In a decision of the employment tribunal in a case of philosophical belief discrimination involving a dachshund that was referred to as a “gender-fluid” dachshund, a judge recommended updating a council’s mandatory elearning to include training on ‘freedoms of belief.’
Cambridgeshire County Council has agreed to compensate Elizabeth Pitt, a social worker who was harassed and discriminated upon because of her gender-critical views and sexual orientation. The tribunal ordered that it pay PS8,000 for legal costs.
Pitt, a lesbian actress, was reported by the council after allegedly making transphobic comments during a meeting of the LGBTQIA+ Ally and Support Group held via Zoom last year.
One attendee began the meeting by explaining that his dachshund was gender-fluid. He said he dressed his dog in order to provoke a debate on gender. Pitt and her lesbian friend continued the conversation, allegedly exchanging “nasty” opinions in an “aggressive tone”.
CCC wrote the claimant a letter in April 2023 informing her that formal concerns had been raised regarding “some views” Pitt expressed and her colleague, which “were perceived to be inappropriate and offensive in nature”. It informed Pitt that a meeting was to be held “to listen to the views you have expressed”.
Pitt has denied that she was aggressive, but acknowledged that she can be direct. CCC management asked her if the meeting felt like a good place to share her opinions. She replied by asking what the group is for if not to have this type of discussion.
CCC published a report in June 2023 stating that it considered Pitt’s remarks “to be non inclusive and transphobic”, and they “caused serious offence”. The report said that Pitt’s comments were “particularly inappropriate and poorly judged” and “had a detrimental impact” on the mental wellbeing of the complainants.
CCC told Pitt, in writing, to “ensure that her personal views and belief did not manifest themselves as comments or actions at work that could discriminate against other people on the basis of a protected character”. She was asked not to speak with any members of the LGBTQIA+ or attend their events. CCC informed her that the instruction was part an informal phase of its disciplinary process.
Pitt filed a complaint in relation to this instruction. The tribunal heard the claimant write in response to the outcome of the grievance: “There’s nothing in the outcome that explains the decision that there was a problem with the expression my beliefs. So how has the conclusion been reached on the expression my beliefs?” She didn’t receive a substantive reply to this question.
CCC agreed that Pitt’s feminist beliefs were a philosophical one, but the way she and her co-worker promoted them was “aggressive” and “confrontational”, for example talking over others and not allowing them to speak.
The morning of the first hearing day in July 2024 the counsel for CCC informed the tribunal of its admission of liability for harassment related to the claimant’s gender-critical views, as well her sexual orientation.
With the approval of the tribunal, the parties used the remainder of the day to discuss the remedy. They agreed on the amount that the claimant should receive as well as the proposed terms.
In her submissions on whether CCC must pay legal costs, Naomi Cunningham for the claimant told the tribunal that CCC’s own documentation “makes it unmistakably clear that the investigation and investigation report, as well as the management instructions, were all motivated by the claimant’s manifestation of protected belief”.
She stated that “the central argument on which the respondent’s resistance to the allegation is based (i.e. The contemporaneous documentation of the respondent’s own contradicts its claim.
In judgement the tribunal determined that Pitt was successful in her claim that CCC’s behavior amounted harassment under section 26 Equality Act, relating to gender critical belief and sexual preference.
The parties agreed that CCC would pay Pitt 29.400 PS for the loss of gross income, plus 1.500 PS in interest, 22,000.00 PS for emotional injury, plus 2.200 PS interest, and 900 PS for counseling fees. The total was PS55,900. This is on top of a PS8,000 contribution towards Pitt’s expenses.
Training in freedom of belief
Paul Michell, Employment Judge at CCC, recommended that CCC’s mandatory online learning be revised so as to include a chapter on “freedom in speech and belief”. He suggested that Anya Palmer from the Employment Bar, who represented Maya Forstater’s landmark case on gender-critical beliefs, should draft this section.
He said that all CCC staff should have access to the training within six months.
A spokesperson for Cambridgeshire County Council stated that the council aimed to “create a safe, compassionate and inclusive environment for people to come to work and recognize this must be balanced while everyone is entitled to express their views and beliefs”.
He said: “We’ll reflect on this final result and review our policies and procedures in accordance.”
Subscribe to our weekly HR news and guidance
Every Wednesday, receive the Personnel Today Direct newsletter.
