EXCLUSIVEPictured: Gender-fluid dress-wearing dachshund called Pablo who sparked lesbians transphobia legal battle with council that cost taxpayers £63,000
This is Pablo, the ‘gender-fluid’ dachshund at the centre of an 18-month long legal battle against a woke council, which has cost taxpayers more than £63,000.
This is Pablo, the ‘gender-fluid’ dachshund at the centre of an 18-month long legal battle against a woke council, which has cost taxpayers more than £63,000.
Lesbian social worker Lizzy Pitt was accused of voicing ‘transphobic’ views by her colleague, Gleicon Analha who is Pablo’s owner.
He chaired a Zoom call for LGBTQIA+ employees of Cambridgeshire County Council where he said he identified his dachshund as ‘gender fluid’, and put a dress on the animal to prompt debate about gender.
Pablo, or Pablo Vittar, to give him his full title, is named after a Brazilian drag queen of the same name who campaigned against the country’s right-wing former president Jair Bolsonaro.
The dashing dachshund even has his own Instagram account, where he can be seen wearing a colourful tutu, a glittering crown.
This is Pablo, the ‘gender-fluid’ dachshund at the centre of an 18-month long legal battle against a woke council, which has cost taxpayers more than £63,000
Lesbian social worker Lizzy Pitt was accused of voicing ‘transphobic’ views by her colleague, Gleicon Analha who is Pablo’s owner
Mr Analha chaired a Zoom call for LGBTQIA+ employees of Cambridgeshire County Council where he said he identified his dachshund as ‘ gender fluid’, and put a dress on the animal to prompt debate about gender
Brazilian-born Mr Analha, who is a young people worker on the council’s Targeted Support Team, complained about Ms Pitt’s comments, and that of another lesbian employee on the Zoom call.
In submissions for the case, he described Ms Pitt’s colleague, who also worked in the social work department declaring ‘Your dog is male’ in response to his claims about its gender fluidity.
He said the group was ‘silent and shocked’ and he felt it was an attack on his ‘personal choices and lived experiences’.
Mr Analha claimed the two women had made: ‘Some transphobic comments and this caused an emotional impact on the peer group.’
He recalled the incident in January 2023 in the employment tribunal documents: ‘I found a way to bring awareness regarding gender and sexuality through my dog via Instagram and informal conversation on the streets.
‘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 of voice, 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 total number of people on the Zoom call was eight, according to the documents in the case seen by MailOnline.
Mr Analha continued: ‘People mentioned that they were shaking, feeling threatened and horrified with the disrespectful comments.’
In an email to his bosses and the council’s HR team, he added: ‘We collected statements of the individuals; we want to take this further. All the LGBTQIA+ peer group agreed to share their statements and take this further.’
Later, he added: ‘Regarding the mental health impact, these transphobic and deeply hurtful attacks touch deeply my values, this is the second night that I couldn’t sleep thinking about the cruelty. This made me wake up overnight and use Saturday morning to write this email.’
The dashing dachshund even has his own Instagram account, where he can be seen wearing a colourful tutu, a glittering crown, and even representing the council at a Pride event, where visitors to the stall were offered ‘free glitter’
Pablo, or Pablo Vittar, to give him his full title, is named after a Brazilian drag queen of the same name who campaigned against the country’s right-wing former president Jair Bolsonaro
In submissions for the case, Mr Analha described Ms Pitt’s colleague, who also worked in the social work department declaring ‘Your dog is male’ in response to his claims about its gender fluidity
Ms Pitt and another lesbian colleague were reported for their really aggressive tone with views that were deemed to be non-inclusive and transphobic.
But when Ms Pitt was disciplined by bosses and banned from contacting members of the group or attending meetings, she took them to a tribunal for harassment.
Now, Ms Pitt has been awarded over £55,000 and won £8,000 in legal costs after a judge said records showed she suffered because of her gender-critical beliefs.
The tribunal in Cambridge also recommended that the council change its staff training to include a section on freedom of belief and speech in the workplace.
The hearing was told that during a Zoom meeting in January 2023, Mr Analha said he identified his dachshund dog as gender-fluid and put a dress on the dog to prompt debate about gender.
Ms Pitt responded - alongside a lesbian colleague of hers - by voicing gender critical views which others on the call found offensive.
One said she had a really aggressive tone and that he found it quite inappropriate that Ms Pitt and her colleague had been commenting on transwomen participating in womens sports and sharing womens spaces.
The panel heard it was clear from documentation from attendees that opinions voiced by Ms Pitt were seen as problematic.
They took issue with her nasty opinions and the council wrote to Ms Pitt in April 2023 to tell her that a formal concern had been raised, relating to some views she had expressed during the call which were perceived to be of an inappropriate and offensive nature.
At a meeting with bosses, she denied having been aggressive but accepted she could be quite direct.
When asked if she thought that was the appropriate place to discuss her views, she asked what the group was for, if it was not for that type of discussion?
On his LinkedIn bio, Mr Analha, who is also the council’s Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Committee Vice-Chair, says : ‘I grew up in Brazil seeing inequalities in my community, for example, on the same street millionaires houses and "favelas" made of cardboard, I have seen friends dying of transphobia..
‘In my spare time, if you dont see me in the parks, dancing, painting, running, you can see me advocating for LGBTQIA+ activism.’
Following her meeting with bosses, a report said comments by Ms Pitt had been perceived to be non-inclusive and transphobic, had caused significant offence and been particularly inappropriate and ill-judged.
She was told her comments had a detrimental impact on the mental health and well-being of the complainants.
Ms Pitt was then sent a written management instruction, in which she was told to act in a way which ensured her personal views and beliefs did not manifest themselves in comments or actions in the workplace that might discriminate against others on grounds of a protected characteristic.
Ms Pitt and another lesbian colleague were reported for their really aggressive tone with views that were deemed to be non-inclusive and transphobic
Mr Analha said the group was ‘silent and shocked’ and he felt it was an attack on his ‘personal choices and lived experiences’
She was asked not to contact any members of the LGBTQIA+ group or attend their events, and that the order was an informal stage of the councils disciplinary procedure.
This prompted Ms Pitt to raise a grievance and in response to her outcome, wrote: There is nothing in the grievance outcome that explains why it has been decided that there was an issue with the way my beliefs were expressed, so how has the conclusion on the expression of my beliefs been reached?
She did not receive an answer to her question.
Ms Pitt argued the councils reaction to her expression of gender critical beliefs amounted to harassment/direct discrimination.
The council accepted her gender critical beliefs amounted to a philosophical belief, but said it was the manner in which she and her colleague chose to promote their views that had been aggressive and confrontational by talking over people.
It was heard that Ms Pitts crowdfunded legal team wrote to the councils solicitors in July 2024, informing them they would be applying for costs.
The letter stated documents left no sensible room for doubt that Ms Pitts views had caused - in whole or part - the councils impugned conduct which amounted to discrimination or harassment because of her gender critical belief.
It concluded by inviting the council to admit liability for harassment because of [her] protected belief, and agreeing to a truncated hearing to deal with remedies only.
The panel heard on the first day of the final hearing in July 2024, the council admitted liability for harassment relating to Ms Pitts gender critical beliefs, as well as her sexual orientation.
Employment Judge Paul Michell said: We fully accept that on the face of the documents, [the council] had (at least) reasonable prospects of persuading the tribunal that [Ms Pitt] was treated as set out above in substantial part because of the perceived insensitivity of her raising her views in a forthright manner and in that forum; her being seen as being deliberately provocative (perhaps largely by association, because of her colleagues behaviour).
However, we agree with [Ms Pitts lawyer] that the contemporaneous documents unambiguously show that at least part of the reason for [Cambridgeshire County Council] impugned conduct was its response to the manifestation of her gender-critical beliefs.
He, therefore, awarded Ms Pitt £8,000 in legal costs.
Employment Judge Paul Michell awarded Ms Pitt £8,000 in legal costs. She was also awarded nearly £30,000 in loss of earnings and £22,000 compensation for injury to feelings which, with interest added, totalled £55,910
She was also awarded nearly £30,000 in loss of earnings and £22,000 compensation for injury to feelings which, with interest added, totalled £55,910.
He added: [We] recommend that [Cambridgeshire County Council] mandatory essential e-learning be revised to include a section on freedom of belief and speech in the workplace and that it be made available to all of [its] employees within the next six months.
The tribunal recommends that [Ms Pitt] be sent a copy of [this], and confirmation of the date that it was made available to the employees.
Following the outcome, Ms Pitt told supporters that she was delighted that the council accepted full liability and agreed to pay her compensation.
Ms Pitt, who raised £51,529 for her legal case on a crowdfunding page from 2,121 donations, said: It would be understandable if, when it came to it, the councils witnesses may have felt a bit queasy about the questions they were likely to face, and for clarity the above is the tip of the iceberg.
Lets hope that other employers will start to learn that its a bad idea to try to stop lesbians asserting their boundaries and silence staff who know that sex is real, and sometimes matters.
I thank everybody for the support you have given to me - I have lots of thank yous still to do; there have been 2121 donations to the fund - and this win belongs to all of us.
A council spokesman said: We strive to create a safe, inclusive and compassionate environment for people to work in and recognise this needs to be balanced with everyone being entitled to express their own views and beliefs.
We will reflect carefully on this final outcome, as well as undertaking a review of our policies and procedures accordingly.
Cambridgeshire County Council, Mr Analha – and Pablo – were contacted for comment.
