Are the royals on the rocks?

13637384042

Comments

  • @Sojourner It's the sort of staff turnover that would attract serious investigation in a commercial enterprise. Even if one ignores the period since they fled the RF, their turnover rate from January 2018 to December 2020 was 45%. For comparison, outside retail and hospitality the average is around 15%.

    But perhaps it's more natural wastage and turnover than an actual concern. So they've quit the firm, what do they need "staff" for. I guess since they are presumably not so strapped for cash (despite the comedown) they might have a nanny or two and maybe a cleaner/chef...

    Perhaps the rest of these "staff" just weren't really doing anything. How many staff can some rich, non working family of four need?
  • AnselminaAnselmina Shipmate
    I don't know about Royals on the Rocks, but here are a couple who have been on the bathroom floor! Hey! wasn't that the plot of The Royle Family once? Life imitating art and all that?!
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
    They do, quetz. Sometime I dam them, sometimes I let them go. In this case I think the tributaries had become largely non- Purgatorial. But any more chat on my actions should go to the Styx.

    Barnabas62
    Purgatory Host
  • Staff turnover is a good sign of how a place is running. There is what is charmingly called the normal churn, where people find promotions elsewhere or elope or retire, but if it gets higher than that (HR people in different sectors have their own metrics), or if it affects a sector of the staff (e.g., I was in an office where the thug-like behaviour of a new manager drove all of the francophone staff away in a 2-month period), then antennae need to be raised. The few situations I've seen where domestic & operational support was involved tended to have long-term employees with strong personal loyalty, although the intensity of the workload for a few of these instances meant that they had limited shelf-lives.

    In the case of the Sussexes (I keep on wanting to write Susseces, such is the curse of a classical education), it could be a number of things. Perhaps after a few months of Californian establishment, their needs are clearer (not so many chamberlains!) or UK staff can't take the incessant sunshine. Harry, as a professional soldier with HR experience and one accustomed to working with staff, should have a good grasp on things, but Meaghan may have different expectations. Much of her life has been outsourcing support (cleaning agencies rather than permanent staff), representation support (dressing etc), agencies for booking and coordination etc., and she may not be as accustomed to having permanent staff for this, where supervision and mutual support is more of a characteristic.

    All idle speculation, of course. Did they bring people from their British establishment?
  • MargaretMargaret Shipmate
    In the case of the Sussexes (I keep on wanting to write Susseces, such is the curse of a classical education)

    I'm SO relieved to know that I'm not the only person in the world who does this.

  • In the case of the Sussexes (I keep on wanting to write Susseces, such is the curse of a classical education),

    Susseces, or Sussices?
  • In the case of the Sussexes (I keep on wanting to write Susseces, such is the curse of a classical education),

    Susseces, or Sussices?

    I waver between the two. My preference would be Sussices, if I have to make a decision.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    We should have stuck with Suth Seaxa.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
    You are all forgiven but if you want to rap or rant about the Sussexes do set up a different thread in the right forum. This one is really about the Royal family as an institution.

    Thanks

    Barnabas62
    Purgatory Host
  • I've since had occasion to chat with a retired official who had much to do with the Windsors on their various visits and had friends on staffs. He tells me that palace staff tended to fall into two divisions; those who wanted it on their CVs to heighten their chances elsewhere, which he said was very common with kitchen and buttling types; and the lifers who liked the atmosphere and work, and the prospect of a lesser grade of the Royal Victorian Order at the end of it all. Only a few came from older noble families which, he noted, had a history of looking down at the Windsors, and many of the team were locally recruited or ex-military. He said it was a very well-run machine, albeit of high standards circa 1975, but is only now moving up to the turn of the century. Staff decisions for support for junior royals were made centrally, and he imagined that this could be frustrating for those involved.

    Two of my old high school friends from a certain smelly mill town had provincial Government House jobs and loved it, as they enjoyed the Lt-Governor personalities whom they were serving, but that's not palace life, more an interesting sideshow of provincial bureaucracy.
  • Midlander1963Midlander1963 Shipmate Posts: 4
    I hope a line is soon drawn under this sorry saga. As Prince Charles, Princess Diana and Prince Andrew all discovered, the washing of royal dirty linen in televised interviews never does any good and causes positive harm. The Sussexes have abdicated their responsibilities and, having made their bed, must lie in it. I am a royaliost but I'm only interested in proper, senior, hard working members of the royal family.
  • I hope a line is soon drawn under this sorry saga. As Prince Charles, Princess Diana and Prince Andrew all discovered, the washing of royal dirty linen in televised interviews never does any good and causes positive harm. The Sussexes have abdicated their responsibilities and, having made their bed, must lie in it. I am a royaliost but I'm only interested in proper, senior, hard working members of the royal family.

    Define hard working.
  • Ethne AlbaEthne Alba Shipmate
    Define ‘ interested in’?

    Seriously?
    Potatoes, stamps, friends, yes.

    Royalty ???
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    Three things that are often confused are hard work, activity, and usefulness
  • Yeah, but think of all the air miles.
  • BoogieBoogie Shipmate
    KarlLB wrote: »
    Three things that are often confused are hard work, activity, and usefulness

    Worth a thread of its own.

  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    Yeah, but think of all the air miles.

    I always thought there was an inconsistency in Al Gore's message about climate change and his flying around the world to preach it.
  • They all do it. Any conference on climate change should by definition be done on Zoom.
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    Indeed. And I'm prepared to put good money on the assertion that Gore was not flying up the back of the bus.
  • They all do it.

    Greta doesn't.
  • DafydDafyd Shipmate
    edited March 28
    Gee D wrote: »
    I always thought there was an inconsistency in Al Gore's message about climate change and his flying around the world to preach it.
    It's better for the environment than flying around the world to not preach about climate change.
    If you think it's permissible to hold an international conference in person for any reason, then holding an international climate change conference in person is permissible. The point isn't for each individual participant to lower their personal emissions: it's for our societies as a whole to lower their collective emissions. If flying round the world facilitates that then it's a net good.

    Installing solar panels on the roof causes upfront emissions. That's not a reason not to do it.

  • Gee D wrote: »
    Indeed. And I'm prepared to put good money on the assertion that Gore was not flying up the back of the bus.

    I"m not sure that seat placement has anything to do with carbon.
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    edited March 29
    Gee D wrote: »
    Indeed. And I'm prepared to put good money on the assertion that Gore was not flying up the back of the bus.

    I"m not sure that seat placement has anything to do with carbon.

    The placement up front reduces the number of people able to take the flight and thus leads to more flights with more bad emissions.
    Dafyd wrote: »
    If you think it's permissible to hold an international conference in person for any reason, then holding an international climate change conference in person is permissible. The point isn't for each individual participant to lower their personal emissions: it's for our societies as a whole to lower their collective emissions. If flying round the world facilitates that then it's a net good.

    I'd have thought that even when Gore was flying around, information technology would have allowed the conference not to have been held in person.

    I don't understand you comment that it's not for individuals but for societies. Is not a society made up by a number of individuals?
  • Gee D wrote: »
    Gee D wrote: »
    Indeed. And I'm prepared to put good money on the assertion that Gore was not flying up the back of the bus.

    I"m not sure that seat placement has anything to do with carbon.

    The placement up front reduces the number of people able to take the flight and thus leads to more flights with more bad emissions.

    It's taken me until now to guess that you're alluding to flying first class. I like circumlocution as much as the next male hominid but sometimes it can be excessively obscure.
  • Simon ToadSimon Toad Shipmate
    I was in the car being serious an hour ago and I thought I should come clean about my genuine and considered opinion on the Monarchy's institutional future in Australia. My personal preference is that its role, limited and largely performed by an Australian-nominated Governor General, continue into the distant future. However, when push came to shove I voted for a republic last time, and I will again.

    My reasoning is that the Monarchy is a cherished tradition of people like me, with their heads and hearts at least partially rooted in the British Isles. We are no longer Australia, and I know that people from other backgrounds really would prefer to ditch the English Monarch. If we are truly to embody the ideal of my favorite patriotic song, we need not to grow out of our Britishness, but to move beyond it.
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    edited March 30

    It's taken me until now to guess that you're alluding to flying first class. I like circumlocution as much as the next male hominid but sometimes it can be excessively obscure.

    Sorry, "flying up front" etc is pretty common here for first class. Talking of someone who in the one week had flown to Tokyo for a couple of days, then on arriving back home been told their presence was needed straight away in Singapore you'd say either they'd be flying up front, or "at least not flying down the back of the bus".
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    Gee D wrote: »

    It's taken me until now to guess that you're alluding to flying first class. I like circumlocution as much as the next male hominid but sometimes it can be excessively obscure.

    Sorry, "flying up front" etc is pretty common here for first class. Talking of someone who in the one week had flown to Tokyo for a couple of days, then on arriving back home been told their presence was needed straight away in Singapore you'd say either they'd be flying up front, or "at least not flying down the back of the bus".

    Both phrases totally alien to this UKian.
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    What would be the colloquialisms you'd use?
  • BroJamesBroJames Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host
    I worked out what the colloquialism meant from having flown, but I’m not sure there is a common colloquialism in U.K. use. We just say first class, business class, or economy.
  • BoogieBoogie Shipmate
    ‘Flying up front’ means the pilot 👩‍✈️
  • Simon ToadSimon Toad Shipmate
    cattle class is the other end...
  • SpikeSpike Admin Emeritus
    Gee D wrote: »
    What would be the colloquialisms you'd use?
    “First Class” and “Cattle Class”
  • Turn left when you board = first class.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    First class and Normal
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    Interesting to see how a comment simply made without thinking of any confusion can in fact confuse.
  • Simon ToadSimon Toad Shipmate
    Port out starboard home?
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    Simon Toad wrote: »
    Port out starboard home?

    You may be interested in this: https://www.merriam-webster.com/help/faq-posh
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    Simon Toad wrote: »
    Port out starboard home?

    I think those days finished with Indian independence......
  • Gee D wrote: »
    Simon Toad wrote: »
    Port out starboard home?

    I think those days finished with Indian independence......

    There you are, we should never have let go of India. That damn Attlee fella.
  • Attlee appointed Mountbatten because they were on the same wavelength.
  • I realise this could/will merit a thread in its own right, but Prince Philip has sadly died. I'm not really a royalist but he seemed to widely regarded as a steadying influence.
  • Ethne AlbaEthne Alba Shipmate
    edited April 9
    Hopefully the death of Prince Phillip will focus the minds of all involved.

  • EirenistEirenist Shipmate
    I think latterly he was everyone's embarrassing but treasured great-uncle.
  • Eirenist wrote: »
    I think latterly he was everyone's embarrassing but treasured great-uncle.

    :lol:

    He certainly had a reputation for saying the wrong thing at times.

    Doubtless all that will be raked over for days to come, as all other World News and Events are now cancelled...
  • Gramps49Gramps49 Shipmate
    My condolences to the royal family for their loss. Regardless of his flaws, the queen always called him her rock.
  • jay_emmjay_emm Shipmate
    In a slightly bizarre story
    https://theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/may/09/prince-michael-of-kent-accused-of-selling-access-to-kremlin[/url]
    You'd think his influence in this country would be more significant.
  • jay_emm wrote: »
    In a slightly bizarre story
    https://theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/may/09/prince-michael-of-kent-accused-of-selling-access-to-kremlin[/url]
    You'd think his influence in this country would be more significant.

    Why?

    Asking for a friend...
  • QuestorQuestor Shipmate
    We in the UK have a constitutional monarchy.
    The only real task the Queen has to perform is to recall parliament. She adds her signature to the Acts which are put through parliament.
    She also has regular briefings with the Prime Minister.
    She remains neutral.
  • Questor wrote: »
    We in the UK have a constitutional monarchy.
    The only real task the Queen has to perform is to recall parliament. She adds her signature to the Acts which are put through parliament.
    She also has regular briefings with the Prime Minister.
    She remains neutral.

    Ostensibly, yes - but the fact still remains that she can influence law-making to favour her own ends, as has been revealed in the press this year.

    What has this to do with Kent, though, who is a relative of the Queen, but not paid via the civil list?
  • TheOrganistTheOrganist Shipmate
    jay_emm wrote: »
    In a slightly bizarre story
    https://theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/may/09/prince-michael-of-kent-accused-of-selling-access-to-kremlin[/url]
    You'd think his influence in this country would be more significant.

    In which country, UK or Russia?

    As the second son of the fourth son of the monarch who died six-and-a-half years before he was born he has zero influence in the UK.

    On the maternal side, I don't think that being the great-great-grandson, with two maternal descents, of a tsar who died in 1881 is likely to give him much traction in Russia. His appearance does cause comment in Russia (he bears an uncanny resemblance to Nicholas II) but he's actually less closely related to the last tsar than the late Duke if Edinburgh. And I'm sure none of us needs reminding that the Russians did away with their monarchy in 1918.

    Friend of Putin? I doubt it.
Sign In or Register to comment.