King Charles - disquiet at Highgrove & the gardeners’ exodus - SUNDAY TIMES INVESTIGATION

[vera99]

Murdoch is growing bolder in his dotage — first with Trump, and now with another bombshell investigation into the grasping, stagnant, and catastrophically out-of-touch Windsors. And yet we keep pumping more public money into this so-called dysfunctional family.

What you need to know

King’s demands, staff shortages and low pay led to gardener exodus at Highgrove

Royal charity which runs gardens told to offer mental health support after formal investigation

Charles has lost 11 of 12 garden staff since 2022 including two head gardeners who quit within a year

Monarch said of one worker: “Do not put that man in front of me again”

After Ukraine invasion King proposed plugging staff shortages with war refugees or the elderly

At one point half of staff were on minimum wage

https://archive.ph/fspT3#selection-1495.0-1501.155

In that case, why was he asking the charity to carry out work on his private estate specifically regarding the ragwort issue?

The article says that as part of the lease of the gardens to the Foundation he has access to the swimming pool.

As I understand it, ragwort is a problem in agricultural areas and should be disposed of promptly as it can cause problems for a number of animals (I do not live in the countryside so this is from general knowledge - happy to be corrected).

Could it be that we're looking at this from the wrong end of the telescope?

Perhaps, instead of KC getting a charity to do his work and letting them exploit their workers (not saying they are), perhaps this charity, which seems to be involved in training horticulturalists, needed somewhere to be based/operate on and KC offered Highgrove?

Perhaps it's not so much them doing him a favour, more the other way round?

I don't know - but sometimes that's the case. I've come across situations like this where an outdoor-based charity has the funds, the personnel, the plans, but no actual territory on which to operate. It's a possibility.

@PigeonDress

Yes - they're two very different skillsets, aren't they? What is needed is a good partnership of brawn and creativity/plant knowledge, to really make a garden design business work.

(It's a bit like some women I knew who did an interior design course (remember those!!) and then tried to get clients on the basis of making a lovely mood board with fabrics, colours and photos.

Unfortunately, they also required the client to have fully prepped the rooms (stripping wallpaper, plastering,etc) before they came in to waft around with their swatches, bless them. Needless to say, they didn't get any work! They needed either to go to college and learn plastering - a very in-demand and skilled job- or find someone who could do the tougher work to partner them.)

I think it’s interesting that the high turnover has been linked to the last two years including someone who had worked quite happily for Charles for many years.

So something specifically changed in the last two years re the managing of the garden staff.

Presumably Charles also doesn’t get as much time to potter about at Highgrove since becoming King so hasn’t got to know the new staff on a personal level leading to less trust and empathy on both sides.

@bluegreygreenand @CoffeeCantatahave both provided good answers, I get the impression though that no explanation will be good enough for you.

And if it's was meghan paying low wages to staff what would your response be?

What is your reaping to the fact charles has high turnover ofnstaff the very thing you criticise Meghan for and call her a bully

Flattered but not interested sorry .

What would you say? Divert from the leak to a photographer of Harry's attempts to slither back into the UK?

Yes, good analogy, I know a lot of the interior design wafters too! Not a patch on the amazing, skilled tradesmen and women we have been lucky to engage, who actually have a terrific eye for design too.

Could well be !
or just an old fashioned attempt to whip up republican fury?

Interestingly, nobody seems to have picked up on the fact that these arrangements appear designed to prevent William from inheriting the estate.
It looks increasingly like Charles has one eye on posterity wanting the gardens to endure as a lasting personal legacy, rather than risk them being folded into the broader Royal Estate and handed down to William and his family as part of the usual succession.

Perhaps he doesn’t fully trust William to preserve them there have been rumours, after all. And not just about differing priorities: there have long been whispers of tension between Buckingham Palace and Kensington Palace, with suggestions that the King’s camp has occasionally briefed against William’s team.

In that context, this starts to look less like simple estate planning and more like legacy control but none of this excuses bullying and intemperate behavuiour towards underpaid hard working staff.

Or cold, hard facts especially the kind that never seem to land on the ermine-trimmed desks of the royal sycophants who make up the eternal soft-soap chorus of the choir eternal - and royally inconvenient facts, at that.

Really?
it looks like no such thing to me! 🤷‍♀️

and you are forgetting that William may not wish to carry on with it himself!
such supposition helps no one.

.

Interestingly, nobody seems to have picked up on the fact that these arrangements appear designed to prevent William from inheriting the estate.

That's because it's not correct. William now owns the estate as part of the Duchy of Cornwall. Through the arrangements discussed in the article Charles leases Highgrove from the Duchy.

Interesting so through these arrangements has Charles effectively ensured that Highgrove Gardens will be preserved in perpetuity, regardless of the intentions of any future monarch?

This post makes no sense whatsoever!
first you are angry because Charles is apparently not paying his staff enough and expects them to do their job .

then when it’s pointed out he is no longer paying them it’s the charity , you are angry about that.

then you are implying that he’s trying to rob his own son and heir and keep things from him ( which can’t happen when William becomes king ) .

now you are claiming facts that are not established and insulting anyone who doesn’t agree with you!

Sounds like it was a 20 year lease so long enough to let Charles keep using it as a private residence then William / George can decide whether to renew the Foundation lease or manage it some other way.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/K2OW0-_ne64

As a trained gardener I actually agree with all three statements.

One ragwort in an organic garden going to seed is a big problem and should never be coming into flower.

I too would be disappointed by the delphinium disappointment, pretty simple to grow with good slug control and any gardener should be aware of their employers favourites.

A gardener with poor knowledge shouldn’t be working there unless on a training scheme.

I do think the low pay is poor given King Charles should recognise professional skills in that sphere and can afford to set a good example in recompense.

From the article:

He entered into a 20-year agreement to rent the estate through the company. His landlord: the Duchy of Cornwall, which, under his control or his son’s, would have to honour the deal ...
As a result, Charles could keep the residence ... while subletting the gardens to The Prince’s Foundation (now The King’s Foundation)

The lease runs for 20 years

Edit to remove unnecessary link

I haven't read the thread through but ragwort is not ok in fields where there are animals and if you let it seed in the garden it can get about to the waysides and the fields next door. In the field near me there aren't any animals but I will take out ragwort if it's in the rough parts of my garden, whereas I'd leave nettles and dock and cow parsley.

Sorry I don’t click on unverified or unasked for links to random YouTube videos.

Reading through the article again I think one of the issues is the management of the garden staff is being supervised by someone who doesn’t really care about gardening.

Unlike when Charles was more hands on in charge this new manager seems to have prioritized making the estate turn a profit over the running of the garden.

The more senior gardeners who quit seem to be frustrated that they weren’t being allowed to explain the gardening reasons behind the decisions they wanted to make because this manager was running interference.