Rachel Reeves lied on her CV was not an “Economist”

[Disappointedagain22]

AIBU - it’s OK to lie to get ahead

AINBU - it’s bad RReeves very Publicly lied about her prior work. We are right to feel annoyed by this lie.

saw this headline and am feeling really disappointed. Think Rachel Reeves needs to tell public exactly her job title.
She changed job title from Economist, to “Retail Banking”
An Economist at a Bank, is a clear and specific job, it’s a economic research position. A good experience for her current position.

”Retail Banking” - is not a job title … she could have been doing anything in a branch from Bank Teller, to Branch manager, or working in back office operations putting bank notes in the plastic bags or in HR.

The problem is his accusations are so personal and politically motivated that you can see why no one would take them seriously.

Nor is it in the interest of anyone involved at the time to suggest that Reeves was anything other than professional.

Latterly the Tory Party say it’s worth a go. But it’s the same as Rayner. Reeves will survive it. And it she succeeds it will be forgotten. If she fails, the same result.

All it is really is proof that Reeves has made some wealthy people very angry. They would not be so exercised if she was not competent enough to make their lives difficult. They hate her for that, that’s all this is.

@PandoraSox

You were right when you were said you did not like Reeves.

Well done - very intuitive.

And?

She studied economics at Oxford, she joined the BoE as an economist at a very junior level. Technically, she was, therefore, a BoE economist but the IMPRESSION given was that she held a significant role there. Is that a lie?

And.

You were right when you said you didn’t like her.

That is seriously funny!

Doesn't mean I am not taking that person's claims with a mine's worth of salt right now.

Let's see what unfolds.

It was a screenshot of his linked in. Obviously a reliable way to check his CV 😆 you just couldn't make this up.

Do you want to try again? This sentence doesn't actually make sense.

As I say - this story has legs.

No more sleaze they said - what utter bullshit.

I note no suggestion that Kev has inflated his CV and was really just the tea boy.

This story has legs,

in a swimming trunks on a sunbed

This thread is hillarious, just like x

Do you need a box of tissues?

Well that's an excellent point. Do we have any evidence that Kev wasn't just the tea boy?

I can think of two bits of evidence - that he's a man and that he's not Labour. That's all you need isn't it? and he probably doesn't actually exist either

Your tea boy Kev may just be Reeves (the analyst) nemesis…

Why, is the corner shop you run long Kleenex?

In all seriousness, let's say Kev is real and that he held all the posts on that CV.

That would indicate he is a serious, intelligent, professional person. That doesn't really fit with the way he has chosen to spill the dirt he claims to have on Reeves.

Yes, suggest you drop the poor attempts at humour - not your strong suit.

Otherwise, as you suggest ‘let’s see what unfolds’.

Let's see what unfolds

Kev's towel?

His CV matches a Kevin Gillet who was quoted in Wales Online in 2007 as working at Bank of Scotland.

Just had a look to see what the fuss was about.

He's been contacted for more info in that link. Not sure it will do much tbh but I guess we'll see what happens

You are not making much sense here? Could you possibly rephrase? (Perhaps Google translate is glitchy tonight).

So RR definitely lied on LinkedIn, but Kev absolutely and definitely didn't? Okaaaaaay.

With sarcasm, you asked if I needed a box of tissues.

Please explain.

And what do you mean re Google Translate? Be very clear please.

Is Kev the Chancellor?

Did I miss something?

Perhaps Google translate is glitchy tonight

What is this referring to?