Sinister reason why Harry and Meghan’s staff keep quitting
Much has been made of the royal staff turnover, with the blame lumped on poor Meghan’s shoulders. But is there another reason?
Meghan and Harry have so much to do right now.
There’s a rundown Windsor cottage to renovate (where to put that yoga studio?) and a new baby to prepare for (SO MUCH Petit Bateau to buy).
Also, they need some staff, desperately.
Of all the negative stories that have been doing the rounds about the Duchess of Sussex (and her husband, the Ginger Charmer) of late there have been a number about the current procession of people popping down to the Kensington Palace HR department to tender their resignations.
— For more stories like this, go to whimn.com.au.—
First it was revealed that the couple’s personal secretary, Samantha “The Panther” Cohen, had decided to resign after working for the royal family for 17 years including as the Queen’s private secretary.
Cohen, who is Australian, took the gig earlier this year. Her mission: To get Megs royal family ready. However, it’s believed that Cohen will be leaving their household when their bebe is born in autumn next year.
Related: Is this the biggest mystery being suppressed by the royal family?
Related: The weird royal gift all Australians are entitled to?
Related: The royal love story you didn’t know
Then there’s Melissa Touabti, who was Meghan’s personal assistant — emphasis on ‘was.’ The Sunday Times recently reported that the HRH and Melissa had a troubled relationship, which was why the French woman was saying “au revoir” to spending her days scheduling tete-a-tetes with Michelle Obama and popping out for maternity Lululemon. (We imagine.)
Finally, there is Edward Lane Fox who left Harry’s employ as his “right hand man” and private secretary in winter after 15 years of service.
Much has been made of all this staff turnover, with the blame being lumped on poor Meghan’s Givenchy-clad shoulders, the insinuation being that her 5am text messages and allegedly demanding behaviour were driving palace staffers to start polishing their CVs and trawling Seek.
But is there another reason? Such as the fact that the salaries the royal family offer are pretty sh*t? Because, working for the royal family might sound wildly glamorous but the reality is far away from the gilt-edged fantasy.
Related: The brutal truth about Meghan and Kate’s ‘feud’
Related: Prince Harry shares touching message from the Queen
Related: 7 strange things that happen to royal babies
In April this year it was revealed that cleaning staff at Buckingham Palace are paid around $14 an hour, which is about $3.50 less than the suggested minimum wage in London. (You can earn more working in the major supermarket chains it has been reported.)
Meanwhile, the Palace advertised for a trainee butler in 2011 for which the “lucky” applicant would have been paid about $26,000.
Fancy keeping Her Maj’s ponies in tip-top condition? That will get you about $34,000-a-year.
Even if you want to shy away from all that “downstairs” toiling and scrubbing and getting corgi marks off the curtains, working in the Private Secretary’s office comes with a $41,000 pay packet.
Running the royal family’s social accounts as a ‘digital communications officer’ will benefit your bank account by around $52,000.
Related: The royal family has been hiding a serious hottie
Related: The Queen is ‘absolutely fuming’ over this rumour
Let’s also remember that the 1000 or so staff (does anyone get called a ‘servant’ anymore?) also face having to work notoriously long hours. The conditions are hardly luxurious. While some roles offer live-in accommodation, the rooms are said to incredibly small and dingy (though all meals are free — more spotted dick Wilbur?)
Which brings us back to the procession of staffers departing Harry’n’Meghan’s employ. Maybe it’s time to get out the Coutts cheque book and start ponying up some more dosh? Just a thought.
Daniela Elser is a freelance writer and contributor, continue the conversation @danielaelser
This story originally appeared on whimn.com.au and is reproduced here with permission