Battle of Brothers: William, Harry and the Inside Story of A Family in Tumult

[UglyAmerican]

Right, the question of "why Harry would allow Meghan to allegedly treat people like this" is almost more unsettling than the idea of Meghan being so destructive.

Keeping in mind that we have no idea whether any of this is true... I have to say that at this point, if Meghan told Harry that the sky was orange and the grass was purple, and that those saying otherwise were just trying to gaslight him and turn him against her because they're racist, he might believe it. I'm sure he thinks either that the allegations are lies, or that whatever Meghan did was justified by whatever the staffer did. And maybe there's some truth to that position - we don't know.

 

[ACO]

No, bullying is often quite difficult to prove as it takes place in private or in front of people who are not that high ranking and dont want to back up accusations because they are afraid themselves. It can be very insidious and create a climate of fear and it is often not investigated properly...
As for the "eamils at 5 am" in themselves, tehy are not bad, but if they were followed up by someone yelling "I send you an eamil at 5 am and you didn't respond by 5.30 am".. "or "why didn't you reply to my email.. " yes it is unreasonable and bad behaviour.

Disagree. People in this book are being quoted in called her a sociopath and saying she made the working environment hostile. There would absolutely be proof in that. People don’t become that way overnight. Most people who have these types of allegations about them will have displayed this in many ways and evidence would be collected. It’s just is especially with someone high profile surrounded by many. So I don’t buy into that and eventually people will start digging.

 

[Muhler]

Do you think those who have allegedly been bullied by Meghan - and judging from the latest revelations - also to a varying degree by Harry, will feel inclined to go public and tell their stories in details? Simply because they now feel they may have a sort of "official" backing.
And what would be the result of that? - After all, as has been pointed out, some of these people are highly respected and in positions of prominence.

This surely will worsen the relationship between H&M and William in particular?

It seems to me that the BRF have decided to counter attack, using means that are similar to those of H&M.
We can debate whether that's a wise move in the long run, but if the BRF are going to war on H&M, H&M will lose, unless they have irrefutable evidence to back up their allegations.
It's a question of credibility and recurses, as I see it.
How is W&K's (in particular) public credibility in comparison to H&M?
On whose side is the British press in particular? Well, as I see it H&M have seriously alienated the British press corps.
The BRF has a seriously competent PR corps behind them, with the opportunity and means and contacts to drum up even more recurses.
Backed by leading politicians who are not at all interested in seeing the foremost representatives of UK being time and time again accused of racism and general unpleasant behavior.
Supported by a press corps who want payback.

The battle of the public in Britain is IMO lost. H&M may appeal to hardcore fans of H&M and to de fault detractors of the monarchy/BRF. But for the rest? The best H&M can hope for is indifference.
The battle for the public in USA is slightly more open in my assessment. There is a fanbase in USA. There are quite a few who will react in support of claims of racism - almost by default in some cases.
As for the rest, who cares that is, it's again a question of credibility IMO.
The average American cannot be expected to know the details or the intricacies of how the BRF works, so it's down to who do they believe in? H&M or the BRF.

As for the European public, especially the monarchies. H&M haven't tried to win over the public there and it's my impression that the press coverage on the Continent has gone from very positive and even some sympathy of H&M's allegations, to at best indifference. The positive stories with H&M in the papers are few now. While the rest of the BRF continue to deliver, quietly.

I cannot speak for other monarchists on the Continent, but to me H&M have turned into a horror-story on several levels! Into something I would hate and fear should happen to my own royal family.

 

[Denville]

Disagree. People in this book are being quoted in called her a sociopath and saying she made the working environment hostile. There would absolutely be proof in that. People don’t become that way overnight. Most people who have these types of allegations about them will have displayed this in many ways and evidence would be collected. It’s just is especially with someone high profile surrounded by many. So I don’t buy into that and eventually people will start digging.

Im not going to argue as I can see the thread being closed agian, but as someone who has been bullied in a workplace, I disagree.

 

[Prinsara]

Whether the serious allegations are true or not, we know for a fact Meghan deliberately and by choice joined the family and The Firm without knowing what she was getting into.

Had she done some homework and come prepared, the idea of treating the staff very badly would seem to have far less traction.

 

[Denville]

Whether the serious allegations are true or not, we know for a fact Meghan deliberately and by choice joined the family and The Firm without knowing what she was getting into.

Had she done some homework and come prepared, the idea of treating the staff very badly would seem to have far less traction.

I'd hope that no-one would marry a royal with the idea that they could be tough with the royal staff.

 

[Sandy345]

It should not be assumed that Meghan is "guilty." There was tension between the two couples. And before that Will and Harry did not always get along (even before they chose their respective spouses). I think had Diana been around, she would have had words with both her sons when they went through phases of not getting along. There was also tension before the Meghan and Harry wedding because William apparently wanted to break them up. ANd if this allegation of "bullying" took place at all, wouldn't there be some mediation by the Queen herself rather than "courtiers" rushing to the media to complain. Something off about this. It seems to me that if peace was to be restored and resolutions to conflict, the courtiers would not be permitted to leak stories to the media. I don't believe she treated the staff "badly," there are people she had worked for who said she never "bullied' people. Why is it assumed that Meghan is "guilty." The allegation of Kate saying Meghan had an agenda, does not say much good about Kate. I agree about earlier posters that the two couples should not have been expected to be "teamed." I think there is enough work to go around so couples don't have to team up. If there had been tension, I think the separate venues should have been setup sooner rather than later.

 

[Heavs]

Whether the serious allegations are true or not, we know for a fact Meghan deliberately and by choice joined the family and The Firm without knowing what she was getting into.

Had she done some homework and come prepared, the idea of treating the staff very badly would seem to have far less traction.

Hmm. I don't know. I think it depends on the person themselves and not whether or not they'd done their homework. I think someone who was truly unprepared but willing to learn would realise that treating staff with basic politeness was a good idea, even if they were lost, scared and suffering. Anyone should realise that screaming at subordinates is being a terrible boss, especially if they're basing their brand on kindness and compassion.

We know from Finding Freedom that Meghan and harry dismissed what advice they were given as wrong for them and in this book's previous edition Lacey blamed William for not coddling Harry and HM for not giving Meghan what she deserved.

Personally the fact that Scobie (with their permission) acknowledged every petty article about them was *true* but in such a way that they were allegedly completely innocent and everyone else was in the wrong is actually making this seem more likely.

And especially as we know a lot staff *did* leave during their 18 months working in the BRF and a lot of staff have continued to leave now they're on their own and in control of their own projects to their hearts' content. That part has nothing to do with the BRF. Although we don't know exactly why they left.

And the fact that the BRF has now called in an outside law firm to conduct an investigation. IF it was just completely made up smears I don't think they'd do this. How true everything is or how serious is yet to be determined but presumably they can prove all the accusations started in 2018.

 

[Sandy345]

I don't think William ever coddled Harry. Or was expected to. He should have stayed out of "advising" Harry unless it was called for. This is lethal to fraternal relationships in a lot of households. I think there should be an investigation as to why the courtiers got away with leaking these stories to the media. And not target Meghan specifically. The media seemed to be anti Meghan in many cases before Meghan had a staff to work with. And it got to the point she was accused of changing the engagement ring, until it was found that Harry redesigned the ring. I think there is a lot of blame to go around here.

 

[Moran]

If the whole thing is true - and we can assume it all started in 2018 - the RF doesn't look good at all. It failed to defend staffers from a member of the RF going giddy with what she perceived as her new power. It's true that they could hardly fire Meghan as a duchess and if they had tried something to rein her in, she would have cried racism and Harry would have backed her up but still... I can't believe there was no other way but protecting her and letting her go on. Again, IF this is true. I can't wait how Lacey is going to spin it as everyone else's fault but Harry and Meghan's.

The idea that she was the soul of cooperation at her workplace before, so this automatically absolves her as a bully in her new position doesn't wash with me. She was never the boss before. She was expendable. Never the star with star power. Of course she'd be nice! Don't tell me I'm the only one who have seen people making mooneyes at the big bosses they work with and shout at the staff who actually arranges the transactions between them and the big boss? Kind to the boss, horrible to the underling is a sad classics.

Emails at 5 am is a ludicrous reason for calling someone a bully. But that isn't the only allegation agains Meghan. And anyway, I have worked with people who called me at 10 p.m. and expected to have something done immediately because they were the assignors. We quickly parted ways because I was a freelancer, not a servant. They laboured under the delusion that they were my bosses. I happen to know some people to whom they were real bosses. I was friends with them. None of them lasted long because these expectations of night work were exhausting - and they weren't the only problem.

An email at 5 a.m. can be nothing or a problem. I suppose we'll see what it was here.

 

[Sandy345]

The Queen needs to just stop any trials from happening or starting or any investigations of her granddaughter in law and grandson. ANd sides would be taken among the public which would not be a good thing. She abruptly stopped the Burrell trial which was IMO wise on her part. It seems to me the trial would degenerate into a he said she said trial. With accusations tossed back and forth. What would she "yell at" for one thing, how can they "prove it." I don't think she's a bully, otherwise there would have been a long list of accusations against her. She did have "bosses" as an actress, the directors give orders to the actors and actresses as does the producer. They can hire and fire and replace actors and actresses. The problem or root of it is that William did not want Harry to marry her and there probably was resentment. I think if the allegations about Kate complainingabout Meghan are true, it is not a good look for Kate. If it had been a "family squabble," the Queen and Prince of Wales should have intervened and separated them. The two couples were expected to be relatives AND co-workers, which perhaps was too much to ask.

 

[Denville]

Truth is that bullying is somethning that hasn't been taken as seiriously as it should, in hte past.. and companies and organisations dont usually want to tackle it. It can b e hard to prove and since it is usually managers doing it, of course management are not all that keen to investigate it.
in the royal households, staff aren't paid that well, so they probably often move on and of course the bosses ARE royal and used to sycophancy and getting their own way, so its quite likely that bullying or difficult behaviour wasn't tackled all that well. As you say, you can't really sack a Prince or Princess.. and they are probably only now working out ways of dealing with them throwing their weight around.

 

[Sandy345]

Does not a courtier supervise the staff?Apparently Charles has put Michael Fawcett in charge of his household and does the planning and supervision of events and receptions for the Prince of Wales. Charles would not be around doing all the supervision of staff for example. He delegates.

 

[Denville]

Does not a courtier supervise the staff?Apparently Charles has put Michael Fawcett in charge of his household and does the planning and supervision of events and receptions for the Prince of Wales. Charles would not be around doing all the supervision of staff for example. He delegates.

What has this to do with allegations of bullying.

 

[Sandy345]

A lot. Because it seems odd that Meghan would be supervising staff without an intermediary or a courtier to advise and give orders to the staff.

 

[Denville]

A lot. Because it seems odd that Meghan would be supervising staff without an intermediary or a courtier to advise and give orders to the staff.

Im not sure what you mean. Royals deal directly with staff and some of these rows seem to have been iwht very senior staff.. who would be working closely with tehir royal.. not the young woman who opens the post.....

 

[Sandy345]

I am curious, and I read stories of Diana when she started out in the family. She had a lady in waiting to guide her as far as protocol with staff and it seemed that Charles supervised the staff instead of Diana. Were these staff members secretaries in Meghan's case or did they do other things like prepare menus for dinner?

 

[Heavs]

The Queen needs to just stop any trials from happening or starting or any investigations of her granddaughter in law and grandson. ANd sides would be taken among the public which would not be a good thing. She abruptly stopped the Burrell trial which was IMO wise on her part. It seems to me the trial would degenerate into a he said she said trial. With accusations tossed back and forth. What would she "yell at" for one thing, how can they "prove it." I don't think she's a bully, otherwise there would have been a long list of accusations against her. She did have "bosses" as an actress, the directors give orders to the actors and actresses as does the producer. They can hire and fire and replace actors and actresses. The problem or root of it is that William did not want Harry to marry her and there probably was resentment. I think if the allegations about Kate complainingabout Meghan are true, it is not a good look for Kate. If it had been a "family squabble," the Queen and Prince of Wales should have intervened and separated them. The two couples were expected to be relatives AND co-workers, which perhaps was too much to ask.

There aren't going to be any trials happening from this. The investigation is so that they know what to change and how to implement it so that a member of staff has a safe way of complaining against a member of the family who isn't an employee per se.

Sides are already being taken by the public and that's not a good thing but that isn't all on the BRF and it's inevitable at this point. The BRF comms teams did try and put out "everyone's fine and just getting on with the next stage in their lives" at the time this was going down.

There are rumours about her behaviour before she married Harry, they're not on topic but they're out there. Of course we should definitely all take these with a pinch of salt. There were a lot of rumours about Harry's behaviour as well and he chose to confirm some of that with admitting being out of control angry and heavily using and drinking so I can believe he would scream at staff.

I suppose they can't prove anything unless anyone has it on tape but if enough people describe a "toxic environment" and can back up their claims with details and witnesses then the palace has to take them serious, as does the law firm investigating.

William allegedly did recommend Harry slow down for reasons that Meghan and Harry have both admitted were problems for them, that she wasn't prepared for everything in her life to be different in a very short space of time. Maybe both let that fester but the excerpt makes it clear that the dossier of complaints against Meghan and Harry were brought to William and after confronting Harry where Harry blew up, William decided he didn't want to share an office any more. He had to take a dossier full of complaints seriously whether they were about Meghan or anyone else. The fact that this got hushed up and there was no actual mechanism to complain about a BRF member is a bad look for KP.

We don't know if Charles or HM got involved at all but it was clearly not just a family squabble at this time, it was affecting staff, apparently severely.

If the whole thing is true - and we can assume it all started in 2018 - the RF doesn't look good at all. It failed to defend staffers from a member of the RF going giddy with what she perceived as her new power. It's true that they could hardly fire Meghan as a duchess and if they had tried something to rein her in, she would have cried racism and Harry would have backed her up but still... I can't believe there was no other way but protecting her and letting her go on. Again, IF this is true. I can't wait how Lacey is going to spin it as everyone else's fault but Harry and Meghan's.

Well according to the details in the excerpt Harry did call racism and refuse to listen so I assume Meghan was doing the same. We've heard from the Sussexes that at this time "everything started to change" and it's clear from their POV (although they didn't mention the allegations) that they weren't in the mood to listen to advice or censure. And that their staff were incompetent or refusing to help them. It just seems like a mess all around and I don't assume William was perfect in how he handled everything either.

Does not a courtier supervise the staff?Apparently Charles has put Michael Fawcett in charge of his household and does the planning and supervision of events and receptions for the Prince of Wales. Charles would not be around doing all the supervision of staff for example. He delegates.

They interact directly with a lot of their staff, even if the staff member also has a boss. Like anyone in a department might be in a meeting with the head. But a lot of the people who left during the 18 months they were working there were the top people who would have been answering directly to Meghan or in close quarters with her all the time like the female PPO.

 

[Sandy345]

William did not tell Meghan to "wait" he told Harry. So apparently there was no direct interaction between William and Meghan where he gave her advice. William also was not specific on how long he wanted them to wait (though it was not his call). Why were the complaints brought to William and not to Charles, the Prince of Wales and in a higher echelon than William? I think this was something for Charles and HM to do not William. I think there were too strong emotions between William and Harry and I think their father and grandmother should have gotten involved.

 

[Denville]

Perhaps not. But royals are more likely to get away with bad behavour. THey can't be fired and if they dont take a polite hint that their behaviour is unkind and unfair, its not easy to go further is it? But In today's world I think that the RF accept that they have to, that the days of royals throwing their weight around have to be in the past. And I think that the queen in particular is polite to staff because she knows that they have less redress and that royal staff are not paid all that well.. and so i can imagine that she would tell off any family member trhowing a fit at a member of staff whether high or low....

 

[UglyAmerican]

Legal question: Presumably all the staff signed NDAs. The way this usually works in the US is that the other party to that agreement can release the person from that agreement, and then they can talk all they want. Is it the same in the UK? And if so, who is the other party - the Queen, the Royal Family as an institution, or the individual royal who supervised that person? I can see this being an issue in the future...

 

[Denville]

Legal question: Presumably all the staff signed NDAs. The way this usually works in the US is that the other party to that agreement can release the person from that agreement, and then they can talk all they want. Is it the same in the UK? And if so, who is the other party - the Queen, the Royal Family as an institution, or the individual royal who supervised that person? I can see this being an issue in the future...

if there is an in house legal investigation I cna't imagine that people are not allowed to talk about what happened ot them, because of NDAs. there wouldn't be much point in investigating bullying if the alleged victims could not be frank

 

[Leopoldine]

Tales of bullying and erratic behavior of royals sell books. My shelves are brimming with books about the BRF, some well-written and some not, and they all contain stories about Charles, Diana, Sarah Ferguson and Andrew acting completely unreasonable with staff. Yelling, screaming, throwing things, all written about by various so-called "royal experts." I take all of the stories, including the Sussex ones, with a grain of salt.

"The Housekeeper's Diary" by Wendy Berry provides some clues as to why a BRF member might get angry -- apparently, staff at Highgrove sat around the staff lounge for hours drinking Charles's wines and liquors while whispering about their employers! If they worked for me, I'd be throwing a few dishes myself.

 

[Moran]

No matter what the result of the bullying investigation is, one thing is clear: Meghan abused the NDAs her former staff signed. She told Janina that a member of the staff had been sacked for being unprofessional - while this person couldn't retaliate because of the NDA. And this didn't come from a palace source, it came from a friend she had authorized to defend her. To me, it's clear that Meghan has problem recognizing ethics in the workplace. She might be legally entitled to share but I, personally, find it unethical to throw names to friend. This doesn't mean she bullied staff but I won't be surprised if it turned out that she did.

Still, I wonder why Lacey, of all people, decided to include this in his book. A rift between him and Harry and Meghan? A polite warning that he'd no longer be a privileged royal historian if he went up like this? An excerpt published without the follow up which makes it all someone else's fault? In the way The Times presented it, it doesn't jive with what we've seen of him this far.

Anyway, the "William authorized a friend to speak" does denote, IMO, a step away from the "never complain, never explain" strategy the RF had been employing this far. They have the best PRs at their disposal so it certainly wasn't an accident. Perhaps the BP has decided to fight fire with fire? But even so, why would they chose Lacey, with his bias towards Harry and Meghan?

 

[Denville]

No matter what the result of the bullying investigation is, one thing is clear: Meghan abused the NDAs her former staff signed. She told Janina that a member of the staff had been sacked for being unprofessional - while this person couldn't retaliate because of the NDA. And this didn't come from a palace source, it came from a friend she had authorized to defend her. To me, it's clear that Meghan has problem recognizing ethics in the workplace. She might be legally entitled to share but I, personally, find it unethical to throw names to friend. This doesn't mean she bullied staff but I won't be surprised if it turned out that she did.

Still, I wonder why Lacey, of all people, decided to include this in his book. A rift between him and Harry and Meghan? A polite warning that he'd no longer be a privileged royal historian if he went up like this? An excerpt published without the follow up which makes it all someone else's fault? In the way The Times presented it, it doesn't jive with what we've seen of him this far.

Anyway, the "William authorized a friend to speak" does denote, IMO, a step away from the "never complain, never explain" strategy the RF had been employing this far. They have the best PRs at their disposal so it certainly wasn't an accident. Perhaps the BP has decided to fight fire with fire? But even so, why would they chose Lacey, with his bias towards Harry and Meghan?

I read some of the book last year and it all seemed to be blaming William (and others ) for All of Harry's problems... so this seems to be a change

 

[Prinsara]

But even so, why would they chose Lacey, with his bias towards Harry and Meghan?

Possibly because giving this story to someone who supported Harry and Meghan makes it look better than giving it to someone who's been against them all along.

 

[Sandy345]

Tales of bullying and erratic behavior of royals sell books. My shelves are brimming with books about the BRF, some well-written and some not, and they all contain stories about Charles, Diana, Sarah Ferguson and Andrew acting completely unreasonable with staff. Yelling, screaming, throwing things, all written about by various so-called "royal experts." I take all of the stories, including the Sussex ones, with a grain of salt.

"The Housekeeper's Diary" by Wendy Berry provides some clues as to why a BRF member might get angry -- apparently, staff at Highgrove sat around the staff lounge for hours drinking Charles's wines and liquors while whispering about their employers! If they worked for me, I'd be throwing a few dishes myself.

Charles late, ex valet, Stephen Barry wrote of some behind the scenes drama as well. Though Wendy's book was only sold outside the UK.

 

[Denville]

Possibly because giving this story to someone who supported Harry and Meghan makes it look better than giving it to someone who's been against them all along.

But the stories have been out there for a while. Presumably Lacey has taken it on board....has investigated a bit and feels that there may be soem truth in it....

 

[Sandy345]

Lacey really would have no clue and it is less than credible if he waffles about his opinions. He seemed to have criticism for both Will and Harry.

 

[Denville]

Lacey really would have no clue and it is less than credible if he waffles about his opinions. He seemed to have criticism for both Will and Harry.

how would he "have no clue?" He is a well known royal biographer who has written several books about members of the RF. He clearly has contacts in the royal households and since he was previously much more sympathetic to Harry, it sounds as if he has found that there were other issues (which have been mentioned before) that may undermine his previous good opinion of Harry.
He may well feel that there is a lot of smoke about the bullying, and it is senior people who work direclty with the royals who are complaining/speaking out...