Is there really that much of a difference between "charity and philanthropy" v "public duty"?

[Funfacts99]

For the record I lean towards Republicanism but in general I am on the fence about this specific, current H & M debacle. On the one hand, I think it must be very difficult to join the RF as an outsider. On the other hand, I can see the merit in the argument that you are either totally in, or totally out.

However, as has been stated, is there really that much of a difference between so-called "public duty" and "charity and philanthropy" in reality? The Queen and Prince Charles undoubtedly put in the work visiting hospitals, village halls, and scout huts across the country. But at the same time, their land and estates make huge profits and generate a lot of income.

Therefore it could be argued that the RF's charitable work is backed by private income too. So what's the difference (apart from practical logistics related to H & M's location, but they have already said they would be willing to travel) between doing charitable work supported by income that you generate yourself by deals with Netflix etc, and doing charitable works backed by income generated from the Duchy of Lancaster and the Duchy of Cornwall's land and estates (which, if I have understood it correctly) is private, not public money?

Is there reliable information about the staff who left nicknaming and ridiculing Meghan. It is good, surely, that HR procedures are being reviewed.
Can you not see the irony that Meghan and Harry want everyone to hear their voice but not as keen for the voices and stories of their staff to be heard.

Have you read the Times article? The argument is that they didn’t investigate the bullying because BP wanted to protect Meghan so were prepared to throw staff under a bus to save her.

@felulageller

It will be interesting to see what Charlotte and Louis lives will be like. On normal protocol they shouldn't even be HRHs.

Only because HMQ is so long lived.

If she had died at the same age as the longest-lived of her predecessors (Queen Victoria or King George III, dies aged 81) then they would both have been HRH at birth as grandchildren of the monarch.

They'll end up like other younger siblings of future monarch - over recent generations, Princess Margaret, then Princes Andrew and Edward and Princess Anne, then Prince Harry.

So there's definitely plenty of scope to go in many directions, whether that to Olympian, full time working Royal, stepping back, failed business career, or disgrace.

@Peaseblossom22 I think, as previous posters have said, it’s more likely that speaking rudely to your staff is considered par for the course at BP and they didn’t want to uncover that can of worms!

It's going to very difficult for Charles to succeed his mother.All the paraphernalia of Coronation etc. An old man is not nearly as charismatic as a young woman was back in 1953.
Will he make it or will the whole thing collapse?

I know several people who have worked there over the last twenty years. None have reported that , in fact the reverse, long hours yes, pay’s not brilliant, difficult because of the constant need to be vigilant for press etc. Lots of internal politics and hierarchy . But not rudeness, frankly internal seething is much more British than the American approach which is to just ( as my US SIL would say ) ‘say it like it is ‘ and this is provably where MM came a cropper.

I have seen this a lot with US colleagues , in their mind they are just being honest , to the British it’s over aggressive and unnecessary . Neither is wrong or right it’s just culturally different . Also remember that in the US you can fire someone almost at will if you consider their performance poor , we can’t do that here so tend to be more circumspect.

@Peaseblossom22

I know several people who have worked there over the last twenty years. None have reported that , in fact the reverse, long hours yes, pay’s not brilliant, difficult because of the constant need to be vigilant for press etc. Lots of internal politics and hierarchy . But not rudeness, frankly internal seething is much more British than the American approach which is to just ( as my US SIL would say ) ‘say it like it is ‘ and this is provably where MM came a cropper.

I have seen this a lot with US colleagues , in their mind they are just being honest , to the British it’s over aggressive and unnecessary . Neither is wrong or right it’s just culturally different . Also remember that in the US you can fire someone almost at will if you consider their performance poor , we can’t do that here so tend to be more circumspect.

I've had family who worked for the RF too, and they would agree. The Royals expect a lot, pay little, but are always polite and show concern about staff personal problems.

Surely Meghan, who constantly gives "love thy neighbour" advice, and the importance of mental health, would be kind to those beneath her. Yes?

Exsctly. “What Meghan wants, Meghan gets” remember. It’s fine if she’s calling the shots but this wasn’t going to be the case in the RF. She therefore struggled with a different culture and her wishes were tempered with the overall requirements of the Queen. She’s going to be fine in America because they applaud money. It also seems that the Americans don’t support the Queen now because Meghan spreads her view of life in the Royal Household. Presumably Mr Biden won’t want to come here.

Largely we have a constitutional monarch. That’s not likely to change. The RF needs to slim down and champion fewer charities and causes. However, opening parliament, hosting banquets and other state occasions won’t change. It still seems odd to me that Meghan had such a huge ego she thought it would all change for her.

I cannot see Harry’s connection between Meghan and his mother’s death either. She had left the RF by then. She had a drunk driver. She didn’t have the same protection that Meghan enjoyed. The press is a connection but I’m glad we have a free press.

“Surely Meghan, who constantly gives "love thy neighbour" advice, and the importance of mental health, would be kind to those beneath her. Yes?”

And what proof do you have that she isn’t?

By all accounts, her colleagues enjoyed working with her in the US.

Perhaps RF staff are not used to a mixed race, confident and direct woman?

Or worse, perhaps they were aggressive towards MM and burst into tears when called out on it (the Karen meme)?

Or may be she did bully them...who knows and the time for a fair investigation has long passed. Now with the acrimony, the conclusion is suspect. . It is all a mess and should have been investigated then

Here we go again - she’s mixed race and can’t be a bully.

Is the best you can say is that perhaps they were aggressive towards her? Jason Knauf reported her behaviour and is American and must have perceived her behaviour unacceptable even by more direct American standards.

Ah, so Jason is believable, but MM is not? Why do you think that

None of us know what happened, please my post above.the only thing which seems relatively clear is that RF failed to act in a professional and timely way.

And yes, women of colour are more likely to get bullied in the UK than others. Especially in public organisations. I saw stats about that in some report, I’m sure you can google it if you are interested

@Lookingforwardto2021

Ah, so Jason is believable, but MM is not? Why do you think that

None of us know what happened, please my post above.the only thing which seems relatively clear is that RF failed to act in a professional and timely way.

To me MM is not believable because she said she did not contribute to Finding Freedom but then a judge looking at the ANL case declared she lied and had. JK hasn’t been caught out publicly lying to save his reputation. The rich and powerful tend to get away with bullying people because some are so indoctrinated that they cannot believe otherwise.

Completely agree that the RF didn’t act appropriately and if they had, this wouldn’t be being exposed now.

They didn’t act because they thought they were protecting Meghan. The Daily Telegraph has details of some of the incidents. Wearing diamond earrings given by the Saudi Prince who ordered the killing of the journalist Khashoghi. Meghan wanted to keep all the free designer outfits she was sent. RF pay for what they wear. She kept the outfits and Prince Charles paid. She sent emails to staff all hours of the day. She wanted air fresheners in St George’s Chapel. Her wedding dresses cost £500,000. She got what she wanted but her staff walked out .
Harry was summoned by the Queen because he lost his temper with staff.

There’s obviously a huge difference between the reality of the RF and what the USA thinks the RF is. The Telegraph think Queen Oprah rules there. They also look at language. In particular the notion of “your truth”. That’s what you believe but isn’t “the truth”. So basically if you believe something, you say it. It’s a massive issue in the USA. Just look at Donald Trump.

I’ll do out of a limb here...I’ll wager you are an avid reader of the Daily Fail 😂

Looking very predictable, yes. And all very wrong of course. Really not sure why avid DM readers don't stick to the comments on those pages with like minded bigots people. 😁

I read a really good distinction between 'public service' and 'philanthropy' on twitter. To live a life devoted to public service involves sacrifice of self. Not just time and work but at all times putting the collective before the individual.

So you sacrifice your opinions, your politics, your individual voice, your personal goals and your sense of individuality.

So in the case of the monarchy, the monarchy always comes first and you must be prepared to put it first at all times. Every day.

Whereas philanthropy is something you can dip in and out of. You can still put your own voice, personality and goals first. Service of this nature become secondary to the individual. It is done on the side.

Not that I think all Royals follow this - but I think the Queen and Prince Philip have to a large degree.

“We all can agree all people are entitled to their voice and their story -including the staff who left the Sussex’s employment during their time at the palace. The story is as much about the suits at BP protecting Meghan from bullying claims and BP not doing enough to protect their staff - and the looking at latter must be a good thing. Nobody should be exposed to workplace bullying and feel that they have no recourse to due processes”

The average American has a very different way of speaking to the average Brit. I wonder if that has a lot to do with it. The people in the Palace are not worldly people.

The main thing we’ve learnt from the while affair is that the monarchy cannot or will not adapt or modernize. I also sense a very strong generational divide over the,say, under 35s/40s who are shocked that the royal family cannot assimilate anybody different from themselves (IE they blame the RF) and the older generations who take the opposite view.

@ShallowCoastalWaters
Well, the Queen is the CEO and has millions singing songs in her honor at major sporting events, is treated like a Demi-God by all in her presence etc. I’m sure that has something to do with her much lauded ability to suppress her “individual voice”. Hope the firm gets scrapped soon, it’s not healthy for anyone, least of all it’s members who are expected to a forego a normal life of free agency for one of “public duty” due to an accident of birth.

It’s interesting that the person who raised concerns about MM’s behaviour towards her staff, Jason Knauf , is himself American . One of the people she is accused of bullying is herself black.
Neither fit the stereotype of white men in grey suits.

She seems to bully women in junior positions so where are her feminist principles?

'Seems to'

That is the key.
Let's see an independent enquiry on it?

@ShallowCoastalWaters

I read a really good distinction between 'public service' and 'philanthropy' on twitter. To live a life devoted to public service involves sacrifice of self. Not just time and work but at all times putting the collective before the individual.

So you sacrifice your opinions, your politics, your individual voice, your personal goals and your sense of individuality.

So in the case of the monarchy, the monarchy always comes first and you must be prepared to put it first at all times. Every day.

Whereas philanthropy is something you can dip in and out of. You can still put your own voice, personality and goals first. Service of this nature become secondary to the individual. It is done on the side.

Not that I think all Royals follow this - but I think the Queen and Prince Philip have to a large degree.

I think this sums it well. There are not many people who effectively put their role, opinions and views before everything else. Wasn’t it said that you work for the monarchy, the monarchy doesn’t work for you?

The bullying claims feels very reminiscent of Johnny Depp and Amber Heard where so many people just couldn’t comprehend that Depp could be abusive because they admired him and he was rich/powerful/famous... In the end, what happened? Both sides came out looking really bad and also to some extent both sides told the truth. I don’t see why people can’t have felt bullied by Meghan whilst she simultaneously felt bullied by others at the palace and media.

Once upon a time I was so pleased by Meghan joining the royal family then I gradually became more and more disillusioned with their antics and way they went about things. Now this will be my last post on them because they’ve gone beyond holding interest. I might be in the minority but I can see how it could have been similar with the royal family - from pleased and welcoming, to shocked and disappointed, and now resigned and moving away. If others feel the same, they might watch their interview for the entertainment (because that’s what they’ve become) but long term they are unlikely to become much whilst the royal family will undoubtedly brush this off and move on.

What a desperate old style way of thinking the palace have that ppl are just gonna take the tabloids word for it. This is not the 80s. They should wake up. I see the earrings story was laughed into oblivion since ppl know that it was a stitch up and the jewellery belongs to the crown.

Very interesting thread here
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1366915308477423621.html

I also like how all these ppl that used to work with MM are coming out testifying that she is not a bully and always treated ppl fairly. Even Diana's biographer has already reported how he spent a year in LA putting out adverts that he would pay for dirt on her, and no one came out with that instead they all said she was good to work with.

And just what kind of institution is the queen running here with all these leaks and stories.

What game did they think they are playing by this latest smear. Looks like employees are doing whatever they want, whenever. HMQE has to run a tighter ship than this.