Redundancy warning

[victor]

To staff at Clarence house what fantastic timing as they were busy with arrangements over the passing of the Queen

[cromwell]

How crass is this. The staff have been working long hours this last week and this is the treatment that they get.
Very, very insensitive and terrible timing.

[meriad]

Seriously? Crikey that's just awful - those poor people

[Osc]

Scare headlines - there “may” be redundancies “if” the King moves to Buckingham Palace, which hasn’t been decided as he likes Clarence House. Also every effort would be made to redistribute staff to other royal properties, from my reading of it.

[Suff]

As always there are those who will take early retirement and a package.

It is unrealistic for people to expect that the King will continue as he did. However I expect Charles will exert effort to ensure the staff are accommodated.

This smacks of republican reporting.

[saundra]

Typical scare mongering by media as always

[Kaz]

Scare headlines - there “may” be redundancies “if” the King moves to Buckingham Palace, which hasn’t been decided as he likes Clarence House. Also every effort would be made to redistribute staff to other royal properties, from my reading of it.

Exactly right Osc. Apparently they’ve been given advance warning, which must be done according to law, but every effort will be made to redeploy staff or there will be enhanced redundancy packages. If HM moves to Buck House he won’t need two London bases.

[Workingman]

"Heartless" and also "callous in the extreme," is how the 'republican' civil service union has described the urgency in the way in which it was done.

I wonder how many of us would be so accepting if we were on the receiving end?

It is not that it has been done, nor that it might have been necesary at some time, but the way it has been handled. Would it really have hurt to wait till a few days after the funeral and allow many of the loose ends to be tied up?