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

By all accounts?? Really! Nice try.

At least pay them properly!!

Is it time to stop all this cowtowing to royalty and have a referendum on whether in 2025 when so many people struggle to live that you have such wealthy individuals to which mere mortals are expectedly curtsey/bow to. I truly feel any loyalty to the royals died with the late QE2.

I used to post a lot on this board - my bias is well known but when this story lept out of the Sundays just had to share !

Really !!!!

One of the head gardeners left 'after serving the King for decades'. - so he retired then?

Just had a quick look at the Highgrove website and the rf website and the payscales seem reasonable - I'm guessing the NMW roles were for garden labourers, not head gardeners 😁

I thought the wages in Charles's household were said to be much better than in the late Queen's, though now he's "taken over" maybe they've reverted to what she used to pay?

The overall issue comes as no surprise though. Palace employment's supposed to be good for the CV - though never ask me why - but it's hard to imagine many being happy to work for a pettish individual like this, especially when his habit of sacking people at tthe drop off a hat is so well reported

The Royal Family have always paid their staff poorly. I have seen the advertisements!

Agree with a pp who said it’s interesting watching certain posters rush to the monarchy’s defence! It can hardly be described as a non-story when,

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

Also, this isn’t an isolated incident. Remember the Palace’s chef’s strike in 2017 when 14 chefs, porters and kitchen staff walked out?

https://au.lifestyle.yahoo.com/buckingham-palace-in-turmoil-as-queens-staff-quit-37484984.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAGDpMOA2pKDqw2O9X2sB7o7_kxIFlFZEO7cTs_s0n8HtEBwKfm41sneBMFVkK9BMPUGDGraGzSTG-qCFMDAmIP_rFwvpjGFiYkDdesiuj1xgOArYyXHtLQVm8L64iUJXkiSHaTKe3gxJfIdXNybYd1AzrOvvdmScfSm8ObKdDBn-

A short time later, a deputy gardener made the technical error during a walkabout — apparently about magnolias. Charles insisted he be removed immediately. At the end of the man’s probation period he was told by Innemée that he had not passed, with foundation sources now claiming he was not at the “level required for the role”.

People fail probation all the time. It sounds like this was perfectly justified. How does that become the fault of the employer?

I think this is a super-goady ‘ooh -look over there!’ desperation thread!

A good place to hide bad PR for the Sussexes?

Minimum wage is ridiculous and Charles sounds like a spoilt brat. I'm sure people will insist the 11 out of 12 who left in 3 years were all wrong though and that Charlie is a great employer and they deserve as little money as possible.

Seems to me that the major things that emerge from this investigation are that there are pay and HR issues for the gardening staff-which are obviously unacceptable and should be fixed, but have come out about other royal staff before-and the fact that Charles is inclined to be a capricious micromanager. Deeply annoying but not a crime. Surely both of these things have been well known to anyone who is remotely interested in the way the Royal Family conducts its affairs for a very long time? What’s new here?

Yeah right! 😃

And yet monarchists post all of the time about Meghan’s staff turnover? But that’s allowed I suppose? And all of that reporting is completely unbiased?

Talk about hypocritical!

Nice try but I see what you did there. And to be fair, I did plant the seed, so I can't really blame you. I won’t lose my ragwort over it.
Sadly, I must bow out of the thread for the rest of the day, as I’m off to a garden party in Tunbridge Wells. Disgusting, I know.
I can only hope my host is prepared to answer a thorny line of questioning about her magnolias. Wish me luck in the shruburbs.

it is absolutely not a respected newspaper, it is on a par with The Sun

No - I think people will quite reasonably want to look deeper into the report, taking into account the Murdoch press’s reputation and the proprietor’s known republican agenda.

Just critical thinking, really.

Precisely. Now imagine these allegations had come from one or several gardeners in Montecito. We’d already be knee-deep in thread two: awash in manufactured outrage, forensic commentary, and colour-coded timelines.
Even if one accepts the legitimacy of a constitutional monarchy within a parliamentary democracy, it remains essential to hold their feet to the fire preferably with the same scrutiny applied to anyone else.

Thank you to The Times for your sterling work. No doubt Murdoch’s ancestors were once transported for some petty-fogging offence in the mother country, and this is his long-game revenge.

Annoying micro-manager, I can believe! (I’m a bit of a one myself…)

Hardly.

Established: It has been in publication since 1822 and is one of the UK's most widely read and influential Sunday papers.

Investigative journalism: It has a strong track record of serious investigative work (e.g. the Thalidomide scandal, FIFA corruption, and MPs’ expenses).

Audience: It targets a centre-right, affluent readership and often features in-depth reporting, analysis, and long-form journalism.

Fair comment, CurlewKate, but I very much doubt wages will improve while they can still attract staff. They may be forced to pay minimum wage, but there are countless reports of Charles's aversion to invoices and expectations that people will provide their services for nothing so he may well resent even that

Rightly or wrongly the late Queen inspired a lot of loyalty, but it's hardly a surprise if that's lessened now

Oh well I take a dim view of that.

That is a cheap trick - to start a goady thread and run away!

in that case, if OP can’t be bothered to, neither can I. Off to do some gardening!

Nothing goady about it just hard facts, which some may find insufficiently deferential.
Assuming the thread’s still alive when I return, I’ll do my best to respond to any points raised. But I’ve every confidence the collective hive mind of Mumsnet can manage perfectly well without me.

So @vera99 starts a negative thread about KCIII, shoehorns in Meghan Markle (before we even get to the bottom of the first page) and then conveniently has to go out for the day. Colour me surprised. 🙄🙄

Depends on how much he is paid for his knowledge!

Well, no, because if the job spec requires a certain level of knowledge, then pay is not relevant. Being underpaid is a separate issue to not knowing how to fulfil the requirements of a job