Thread 22. Sunak: Taxes, Truth and Tories

[pointythings]

The previous thread filled up fast, so here's another one with a reasonably topical title!

While I'm not pretending to know anything about what Raab is like as an employer, or as a person, I can actually see that there is something potentially problematic about this. The question of intimidating body language etc is quite subjective, and the risk is that people know which words and phrases to use to essentially get rid of someone they don't like.

Here it can be seen as correcting a power imbalance, but in other situations it might exacerbate one.

Without wanting to out myself too

Without wanting to out myself too much, I have dealt with a lot of ministers in my career. Some have been quite unpleasant. Some have been really robust, shall we say, in their responses. Some very much lack interpersonal skills. Civil servants are used to all this, they are not weedy little tenderstems who wilt at a bit of criticism and they don't "target" ministers they don't like.

At least 24 complaints were made, 24

FFS

Rishi Sunak's spokesman refuses to rule out the Prime Minister bringing Dominic Raab back into government.

They can't all have misinterpreted his body language!

In that article, Raab says something about "unionised" civil servants. Attempting to make out it is all a dastardly union plot against him? Loads of Whitehall civil servants aren't even in a union, unlike other parts of the civil service, which are more heavily unionised.

24 perhaps, but there's a lot of jumping on bandwagon that goes on in any workplace and we all know that.

I don't understand how anyone can read the report and suggest that some of the allegations were upheld as a result of staff members repeating set phrases.
Tolley has tested each and every bit of evidence presented to him - which is exactly why some complaints were dismissed.
Can spot where Tolley got it wrong and explain it to me?

They were in three different departments. And the SoS of every one of those departments spoke to him about the way he treated the staff.

No civil servant would make an accusation against a minister lightly. It is very potentially career ending and so really not something that happens much in the weird working culture of Whitehall.

I worked in Whitehall for 25 years and never knew it to happen (even though there were a few instances where it would have been justified, including instances of, er, over familiarity as well as bullying). So for 24 complaints to be made is very significant. Raab must have very, very seriously upset people. I don't think victim blaming is a good look here.

A few people making complaints empowers other people to come forward or allows them to realise they are not alone.

See also #metoo.

Yes, exactly, piggy.

Alex Chalk (KC) in at Justice. Cheltenham MP. I dont know much about him - just that he was Solictor General and, like Sunak, went to Winchester & Oxford.
Here is hoping he does something about the backlogs & state of the courts etc.

Whoever said Dowden would be new deputy ✅. Well done!

It was @Notonthestairs

Dowden in as Deputy.

Should have put some money on it!

I'm absolutely not victim blaming, but I am saying there's an element of interpretation to the points which were upheld and some of those allegations would be extremely difficult to categorically disprove.

I know what #MeToo is, and I think some of those allegations were potentially a bit over-interpreted too.

If you turn this on its head, it wouldn't be so great if this same mechanism was turned against a junior, female member of staff who happened to have an unfortunate manner.

...it was Raab who – after he succeeded Davis at DExEU – announced in public “We are, and I hadn’t quite understood the full extent of this … but if you look at the UK and if you look at how we trade in goods, we are particularly reliant on the Dover-Calais crossing.” Imagine saying that out loud as a secretary of state, then beetling off to insult some underling for failing to pander to one of your Microsoft Word idiosyncrasies.

Just one of many zingers from Marina:

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/apr/21/dominic-raab-hardman-rishi-sunak-scandal

Who is the junior female member of staff bullying? Has she been asked twice to review her behaviour? Has her employer had to pay off previous claims of bullying?

Bullying allegations which lead to a 5 month investigation and a 45 page independent review are not upheld because of an "unfortunate manner".

it wouldn't be so great if this same mechanism was turned against a junior, female member of staff who happened to have an unfortunate manner.

Unlikely that it would take 24 complaints from three different departments before someone had a quiet word with this hypothetical woman with an unfortunate manner.

As I said Jourdain11, the Whitehall culture is really, really not conducive to staff making baseless complaints against ministers.

unfortunate manner

Summary of Dominic Raab's bullying report:

• 44 written pieces of evidence and 66 interviews conducted
• Raab was "intimidating", "unreasonable", and "aggressive"
• Raab put his hand directly out toward an official's face to shut them up + banged on the table
• Raab referred to the Civil Service code to officials in relation to an outgoing project to "reasonably" imply disciplinary action against them in a form of a "threat"
• Sir Philip Barton then told Raab in private not to do this - but Raab denied doing it (Tolley finds he did)
• Raab complained about "basic information" missing from officials - calling their work "woeful" and "utterly useless" - but didn't offer feedback
• Raab has altered his "approach" since - but he should have done this "earlier" after warnings from senior officials
• Raab "should have been aware of his conduct" or "at the very least, he should have been aware"
• Raab wanted to find out the "junior official" responsible for a "minor" issue and then for a "senior official" to apologise to him
• Raab required a meeting with a policy official for the "sole purpose of criticising them" for a late submission - despite there being "no underlying urgency" - the experience was "humiliating and upsetting"
• Officials took "special unpaid leave[]attributable to his conduct"
• Raab worked "long hours" - and therefore became "impatient and frustrated when others do not deliver what he required"
• Some "media reporting was not correct"
• Raab did "4 separate interviews" totalling 2 and a half days

Yeah, I would say a lot of those come down to an unfortunate manner, personally.

And quite honestly, I'd rather a bit of staring and table slamming than petty mind games and gaslighting, having experienced both. Of course, ideally, you'd experience neither.

Raab wanted to find out the "junior official" responsible for a "minor" issue and then for a "senior official" to apologise to him

Raab required a meeting with a policy official for the "sole purpose of criticising them" for a late submission - despite there being "no underlying urgency" - the experience was "humiliating and upsetting"

This really paints a picture of a petty tyrant. No wonder he had to work long hours if he was wasting his time with time with this sort of nitpicking.