Staff of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex

[Duke of Marmalade]

3rd nanny for Archie
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...by-Archie.html

[Curryong]

One supposed nanny was part-time, nights only, and one was seemingly incompetent. I'm glad they've found a person who seems ideal and can seamlessly fit into the Sussex family.

I like the query at the end of this report. 'Do you know this nanny?' Why? So the tabloid can find out something discreditable about this woman and publish it?

[alvinking]

Originally Posted by Duke of Marmalade

3rd nanny for Archie
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...by-Archie.html

What else is new here? Another article full with innuendos to drive a certain narrative. It is funny how these so called nanny have no name.

And even if this were true though I believe it is not, any parent has the right to retain the services of a person they feel confortable with. Further, at that early stage these supposedly first 2 employees were not nannies, but rather most likely neonatal nurses

[muriel]

Originally Posted by Duke of Marmalade

3rd nanny for Archie
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...by-Archie.html

A nanny is private staff, and I really do not believe this is for public consumption.

[Madame Verseau]

How can they assume this woman is the nanny? She could be head of the security detail. DM has earned the nickname the Fail.

[ACO]

Of course they are asking readers to ID her. Zero respect for privacy and yet folk surprised they wanted to keep the god parents a secret. This is why.

Also laughable they wrote a whole article about how amazing this nanny is and she is a godsend to Meghan while having zero clue who she is. They can keep that fiction.

[Zaira]

Originally Posted by ACO

Of course they are asking readers to ID her. Zero respect for privacy and yet folk surprised they wanted to keep the god parents a secret. This is why.

Also laughable they wrote a whole article about how amazing this nanny is and she is a godsend to Meghan while having zero clue who she is. They can keep that fiction.

They literally just make things up. It is insanity.

There is 0 reason we need to know information about their nanny or any royal nanny. Whoever she is, nanny or not, they need to leave her alone.

[muriel]

Originally Posted by Zaira

There is 0 reason we need to know information about their nanny or any royal nanny. Whoever she is, nanny or not, they need to leave her alone.

Very well said!

[Duke of Marmalade]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...eputation.html

Fiona Mcilwham the 'obvious choice' as Private Secretary, Royal sources claimed last night.

[hel]

Very positive article about the Sussex duo and their staff

https://www.townandcountrymag.com/so...l-female-staff

[Fijiro]

Originally Posted by hel

Very positive article about the Sussex duo and their staff

https://www.townandcountrymag.com/so...l-female-staff

Good article indeed. I'm look forward to launch of The SussexRoyal Foundation.

[Dman]

Harry and Meghan’s office moved to Buckingham Palace last week-
https://mobile.twitter.com/majestyma...26255410335745

[Fijiro]

Originally Posted by Dman

Harry and Meghan’s office moved to Buckingham Palace last week-
https://mobile.twitter.com/majestyma...26255410335745

That is good.

[Curryong]

This is excellent news. Apparently in some nice rooms too.

[Hallo girl]

I have read that Omid Scobie is quoting comments allegedly from Harry with regards his view on a nanny. ' not Mary Poppins' using a comparison to the nanny of the Cambridge family.
I do not know how reliable his reports are but comments like this do not help any ' feuds'.
I do not actually know who he is to be honest.

[O-H Anglophile]

Originally Posted by Hallo girl

I have read that Omid Scobie is quoting comments allegedly from Harry with regards his view on a nanny. ' not Mary Poppins' using a comparison to the nanny of the Cambridge family.
I do not know how reliable his reports are but comments like this do not help any ' feuds'.
I do not actually know who he is to be honest.

Nanny Maria has rarely worn her uniform over the past 5+ years she's been with the Cambridges, so that is silly and doesn't seem a valid issue. And if the Cambridges had had an issue with her wearing it, she probably would have worn street clothes like usual.

And Mary Poppins never wore a uniform.

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/author...7/omid-scobie/

"Omid Scobie is a London-based journalist and editor who has extensively covered the lives of the younger members of the British Royal Family for over seven years."

[Hallo girl]

Originally Posted by O-H Anglophile

Nanny Maria has rarely worn her uniform over the past 5+ years she's been with the Cambridges, so that is silly and doesn't seem a valid issue. And if the Cambridges had had an issue with her wearing it, she probably would have worn street clothes like usual.

And Mary Poppins never wore a uniform.

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/author...7/omid-scobie/

"Omid Scobie is a London-based journalist and editor who has extensively covered the lives of the younger members of the British Royal Family for over seven years."

I have only seen photographs of her in uniform at Charlotte's christening, the point I was making is that reports like this encourage the ' feud ' scenario and are not helpful.

[Pranter]

I read elsewhere Maria has only been seen wearing the uniform twice since she went to work for the Cambridges.



LaRae

[Countessmeout]

The other being Pippa's wedding interestingly enough. She was in street clothes for Harry and Meghan's.

Not that I believe the rumors, think its more feeding the feud, but if the comment was real I doubt it meant about the uniform. But more about the very traditional view of a nanny. Perhaps in response to not wanting a Norland nanny who may be seen by some as being more stiff and formal.

[Dman]

The uniform was worn during formal royal occasions. That’s just formal dress. It’s not worn all the time.