitt, a 62-year-old lesbian social worker, was subjected to harassment by her colleagues at Cambridgeshire County Council after she was accused of making "non-inclusive and transphobic" remarks about the dachshund owned by her colleague, Gleicon Analha, as reported by The Telegraph.
The incident occurred when Analha chaired a Zoom call of the authority's LGBTQ employee group last year. During the call, Analha dressed his dachshund in a dress to spark a "debate about gender." He claimed to the group that his dog was "gender-fluid."
Pitt immediately denied that Analha's dog was gender-fluid saying, "Your dog is male!" Another lesbian coworker agreed with Pitt and doubled down that the pooch is not, in fact, gender-fluid.
The pair reportedly proceeded to express gender-critical views, such as their criticism of trans-identified biological men competing in women's sports and using female-only spaces.
The comments resulted in Pitt receiving disciplinary action from managers.
However, the authority was forced to pay £63,000 in costs and compensation after it eventually acknowledged being liable for blatant discrimination based on her beliefs after Pitt filed a tribunal complaint.
Analha claimed in the complaint to the authority, according to documents reviewed by the Daily Mail, that the two women made several "transphobic comments" about his dog Pablo Vittar which "caused an emotional impact on the peer group."
The assertion that Pablo Vittar was a male, he said, left the group "silent and shocked," adding that it felt like a personal attack on his "choices and lived experiences."
"I found a way to bring awareness regarding gender and sexuality through my dog via Instagram and informal conversation on the streets," Analha said. "I identify my dog as gender fluid, and I actually enjoy speaking with people about human gender expression and how we - as a society - imprinted this in animals and culturally we repeat the gender expressions and stereotypes to the young generation."
"When the other employee stated, 'Your dog is male!' with a provocative and angry tone," he continued, "The group was silent and shocked. She ignored our previous conversation and I felt this was the first attack on my personal choices and lived experience."
The incident, he said, left people "shaking, feeling threatened and horrified with the disrespectful comments."
Management implemented a formal disciplinary action against Pitt.
In formal complaints filed against her, her comments were characterized as "offensive" and "nasty opinions," while another individual described her tone as "really aggressive."
Pitt was ordered to refrain from making "comments or taking actions in the workplace that might discriminate against others on grounds of a protected characteristic." She was also banned from contacting members of the LGBTQ group.
However, Pitt raised a complaint arguing that she was subjected "to harassment/direct discrimination" from the council based on her personal beliefs. An employment judge ruled in her favor and ordered the county council to pay her £30,000 in loss of earnings and £22,000 compensation for injury to feelings. The county council was also ordered to pay her £8,000 in legal fees.
