Got fired from Papillon
Rianne Vogels faced trouble after a whistleblower sent a concerning email to her employer, who prioritizes equality as a core value and therefore cannot staff individuals who express non-binary hatred.
Papillon proceeded to terminate Vogels, leading her to claim wrongful termination once again.
This time, the case went to court, and she sought media attention ahead of the trial.
The case proceeded as a matter of freedom of speech, and the judges ruled that it was indeed wrongful termination.
As this was an open court, anyone can access the written verdict.
To verify the quotes we present, you can email hordaland.tingrett@domstol.no and request the verdict in the case Rianne Vogels vs. Papillon in 2023.
Vogels proudly announced her success in court, about winning against her employer.
The verdict emphasizes, 'Papillon relies on trust to fulfill its purpose.
Therefore, it is essential for Papillon that they do not alienate the groups they are targeting.
According to the court's assessment, it would be directly detrimental to Papillon's activities if they have individuals in their ranks who are perceived as prejudiced and non-inclusive.
Consequently, it would be highly negative for Papillon if their employees are perceived as transphobic.'
It further states, 'The court finds that the statements highlighted above, which may give the impression that Vogels is generally negative towards transgender people, could be detrimental to Papillon in the work this organization is to carry out, and the purpose they are to fulfill.'
Additionally, the court's assessment concluded, 'Overall, the court's assessment is that it was not clear to Vogels that her statements on Twitter were contrary to Papillon's interests and could be detrimental to the organization's work.
However, the court finds that she should have understood that her statements about gender identity could have implications for Papillon, and that Papillon could easily be associated with her personal opinions.
In such a context, Vogels should have exercised greater caution in how she expressed herself on Twitter.'
Individuals present in court on the last day of the trial confirmed that the initial demand was over one million NOK in damages, which was abruptly reduced to 'whatever the court saw fit', of which she was awarded 60,000 NOK.
Although we lack information about any prior dealings, apart from what is revealed in the written verdict, it is plausible that Papillon might have been willing to pay Vogels more than 60,000 NOK to avoid being tied up in court.
The verdict states, 'The court agrees that the employee (Rianne Vogels) could be perceived as unwilling to adjust her behavior on social media or moderate her statements in the debate on gender identity.
Statements from Vogels' lawyer in a letter dated March 8, 2022, seemingly leave little room for compromise.
It is stated that a solution can only occur in two ways: either the employer acknowledges and respects Vogels' freedom of expression,
including apologizing and restoring what she has been subjected to after exercising her freedom of expression in matters of societal interest, or the parties discuss the terms of a termination agreement.
This can undoubtedly be perceived as an ultimatum.'
This statement suggests that Rianne Vogels might have sacrificed this nonprofit organization to draw attention to her 'battle' and highlight the trans-debate,
as she mentioned in an interview with Norwegian TV2:
I'm happy to have been successful. The trial has put a bigger problem on the map.
