to think civil servants should be easily sackable for misconduct?

[LargeDeviation]

Apparently one of the Dominic Raab bullying incidents in the foreign office went like this:

Negotiations over Gibraltar border arrangements

Raab to Ambassador: no Spanish troops on Gibraltar under any circumstances.
Ambassador to Spanish diplomats: Spainsh border troops will be allowed permanently on Gibraltar
Other British diplomats to Spanish diplomats: No Spanish border troops will be allowed on Gibraltar
Spain: WTF
Raab to Ambassador: Why did you say what you did? I issued a very clear ministerial directive?
Ambassador to Raab: [unclear response]
Raab to Ambassador: erupts in seething rage

Now the last step is what was wrong, and what was classified as bullying (though it's not clear exactly what happened).

However, if the account is true, then surely the ambassador has committed gross professional misconduct, trying to give away British sovereignty in direct contrast to a ministerial decision? To me going against the explicit instructions of your boss on such an important matter would be a sackable offence in pretty much any line of work - and yet it seems he's still the ambassador to Spain to this day.

As I've said on a previous thread, it's unclear whether Raab was actually a bully or not - the report makes it clear that at the least he was overly rude and demeaning. It's fairly obvious he was not effective, which to me is a genuine reason to get rid of him irrespective of the bullying.

However I see the civil service acting this way with impunity as an even bigger scandal.

Civil servants can be sacked and disciplined just like any other worker. Your understanding of policy development and working with ministers is woeful. Utterly ridiculous to state that "Overall it seems that the civil service is really ineffective. As a whole it seems to severely lack quantitative/data analysis skills in order to facilitate good decisions, and seems to value process much more than outcomes". What empirical evidence are you basing that on? Civil servants are not allowed to discuss what they do in work so can't defend themselves against the crap Raab is coming out with.

From the OP "Now the last step is what was wrong, and what was classified as bullying (though it's not clear exactly what happened)." And "As I've said on a previous thread, it's unclear whether Raab was actually a bully or not"

If she didn't want any discussions about Raab being a bully or not, it was foolish to include those bits of commentary.

“However, if the account is true, then surely the ambassador has committed gross professional misconduct, trying to give away British sovereignty in direct contrast to a ministerial decision?”

It isn’t true as it was rumour only and the civil servant was actually removed from his position as lead negotiator on the basis of this “may have” rumour alone.

The British stance had always been that no Spanish troops would ever be stationed permanently in Gibraltar. Perplexed at the complaints from Spain, Mr Raab investigated and heard that the ambassador to Spain, Hugh Elliott, may have gone beyond the official position agreed by the Cabinet and offered to have Spanish 'boots on the ground' permanently, the Telegraph reported.
The minister then ordered Mr Elliott back from Spain to London to give an account of his actions. But his explanations were not specific enough, according to supporters of Mr Raab. Raab replaced Mr Elliott in negotiations with the former ambassador Simon Manley, although Mr Elliott remained the top British diplomat in Spain.

donquixotedelamancha · Today 14:27

Yes but the issue is that it's Dominic Raab's account and many, many people have said that he 'erupts with rage' over fuck all.

The Guardian reports him as looming over people, pointing his finger close to their faces, banging tables with rage, when they don't capitulate etc.

Simon McDonald, who was permanent undersecretary at the Foreign Office between 2015 and 2020, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “Frankly, I witnessed somebody whose methods did not help him to achieve what he wanted to do, and that I raised with him more than once.”

The high threshold for filing a formal complaint against ministers meant that civil servants were hesitant about reporting specific grievances, he said, which, without evidence, Raab “was able to deflect”.

A five-month investigation by a leading employment barrister found that Raab, as foreign secretary, had engaged in “abuse or misuse of power” to undermine or humiliate staff. He was “intimidating and insulting” in meetings at the Ministry of Justice.

Tolley confirmed that top officials at the Foreign Office and Ministry of Justice had warned Raab about his behaviour. He said Raab’s manner – which the MP himself described as “inquisitorial, direct, impatient and fastidious” – was not in every case intentional, but he was a “highly intelligent man” who ought to have realised the impact on officials, and made changes.

As justice secretary, Tolley said, Raab had “acted in a manner which was intimidating” by going further than appropriate in “delivering critical feedback”, and insulting officials by making “unconstructive critical comments” about their work.

At the Foreign Office, Raab also had to be spoken to by the permanent secretary for acting in an intimidating way, said Tolley. Raab’s fit of frustration when he questioned whether officials were breaching the ministerial code constituted “an abuse or misuse of power” in a way that undermined and humiliated them.

Marina Hyde:

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

Of the decision to give airport facilities for Pen Farthing’s pet rescue, Raab’s colleague Tom Tugendhat observed: “We’ve just used a lot of troops to get in 200 dogs; meanwhile my interpreter’s family are likely to be killed.”^

Hmm, not the first thread the OP has posted trying to minimise the allegations against Raab.

Seems quite clear he's a nasty bully and it can only be a positive thing that he's suffering the consequences of that.

It’s not clear what processes for accountability/employment policies you think civil servants should be subject to that they aren’t already? Do you mean officials should be easily sackable by ministers?

Raab is a bullying intimidating boss. Some complaints were not proven, that doesn't make them untrue, just insufficient evidence. I've read the whole report, as I'm sure the OP has, he's a workaholic who typically expected too much from his staff. Any boss who is at his desk from 7.30 am to 10 pm, Mon to Thurs, is demanding of himself (or inefficient) and no doubt will be miffed if staff clock off at 6 pm. Very senior civil servants - Sir Gus McDonald, for one - advised him about his behaviour, he ignored all entreaties to change.

The tory-bots are out in force this weekend trying to minimise the report and tweak the narrative. I don't like all these seeds being planted about the civil service being out of control, about them being activists, working against the government, etc. It's creating a narrative against the civil service and painting them as treasonous enemies plotting to bring down the government.