The Duke & Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 2: December 2020-March 2021

[Lucy Scot]

What strikes me from the Guardian story posted above is this quote:

"The claims centred on an email sent by the couple’s former communications chief Jason Knauf in October 2018 – five months after the couple’s wedding – reportedly in an attempt to force Buckingham Palace to protect staff, the Times said."

My God, he sent this email five months after the wedding! How much time did Meghan even have to get acclimated to royal life? Did she get any training or counselling at all?

This was the period of time when Meghan and Harry were under Kensington Palace. I do believe that there was jealousy on the part of that staff due to the popularity of Harry and Meghan and the threat of them taking the spotlight away from William and Kate.

 

[Princess_Eleanor]

What strikes me from the Guardian story posted above is this quote:

"The claims centred on an email sent by the couple’s former communications chief Jason Knauf in October 2018 – five months after the couple’s wedding – reportedly in an attempt to force Buckingham Palace to protect staff, the Times said."

My God, he sent this email five months after the wedding! How much time did Meghan even have to get acclimated to royal life? Did she get any training or counselling at all?

This was the period of time when Meghan and Harry were under Kensington Palace. I do believe that there was jealousy on the part of that staff due to the popularity of Harry and Meghan and the threat of them taking the spotlight away from William and Kate.

Or asked the other way around: did Meghan, shortly after arriving in the UK and at Kensington Palace, already mistreat staff? Remember, some of these people were hired for Meghan specifically and therefore new at the palace as well & without allegiance to William or Kate.

And how was Meghan supposed to be counseled and trained when it is said that she did not like taking advice from her advisors & other staff when it went against her own wishes and ideas?

 

[Somebody]

Thank you TLLK for providing the YouGov poll results.

Here is the link to the poll results including all types of category breakdown
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politic...edium=daily_questions&utm_campaign=question_1

I would recommend people going through each category (i.e. Region, Gender, Politics, Age and Social grade) to see how divided the opinions are despite an overall higher percentage (not majority as in more than 50%) of sympathy towards The Queen and members of the Royal Family. The most obvious ones are politics and age groups

It is also important to note that this poll has more options compared to previous polls on royal family (i.e. 5 options instead of 3)

Those are the only ones in which one subgroup (Labour/18-24 year olds) sympathizes more with the Sussexes than with the BRF. In all other categories the BRF comes out on top of the Sussexes.

 

[TLLK]

What strikes me from the Guardian story posted above is this quote:

"The claims centred on an email sent by the couple’s former communications chief Jason Knauf in October 2018 – five months after the couple’s wedding – reportedly in an attempt to force Buckingham Palace to protect staff, the Times said."

My God, he sent this email five months after the wedding! How much time did Meghan even have to get acclimated to royal life? Did she get any training or counselling at all?

This was the period of time when Meghan and Harry were under Kensington Palace. I do believe that there was jealousy on the part of that staff due to the popularity of Harry and Meghan and the threat of them taking the spotlight away from William and Kate.

LucyScot-Please keep in mind that Meghan have been receiving advice and training on from palace aides from the time that the couple were dating starting in 2016. As well as from the day that the couple announced their engagement in 2017. Meghan had been receiving advice on dealing with the press as it was suggested that she not wear a necklace with the "H" and "M" pendants because the paps would notice it and publish photos. She would have had security briefings/trainings almost immediately on how Royal Protection Officers would be there to safeguard her at all times. Also keep in mind that Kensington Palace was Prince Harry's place of residence at Nott Cott and that his office and communication were based/ handled there. Also that was where the former Royal Foundation of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Harry was also working from as a team.


https://news.sky.com/story/palace-t...d-h-initial-necklace-new-book-claims-12046835

Meghan 39, wore the £230 14-carat gold "M and H" chain during a trip to her local florist in the early days of the couple's relationship, according to the new biography Finding Freedom.
But after she was seen wearing it, she got a telephone call from a senior Kensington Palace aide, which left her feeling "frustrated and emotional", authors Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand write.
The book claims: "Two days after Meghan was photographed buying flowers at her usual florist, wearing her new initial necklace, she received a phone call from a senior Kensington Palace aide.
"She was advised that wearing such a necklace only served to encourage the photographers to keep pursuing such images - and new headlines."






Meghan knew the aide had good intentions, but she found the experience "surreal", Scobie and Durand claim.

So even when the couple were still dating, the aides were trying to help her navigate a path into what would be her new life. While she did follow the advice, she admitted it left her "frustrated and emotional." Honestly, I don't believe that Meghan appreciated being advised by the aides if it went against her personal wishes. Royal life comes with serious limitations on a person's personal freedom and I believe that she found them difficult to adapt to when she became engaged and later married to Prince Harry.

 

[Somebody]

What strikes me from the Guardian story posted above is this quote:

"The claims centred on an email sent by the couple’s former communications chief Jason Knauf in October 2018 – five months after the couple’s wedding – reportedly in an attempt to force Buckingham Palace to protect staff, the Times said."

My God, he sent this email five months after the wedding! How much time did Meghan even have to get acclimated to royal life? Did she get any training or counselling at all?

This was the period of time when Meghan and Harry were under Kensington Palace. I do believe that there was jealousy on the part of that staff due to the popularity of Harry and Meghan and the threat of them taking the spotlight away from William and Kate.

Well, if she only needed that little time to have 2 PA's flee the palace and the staff seriously concerned about how she treated a third; that is indeed quite impressive (but not in a good way I am afraid). Most people who truly want to succeed in their new role would be much more willing to learn and listen instead of treating their staff so badly from the very start some of them left and others were concerned about how she behaved and the toxic work environment that she created.

I am afraid she never learned how to deal with staff (previously she didn't have an organization working for 'her' (among others) but instead was part of an ensemble cast where she had a supporting role and had to follow the instructions of the director). That is quite a transition; and it seems she thought that the right approach was to direct them around as 'the new duchess on the block' and make sure she got what she wanted - but did so without much consideration of the people involved.

 

[QueenMathilde]

Without going off-topic The earrings story came from the Times article written by Valentine Low. It's behind the paywall. Like MaiaMia_53 mentioned in the previous post, it has been discussed in the Sussexes News and Currents Events thread.

Royal aides reveal bullying claim before Meghan’s Oprah interview
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...llying-claim-before-oprah-interview-7sxfvd2c3

I could private message you the segment with the earring story if you want the full detail

Thank you- that would be nice if you had the time. I can't figure out what the full story is.

 

[Curryong]

[...]

I do think that much of what has been reported (and these are only allegations of bullying at the moment, not established fact) is rehashed stuff from the tabloids who are reacting with joy at the moment with so much Clickbait on view. What would they do without their negative tales of what the Sussexes are supposed to have done!

 

[duchessrachel]

Well those four were well informed & objective weren't they.

The only present the liberal narrative. There is usually a token Conservative host on the show, but she has to endure the barbs from the other three. I say if anyone ever sees me watching "The View", check my temperature to see if I am sick.

 

[caethi]

It would be nice to see some real reporting on the situation. Is the Times article the results of some of that reporting? If so, I wish that the paper would publish the whole story once confirmed, and not just bits and pieces.


No doubt by releasing the information about the HR "investigation", the palace was trying to look as if they were doing the right thing. It has backfired on them. This situation as it's being reported hurts the palace as much as it hurts Meghan.


It's possible Meghan is a bully but it's also possible she was misinterpreted and misconstrued. If Meghan was mistreated in some way, both she and Harry do not appear to have handled it well. They seem to feel that everyone is against them and that they have right on their side. I just don't buy that bad behaviour by palace aides would have been tolerated by the Queen. The tabloid abuse is one thing--I understand wanting to run from tabloids--but surely Harry and Meghan could have found a solution to problems with palace staff. They are hardly powerless.

 

[Madame Verseau]

Now 10 ex-aides are supposedly cooperating with the BP probe

https://www.thedailybeast.com/ten-a...han-markle-bullying-investigation-report-says

Again the timing is suspect. They are anonymous. And no indication Meghan's lawyers can defend her in the process or cross examine them. If there is a conclusion to what appears to be an one-sided process it supports Meghan's argument that the royals are conducting a witch hunt.

 

[TLLK]

Now 10 ex-aides are supposedly cooperating with the BP probe

https://www.thedailybeast.com/ten-a...han-markle-bullying-investigation-report-says

Again the timing is suspect. They are anonymous. And no indication Meghan's lawyers can defend her in the process or cross examine them. If there is a conclusion to what appears to be an one-sided process it supports Meghan's argument that the royals are conducting a witch hunt.

I believe that I'll wait until we hear information from a more reputable source than the Daily Beast. At this point I do believe that we should also wait to see if the Sussexes choose to challenge the claims legally. However I do understand the timing as it was explained by Valentine Low. Waiting to share the story with Low until after the Justice Warby's decision was made, was reasonable IMO as former aides to the Sussexes could have been called to testify.

 

[AC21091968]

Just when The Guardian release some information/rumours on the bullying investigation, The Telegraph (right-leaning newspaper, pro-monarchy and pro-Brexit) put out more stories on the conflict between Meghan and Palace staff. This time on clothes send by top-designer for free. All of these articles are behind paywall and I also do not have a subscription.

Duke and Duchess of Sussex expect to be notified if formal bullying allegations are made
A source close to the Sussexes said the couple had not been informed of any investigation by Buckingham Palace and had no idea of its scope
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1614881732

The Telegraph @Telegraph
The Duchess is understood to have had blazing rows with staff over whether she could keep free clothes sent to her by top designers
5:30 AM · Mar 5, 2021·Echobox​

https://twitter.com/x/status/1367543047286841346

Another Telegraph article mentioned on Downing St saying the Prime Minister have "full confidence" in Simon Case and both of them take bullying very seriously. Simon Case previously worked as a Private Secretary for The Duke of Cambridge (2018-2020) and now worked as a Cabinet Secretary and Head of the Home Civil Service of the UK government. Simon Case himself was reportedly aware of the bullying allegations.

Downing Street says Boris Johnson has 'full confidence' in Cabinet Secretary amid Meghan bullying claims
Downing Street tells reporters PM and Cabinet Secretary 'take bullying seriously'
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politic...Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1614882861

The Telegraph @Telegraph
Simon Case was reportedly aware of allegations that the Duchess of Sussex had bullied Buckingham Palace staff
5:44 AM · Mar 5, 2021·Echobox​

https://twitter.com/x/status/1367546561048281090

The Telegraph also tried to track on the staff in the bullying allegation.

Sussex society: The key figures at the centre of the Meghan bullying claims
The people close to the Sussexes at the time of the allegations – and where they are now
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1614878812

Meghan did make it to the front page of the Telegraph. Underneath the picture of her, it has the heading, Sussexes "not informed" of bullying inquiry.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Evqx1mrXYAM-7h0?format=jpg&name=medium
Picture from the Telegraph tweet:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1367601004863238148

 

[yukari]

(...)

Duke and Duchess of Sussex expect to be notified if formal bullying allegations are made
A source close to the Sussexes said the couple had not been informed of any investigation by Buckingham Palace and had no idea of its scope
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1614881732

(...)

Another Telegraph article mentioned on Downing St saying the Prime Minister have "full confidence" in Simon Case and both of them take bullying very seriously. Simon Case previously worked as a Private Secretary for The Duke of Cambridge (2018-2020) and now worked as a Cabinet Secretary and Head of the Home Civil Service of the UK government. Simon Case himself was reportedly aware of the bullying allegations.

Downing Street says Boris Johnson has 'full confidence' in Cabinet Secretary amid Meghan bullying claims
Downing Street tells reporters PM and Cabinet Secretary 'take bullying seriously'
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politic...Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1614882861

(...)

The Telegraph also tried to track on the staff in the bullying allegation.

Sussex society: The key figures at the centre of the Meghan bullying claims
The people close to the Sussexes at the time of the allegations – and where they are now
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1614878812

First article:

(...)

A palace aide has indicated that the Duke and Duchess would not be involved, or even informed, about the process, which is carefully billed as an internal “review” for staff rather than a formal investigation.

This is despite the fact that the allegations relate directly to the couple’s behaviour towards their staff, which prompted a formal complaint sent to human resources in October 2018 that was not pursued.

(...)

Asked if they would want to be involved, or to have the right of reply, the source said: “If it was an investigation into them, of some description, there would have to be a formal process where we would have to be involved.

“A formal HR investigation involves formal accusations. If this was a formal office setting, we would have already been fired or have already quit, depending on your point of view.”

Senior aides are expected to take part in the investigation amid claims HR procedures could have seen the bullying allegations escalated to Clive Alderton, the Prince of Wales’s private secretary.

A palace source said the review would be confined to a specific time frame and would give staff who worked for the Sussexes a chance to detail their experiences.
(...)

Second article is basically 6 paragraphs reiterating the title; that Boris had “full confidence” in Mr Case, but it was a “matter for the Palace”, and there was no place for bullying in Government. (I'm pretty sure I've seen similar article on Mirror).

Third article is listing the key figures at the centre of the allegations, they are:
- Simon Case (briefly worked as director of strategy at GCHQ before working as the Duke of Cambridge's private secretary, now Cabinet Secretary), >>>William seriously has to get him back when he's king<<<

- Melissa Touabti (a French, previously worked for Robbie Williams and his wife Ayda Field before worked as PA for the Duchess of Sussex for six months, after she left she work as a nanny for billionaire Richard Livingstone),

- Sara Latham (a dual British-American citizen, former head of communications for the Sussexes who previously worked for Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, now advises the Queen's private office on special projects),

- Katrina McKeever (former Kensington Palace deputy communications secretary who had a key liaison role with Meghan's family, including her father Thomas Markle. Omid claimed she left on a good note, but Reports of Meghan shouting at one of the Duchess of Cambridge's team allegedly referred to her),

- Amy Pickerill (worked at the Royal Bank of Scotland before became Meghan's assistant, when she left a KP source said she would stay in touch with Meghan),

- Samantha Cohen (The Queen's former private secretary then served as private secretary to the Sussexes before leaving the royal household to work for the charity Cool Earth, and the one who's been noted as "a saint" on The Times article),

- Jason Knauf (an American, former communications secretary to both the Sussexes and the Cambridges, now chief executive of the Royal Foundation, and the man who wrote the email),

- Christian Jones (was chief press officer at the Treasury under George Osborne and Philip Hammond, former communications secretary to the Cambridges, now a partner at private equity group Bridgepoint),

- Female Police Protection Officer (former head of protection for the Sussexes who was tasked with overseeing security during Australia Fiji tour in Oct 2018).

 

[Eskimo]

Meghan and Harry have to worry about a fan-base in the United States. The British Royal Family does not have any such worries outside of the UK

 

[Madame Verseau]

So the Sussexes won't be involved in this process; not allowed to respond. This has the feel of a kangaroo court, despite being called s "review". And the Sussexes have fans outside the US.

 

[TLLK]

So the Sussexes won't be involved in this process; not allowed to respond. This has the feel of a kangaroo court, despite being called s "review". And the Sussexes have fans outside the US.

I believe that it important to keep in mind that this is not a court case, but a necessary review of BP HR policies.

 

[Curryong]

Yes, it is a BP review of possible future procedures. However, if during this process serious allegations are made against an individual, surely that person has a right of reply and refute, even if they are a Royal.

 

[yukari]

On the first Telegraph article above, it's been stated as below:

A palace aide said: "If anyone wants to bring up a specific complaint or tensions and discuss where they came from that is fine. But the focus of the review will be on how it was handled."​

So it seems it's not specifically "targeting" Meghan, but the allegation against her might be used as sort of case study, hence why those former staff of the Sussexes will be given chance to detail their experiences (it's for the future, not to deal with what happened in the past). Unless a formal complaint is raised, then it will be another case.

(If anyone wants the whole article, PM me. I can't promise that I will reply straight away though).

 

[poppy7]

The only present the liberal narrative. There is usually a token Conservative host on the show, but she has to endure the barbs from the other three. I say if anyone ever sees me watching "The View", check my temperature to see if I am sick.

That was the liberal view? That was an a appalling view. To dismiss people's allegations of bullying. Meghan is not some baby fignting agai st the msn. If anything g the staff were. That they were grossly misinformed is fine but thatsegment was awful.

 

[Alison H]

Yea... that's how it always is, hence why those closest to the bully, or on the same level at work, have a hard time believing this 'amazing, kind, sweet etc etc," person they know is a bully.

[...]

When I was at school, a really nasty boy used to bully me and a lot of other kids. I met this guy's dad once, and, when he found out which school I went to, he started going on about how I must fancy his son because he was the most lovely, wonderful boy and all the girls in the school must be after him. Yeah, right! People's friends and relatives aren't usually the best ones to ask about this sort of thing.

I'm unsure why anyone seems to think that how people voted in a referendum on leaving the EU in June 2016 is relevant to how people feel about Harry and Meghan in February 2021. What next, people's opinion of Harry and Meghan depends on which football team they support, or what their favourite food is, or what music they like? It's irrelevant, and I wish people, whether it's pollsters or anyone else, would stop trying to divide British society like this. And I'm not sure why the Telegraph is trying to involve the Prime Minister in this.


The latest "story" is that Meghan kept accepting free clothes from designer labels whilst she and Prince Harry were going out, despite being advised that it wasn't appropriate for her to do that, and that she only stopped when Prince Charles agreed to pay for her clothes. Everyone and their dog is going to have some minor story to tell, and, until someone puts an end to this feud between Harry and Meghan and the press, they're going to keep coming. It's not helping anyone: it's just embarrassing. And this interview is only going to make it much, much worse.

 

[AC21091968]

There is an analysis on The Guardian about the recent bullying allegation and Palace intervention. It had contributions from Victoria Murphy, Peter Hunt (former BBC royal correspondent) and Omid Scobie. Surprisingly, I found this article balanced, reasonable and well-thought out, despite The Guardian's republican stance. The full article is not behind a paywall this time

‘Open hostility’: an extraordinary episode in the Sussexes’ royal drama
Analysis: after Buckingham Palace’s remarkable intervention, the war of words is unlikely to die down
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...aordinary-episode-in-the-sussexes-royal-drama

 

[Marengo]

Thanks for that article, interesting to see a more cool-headed view.

But while reading it I wonder why this 'American work ethic' fable is so persistent (see quote by Scobie)? In reality there is not much difference between the US and the UK. 1757 hours vs 1670 hours per year in the US and the UK respectively. Hardly a big difference.

https://ourworldindata.org/working-hours

This kind of theme may be a popular narrative in/about the US but the data does not confirm these kind of assumptions. Of course the theme of 'young naive & high energy American girl tells ignorant (foreign) hotshots what to do and saves the day' is a popular genre in many series (I have been unfortunate enough to sit through one episode of that ghastly Emily in Paris Netflix series) but in reality I am not conviced this happens very often.

To portray employees in the palace, coming from all kinds of carreers, as workshy may also be feeding a certain narrative but considering previous and next carreers of many of these (young-)professionals I doubt that they will just take on a palace-job to take things easy. But why see them as individuals when the press can abuse their existance by portraying them as a collective of evil grey men hellbent on ruining the innocent hero or heroine of whatever telenovela a media outlet is trying to sell to its readers and viewers.

Fortunately neither the duke nor the duchess has said anything of the sort as I am sure they are well aware of their (and his family's) priviledged position vis à vis the people who work for them. But it is surprising to see -of all newspapers- the Guardian writing this down as if it was a fact of life, which it isn't.

 

[evolvingdoors]

Thanks for that article, interesting to see a more cool-headed view.

But while reading it I winder why this 'American work ethic' fable is so persistent (see quote by Scobie)? In reality there is not much difference between the US and the UK. 1757 hours vs 1670 hours per year in the US and the UK respectively. Hardly a big difference.

https://ourworldindata.org/working-hours

This kind of theme may be a popular narrative in/about the US but the data does not confirm these kind of assumptions. Of course the theme of 'young naive & high energy American girl tells ignorant (foreign) hotshots what to do and saves the day' is a popular genre in many series (I have been unfortunate enough to sit through one episode of that ghastly Emily in Paris Netflix series) but in reality I am not conviced this happens very often.

To portray employees in the palace, coming from all kinds of carreers, as workshy may also be feeding a certain narrative but considering previous and next carreers of many of these employees I doubt that they will just take on a palace-job to take things easy.

It really depends on what type of job you do.
if you're in high-tech or a good paying job, things are different than in a low wage job.
also 100 hours difference can be alot that's an extra 4 days of vacation.

 

[Claire]

Having worked at an American and UK firm I really do not see the difference, but I agree it might have to be the type of job that you do.


Having said that I would like to point out the office the perputated the reasons for the high rate of movement at the Sussex office was headed by the same person who wrote the email about the bulling.
The mantra we got from Kensington Palace was that it was Meghan's American and Hollywood ways - her get up and go attitude, the 3 AM emails and the demand for excellence that was the problem then. All good qualities that the staff simply couldn't hack but then privately he is writing emails about bullying and then resigning himself. This is why I really dislike spin.

 

[MARG]

When I was at school, a really nasty boy used to bully me and a lot of other kids. I met this guy's dad once, and, when he found out which school I went to, he started going on about how I must fancy his son because he was the most lovely, wonderful boy and all the girls in the school must be after him. Yeah, right! People's friends and relatives aren't usually the best ones to ask about this sort of thing.

I'm unsure why anyone seems to think that how people voted in a referendum on leaving the EU in June 2016 is relevant to how people feel about Harry and Meghan in February 2021. What next, people's opinion of Harry and Meghan depends on which football team they support, or what their favourite food is, or what music they like? It's irrelevant, and I wish people, whether it's pollsters or anyone else, would stop trying to divide British society like this. And I'm not sure why the Telegraph is trying to involve the Prime Minister in this.


The latest "story" is that Meghan kept accepting free clothes from designer labels whilst she and Prince Harry were going out, despite being advised that it wasn't appropriate for her to do that, and that she only stopped when Prince Charles agreed to pay for her clothes. Everyone and their dog is going to have some minor story to tell, and, until someone puts an end to this feud between Harry and Meghan and the press, they're going to keep coming. It's not helping anyone: it's just embarrassing. And this interview is only going to make it much, much worse.

Umm, I don't think the problem is with the Sussexes and the press. They just seem to be recycling or repeating "leaks" from the palaces.

I don't believe the trash about freebies for two reasons:
1. It was probably the first heads-up given to Meghan by Samantha Cohen, and
2. With as toxic an environment as KP when she arrived that little titbit would have been worth it's weight in gold. Oh make that three:
3. Who...in CH doing Charles personal accounts that would be blabbing to the media about clothes. Prince Charles personally pays for his family's expenses which includes all of their wardrobes from his own to Prince Louis.

Things have changed now obviously but add that breach of privacy to the leaking of the supposed provenance of the earrings Meghan wore on an official tour. I say supposed provenance because last I heard MBS was the heir apparent representing his father, King Salmond Abdulaziz Al Saud.

I am sure the Foreign Office was thrilled to read that little titbit splashed across the country's papers both real and online.

 

[AC21091968]

Having worked at an American and UK firm I really do not see the difference, but I agree miht have to be the type of job that you do.


Having sad that I would like to point out the office the perputated the reasons for the high rate of movement at the Sussex office was headed by the same person who wrote the email about the bulling.
The mantra we got from Kensington Palace was that it was Meghan's American and Hollywood ways - her get up and go attitude, the 3 AM emails and the demand for excellence that was the problem then. All good qualities that the staff simply couldn't hack but then privately he is writing emails about bullying and then resigning himself. This is why I really dislike spin.

I agree with you that it really depends on the job you do, industry you are in and the company's work environment (in terms values or how you fit in). Personality does come into play as well.

For example, if you are an improviser, you might find a job or company that has rigid schedules, difficult and even frustrating. In contrast, those who are planners would find it easier. The same could be said for someone who is a free-spirit and opinionated finding a workplace with rigorous protocol, very restrictive.

 

[poppy7]

Thanks for that article, interesting to see a more cool-headed view.

But while reading it I winder why this 'American work ethic' fable is so persistent (see quote by Scobie)? In reality there is not much difference between the US and the UK. 1757 hours vs 1670 hours per year in the US and the UK respectively. Hardly a big difference.

https://ourworldindata.org/working-hours

This kind of theme may be a popular narrative in/about the US but the data does not confirm these kind of assumptions. Of course the theme of 'young naive & high energy American girl tells ignorant (foreign) hotshots what to do and saves the day' is a popular genre in many series (I have been unfortunate enough to sit through one episode of that ghastly Emily in Paris Netflix series) but in reality I am not conviced this happens very often.

To portray employees in the palace, coming from all kinds of carreers, as workshy may also be feeding a certain narrative but considering previous and next carreers of many of these (young-)professionals I doubt that they will just take on a palace-job to take things easy. But why see them as individuals when the press can abuse their existance by portraying them as a collective of evil grey men hellbent on ruining the innocent hero or heroine of whatever telenovela a media outlet is trying to sell to its readers and viewers.

I think it is a long held myth about American work practices and often likely to be perpetuated by the British themselves for whatever reason. It is nonsense. The teams work very hard and are very poorly renumerated for it. And they all have high class careers outside or within the royal circle.

Knauf himself is American although I am not sure about where he grew up.

I think it is fair really that this may give a balanced view. I think it's fair it is looked into.

 

[poppy7]

All good qualities that the staff simply couldn't hack but then privately he is writing emails about bullying and then resigning himself. This is why I really dislike spin.

That was his job. Or do you think people should release press statements ranting and raving. He was doing his job. In fact you couldn't fault him. Probs why he is literally William's work husband. He trusts him.

 

[Mbruno]

First article:


Second article is basically 6 paragraphs reiterating the title; that Boris had “full confidence” in Mr Case, but it was a “matter for the Palace”, and there was no place for bullying in Government. (I'm pretty sure I've seen similar article on Mirror).

Third article is listing the key figures at the centre of the allegations, they are:
- Simon Case (briefly worked as director of strategy at GCHQ before working as the Duke of Cambridge's private secretary, now Cabinet Secretary), >>>William seriously has to get him back when he's king<<<

- Melissa Touabti (a French, previously worked for Robbie Williams and his wife Ayda Field before worked as PA for the Duchess of Sussex for six months, after she left she work as a nanny for billionaire Richard Livingstone),

- Sara Latham (a dual British-American citizen, former head of communications for the Sussexes who previously worked for Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, now advises the Queen's private office on special projects),

- Katrina McKeever (former Kensington Palace deputy communications secretary who had a key liaison role with Meghan's family, including her father Thomas Markle. Omid claimed she left on a good note, but Reports of Meghan shouting at one of the Duchess of Cambridge's team allegedly referred to her),

- Amy Pickerill (worked at the Royal Bank of Scotland before became Meghan's assistant, when she left a KP source said she would stay in touch with Meghan),

- Samantha Cohen (The Queen's former private secretary then served as private secretary to the Sussexes before leaving the royal household to work for the charity Cool Earth, and the one who's been noted as "a saint" on The Times article),

- Jason Knauf (an American, former communications secretary to both the Sussexes and the Cambridges, now chief executive of the Royal Foundation, and the man who wrote the email),

- Christian Jones (was chief press officer at the Treasury under George Osborne and Philip Hammond, former communications secretary to the Cambridges, now a partner at private equity group Bridgepoint),

- Female Police Protection Officer (former head of protection for the Sussexes who was tasked with overseeing security during Australia Fiji tour in Oct 2018).

The interesting thing is that, looking at the profiles above , what strikes me is that none of them (a director of strategy at GCHQ _the UK's equivalent to the NSA in the US_ and Principal Private Secretary to the PM ; a former employee at the Royal Bank of Scotland; a chief press secretary at HM's Treasury; a former aide to Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, etc.) fit the image claimed by some posters here of "lazy Brits" who could not handle Meghan's "American work ethic" and "perfectionism".


In fact, it is instructive to compare Meghan's "superior" American CV to Simon Case's for example.

 

[Alison H]

That's a lot of people, even if some of them are only involved indirectly. There are personality clashes in any workplace, and there are people who are not suited to the job or to the culture of that particular place, but, when several people all complain about bullying in the same workplace, it strongly suggests that there's a genuine problem.