Priti Patel - workplace bully?

tuxy

Was she joking about starving Ireland?
She's an intelligent woman, she knew Ireland was a large net exporter of food all along?

Michelinextra.

jimgoose wrote: »

It's possible that she has some sort of weird, post-colonial mindset that Orwell would probably have seen in Burma back in the day, where the natives don the uniform of the oppressor and go "Look! I'm as good as you, I can be horrible to brown people too!!" :pac:

I notice this with a lot of Indians

They seem to want to be more English than the English themselves

It's like a Stockholm Syndrome

Raconteuse

Yeah it's a recognised thing. My English friend's grandmother is Indian and extremely "Rule Britannia".

tuxy

Raconteuse wrote: »

Yeah it's a recognised thing. My English friend's grandmother is Indian and extremely "Rule Britannia".

Well the colonial past Britain had over India would have been the glory days for their ancestors.

AllForIt

partyguinness wrote: »

Right, so all the complaints about her from different people going back several years in different departments about being a two faced lying cow is some mad Remainer conspiracy. Okay then.

She is a nasty piece of work.

Just doesn't sound plausible to me.

*a two faced lying cow*. Hmm. Who talks like that about any man.

I am not in any way condoning 'bullying', bully's are no doubt low life cu*ts. But it seems to me when a woman is robust, in the same way men are, that their personal character is vilified in a way a mans isn't. I've already alluded to that point in relation to Thatcher.

And even if it were true what you say, that it has been going on for years - why is it all coming out now? All looks suspicious to me. Brexit isn't really done yet until a trade deal is reached.

Whatever the truth, it is completely improper that a senior civil servant issues televised press statements as if he were a politician. It's a private affair and it seems to me he made this statement to cause maximum damage to the government before any court case has even begun. I smell a remainer rat in all this and I trust my instincts.


edit: when you hear commentators say that Boris announced his wife's pregnancy 'in a timely manner to bury this story', which is utter nonsense as it won't do that since it's ongoing - you just know the knives are out.

dxhound2005

The phenomenon of "more Irish that the Irish themselves" is well known. The second and third generation South Asians in cities in the north of England, are some of the most vociferous against East Europeans arriving in their midst.

partyguinness

dxhound2005 wrote: »

The phenomenon of "more Irish that the Irish themselves" is well known. The second and third generation South Asians in cities in the north of England, are some of the most vociferous against East Europeans arriving in their midst.

because the south east Asians do a lot of the **** menial and 'gig economy' jobs and now Eastern Europeans are taking them. That is the perception anyway.

partyguinness

AllForIt wrote: »

Just doesn't sound plausible to me.

*a two faced lying cow*. Hmm. Who talks like that about any man.

I am not in any way condoning 'bullying', bully's are no doubt low life cu*ts. But it seems to me when a woman is robust, in the same way men are, that their personal character is vilified in a way a mans isn't. I've already alluded to that point in relation to Thatcher.

And even if it were true what you say, that it has been going on for years - why is it all coming out now? All looks suspicious to me. Brexit isn't really done yet until a trade deal is reached.

Whatever the truth, it is completely improper that a senior civil servant issues televised press statements as if he were a politician. It's a private affair and it seems to me he made this statement to cause maximum damage to the government before any court case has even begun. I smell a remainer rat in all this and I trust my instincts.


edit: when you hear commentators say that Boris announced his wife's pregnancy 'in a timely manner to bury this story', which is utter nonsense as it won't do that since it's ongoing - you just know the knives are out.

I'm sorry but you lose all credibility with this rubbish.

BJ, Gove et all are al lying two faced self serving cows. There you go.

partyguinness

AllForIt wrote: »

Clearly dislikable? Isn't that just subjective. Just like Thatcher was 'a horrible b**ch', but was adored by others.

If you have some inside information on this I'm all ears.

Whatever you say about Thatcher, there is no record of her bullying staff.

ChippingSodbury

AllForIt wrote: »

Just doesn't sound plausible to me.

*a two faced lying cow*. Hmm. Who talks like that about any man.

I am not in any way condoning 'bullying', bully's are no doubt low life cu*ts. But it seems to me when a woman is robust, in the same way men are, that their personal character is vilified in a way a mans isn't. I've already alluded to that point in relation to Thatcher.

And even if it were true what you say, that it has been going on for years - why is it all coming out now? All looks suspicious to me. Brexit isn't really done yet until a trade deal is reached.

Whatever the truth, it is completely improper that a senior civil servant issues televised press statements as if he were a politician. It's a private affair and it seems to me he made this statement to cause maximum damage to the government before any court case has even begun. I smell a remainer rat in all this and I trust my instincts.


edit: when you hear commentators say that Boris announced his wife's pregnancy 'in a timely manner to bury this story', which is utter nonsense as it won't do that since it's ongoing - you just know the knives are out.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51705069

The staff member also alleges she was told the decision to dismiss her a year later was not made on performance grounds but because Ms Patel did not "like [her] face", according to comments attributed to her line manager and a colleague.

On that day in October 2015, Ms Patel had shouted at the woman in her private office and told her to "get lost" and "get out of her face", the correspondence alleges.

Ms Patel is described as having acted "without warning" and with an "unprovoked level of aggression", in the woman's formal grievance complaint.

This was settled for £25k rather than go to Tribunal.

Regarding Sir Philip Rutnam:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-51688261?intlink_from_url=https://www.bbc.com/news/topics/c4e71xw4dkzt/home-office&link_location=live-reporting-story

I think you'll find he wasn't a Civil Servant at the time of the Press Conference as he had already resigned. It's also telling that he turned down a settlement offer in favour of going to Tribunal

The incidents that are in the public domain about her behaviour all seem to point in the same direction. To me, the most disturbing one is her unsanctioned meetings in Israel. The Foreign Office (over there and here and I'm sure everywhere else in the world) are extremely careful about how they conduct their business because the reputation of the country is at stake. Her behaviour (and explanation) of these meetings really give off the impression of "those guidelines don't apply to me...."

Tony EH

partyguinness wrote: »

Whatever you say about Thatcher, there is no record of her bullying staff.

That's because she surrounded herself with yes men and anyone who disagreed with her were "wets" and ousted. Her "management style" was very much do as I say and it was her eventual downfall in the end.

Her 'Spitting Image' representation was pretty close in many respects.

Raconteuse

tuxy wrote: »

Well the colonial past Britain had over India would have been the glory days for their ancestors.

Ah th'auld famine and slavery and beatings and murder days.

jimgoose

tuxy wrote: »

Well the colonial past Britain had over India would have been the glory days for their ancestors.

An' for all 'is dirty 'ide
⁠'E was white, clear white, inside
⁠When 'e went to tend the wounded under fire!
⁠It was "Din! Din! Din!"
⁠With the bullets kickin' dust-spots on the green.
⁠When the cartridges ran out,
⁠You could hear the front-files shout,
⁠"Hi! ammunition-mules an' Gunga Din!"

banie01

partyguinness wrote: »

I'm sorry but you lose all credibility with this rubbish.

BJ, Gove et all are al lying two faced self serving cows. There you go.

Agreed.

Casting calling someone being a prick a "cow" as being patriarchal generally diminishes the time I'd give over to listening to a point.

Generally I refer to double dealing males as 2 faced lying bastàrds, or indeed any other slander as to their lineage and indeed lack of it that springs to mind!
Is it more? Or less offensive to use that term towards females partaking in similar behaviour?

Should we now be gender neutral in our efforts to share our opinions of assholes?
Is there a gender neutral term for asshole?
Or does it fit every occasion?

Balf

tuxy wrote: »

Was she joking about starving Ireland?
She's an intelligent woman, she knew Ireland was a large net exporter of food all along?

Well, no. She was just well briefed, and understood the situation more than most Irish people.

Ireland has been net importer of food since 2000, UN data reveals

Will there be food shortages if there is a hard Brexit?

James Brown

She's a Hopkins/Morgan type looking to get a higher profile. It's sad but these people flourish in these anti-anti times, by which I mean the right wing fight back against equality and humanitarianism. Worked for Johnson/Trump/Farage etc..

Michelinextra.

Bowie wrote: »

She's a Hopkins/Morgan type looking to get a higher profile. It's sad but these people flourish in these anti-anti times, by which I mean the right wing fight back against equality and humanitarianism. Worked for Johnson/Trump/Farage etc..

What's a hopkins morgan type

James Brown

Michelinextra. wrote: »

What's a hopkins morgan type

An arsehole using ignorance and hate to sh*t on others for attention to raise their profile.

Michelinextra.

Bowie wrote: »

An arsehole using ignorance and hate to sh*t on others for attention to raise their profile.

Ok thanks for the definition

AllForIt

partyguinness wrote: »

I'm sorry but you lose all credibility with this rubbish.

BJ, Gove et all are al lying two faced self serving cows. There you go.

And I'm loosing credibility lol

AllForIt

ChippingSodbury wrote: »

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51705069


This was settled for £25k rather than go to Tribunal.

Regarding Sir Philip Rutnam:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-51688261?intlink_from_url=https://www.bbc.com/news/topics/c4e71xw4dkzt/home-office&link_location=live-reporting-story

I think you'll find he wasn't a Civil Servant at the time of the Press Conference as he had already resigned. It's also telling that he turned down a settlement offer in favour of going to Tribunal

The incidents that are in the public domain about her behaviour all seem to point in the same direction. To me, the most disturbing one is her unsanctioned meetings in Israel. The Foreign Office (over there and here and I'm sure everywhere else in the world) are extremely careful about how they conduct their business because the reputation of the country is at stake. Her behaviour (and explanation) of these meetings really give off the impression of "those guidelines don't apply to me...."

So I think you'll find he wasn't even a senior civil servant at that time in which case he made a public statement as a completely private individual.

Since when is this the norm?

ChippingSodbury

You're right, it's not the norm.

But neither is it the norm for a senior civil servant of 30 odd years to resign because of what they have described as bullying. In any normal society, that's newsworthy.

Maybe she's just doing her job and he was a lazy, good-for-nothing civil servant but I find that hard to believe given that he refused a settlement and instead is going to a workplace tribunal regarding his allegations.

Forget about Brexit and all that goes with it, whether his statement is out of the ordinary or not, what do you think of her behaviour:

• a Settlement regarding constructive dismissal already paid out in 2015 (complaint re: bullying)
• Her unsanctioned meetings in Israel
• The resignation of a senior Civil Servant of over 30 years service (complaint re: bullying)
• Yet another allegation of bullying from 2017 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-51731753)

Maybe she's just "draining the swamp" of all these lazy, "lifer" civil servants but I think not...

ohnonotgmail

AllForIt wrote: »

So I think you'll find he wasn't even a senior civil servant at that time in which case he made a public statement as a completely private individual.

Since when is this the norm?

As a private individual he is entitled to make whatever public statements he likes.

conorhal

Michelinextra. wrote: »

I notice this with a lot of Indians

They seem to want to be more English than the English themselves

It's like a Stockholm Syndrome

Or.... integration? Shocking stuff.


The left really do have a hard on for bullying women who wrong-think.
It's very noticeable that they seem to reserve a special level of vitriolic hatred for any minority that wanders off the reservation and of course it's a double betrayal to their intersectional thinking minds that a woman of colour is not conforming to how they think she should think. Patel is obviously a race and gender traitor who has to be destroyed before any of their other purse puppies get any ideas.
If Diane Abbot was accused of this crap you can bet your ass the narrative would be 'these cis white men can't handle a stronk independent wyoman talking back to them!'

ChippingSodbury

ChippingSodbury wrote: »

You're right, it's not the norm.

But neither is it the norm for a senior civil servant of 30 odd years to resign because of what they have described as bullying. In any normal society, that's newsworthy.

Maybe she's just doing her job and he was a lazy, good-for-nothing civil servant but I find that hard to believe given that he refused a settlement and instead is going to a workplace tribunal regarding his allegations.

Forget about Brexit and all that goes with it, whether his statement is out of the ordinary or not, what do you think of her behaviour:

• a Settlement regarding constructive dismissal already paid out in 2015 (complaint re: bullying)
• Her unsanctioned meetings in Israel
• The resignation of a senior Civil Servant of over 30 years service (complaint re: bullying)
• Yet another allegation of bullying from 2017 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-51731753)

Maybe she's just "draining the swamp" of all these lazy, "lifer" civil servants but I think not...

My money is that it is a bit of both.

conorhal wrote: »

Or.... integration? Shocking stuff.


The left really do have a hard on for bullying women who wrong-think.
It's very noticeable that they seem to reserve a special level of vitriolic hatred for any minority that wanders off the reservation and of course it's a double betrayal to their intersectional thinking minds that a woman of colour is not conforming to how they think she should think. Patel is obviously a race and gender traitor who has to be destroyed before any of their other purse puppies get any ideas.
If Diane Abbot was accused of this crap you can bet your ass the narrative would be 'these cis white men can't handle a stronk independent wyoman talking back to them!'

It does make you wonder what people expect from her, a job in a call centre maybe, or running a restaurant?

saying that an woman of Indian descent is only capable of being a bully (if indeed she is) because she is trying to copy the English is an incredibly patronising, bordering on racist, thing to say.

It does serve well though, because it gives posters the opportunity to display their own bigotry, while claiming to be holding the moral high ground.

AllForIt

ChippingSodbury wrote: »

You're right, it's not the norm.

But neither is it the norm for a senior civil servant of 30 odd years to resign because of what they have described as bullying. In any normal society, that's newsworthy.

Maybe she's just doing her job and he was a lazy, good-for-nothing civil servant but I find that hard to believe given that he refused a settlement and instead is going to a workplace tribunal regarding his allegations.

Forget about Brexit and all that goes with it, whether his statement is out of the ordinary or not, what do you think of her behaviour:

• a Settlement regarding constructive dismissal already paid out in 2015 (complaint re: bullying)
• Her unsanctioned meetings in Israel
• The resignation of a senior Civil Servant of over 30 years service (complaint re: bullying)
• Yet another allegation of bullying from 2017 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-51731753)

Maybe she's just "draining the swamp" of all these lazy, "lifer" civil servants but I think not...

What I think about that is you made 4 bullet points, 3 of them are the same point and 1 of them has noting to do with bullying i.e Israel. And I didn't suggest the case wasn't newsworthy, I'm suggesting that he possibly made the statement to cause maximum damage to the government.

Actually I'm glad there is going to be a civil case. It will determine whether she is in fact a bona fide bully, or whether she is just strong willed as you'd expect a politician to be.

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

As a private individual he is entitled to make whatever public statements he likes.

I didn't question his 'entitlement' to do so. All I did was raise suspicion about a ex senior civil servant making public statements - that is damaging to the government of the day as a byproduct of making said statement.



The problem with civil servants is they are not accountable to the public. They have their own political opinions maybe even strong ones. Maybe 'Sir' Philip Rutnam, of 30 years services, has had his day and he simply doesn't like change. And there is a lot of change going on in the UK at the mo obviously. Maybe he's not accustomed to to being spoken to by a woman in the way he's accustomed to by a man. There are all sorts of possibilities of explanation to this and I'm just not personally going to assume that the allegations are true without more conclusive evidence.

ohnonotgmail

AllForIt wrote: »

What I think about that is you made 4 bullet points, 3 of them are the same point and 1 of them has noting to do with bullying i.e Israel. And I didn't suggest the case wasn't newsworthy, I'm suggesting that he possibly made the statement to cause maximum damage to the government.

Actually I'm glad there is going to be a civil case. It will determine whether she is in fact a bona fide bully, or whether she is just strong willed as you'd expect a politician to be.



I didn't question his 'entitlement' to do so. All I did was raise suspicion about a ex senior civil servant making public statements - that is damaging to the government of the day as a byproduct of making said statement.

He was getting ahead of the story. an entirely reasonable thing to do given the current uk governments loose association with the truth.

AllForIt wrote: »

The problem with civil servants is they are not accountable to the public. They have their own political opinions maybe even strong ones. Maybe 'Sir' Philip Rutnam, of 30 years services, has had his day and he simply doesn't like change. And there is a lot of change going on in the UK at the mo obviously. Maybe he's not accustomed to to being spoken to by a woman in the way he's accustomed to by a man. There are all sorts of possibilities of explanation to this and I'm just not personally going to assume that the allegations are true without more conclusive evidence.

he worked for 2 previous women home secretaries. he had no problem with them. Patel has previous allegations of bullying against her.

ChippingSodbury

AllForIt wrote: »

Actually I'm glad there is going to be a civil case. It will determine whether she is in fact a bona fide bully, or whether she is just strong willed as you'd expect a politician to be.

I'm glad there will be a civil case too. I think he had every right to defend his decision publicly, given the person with whom he has had the grievance is given plenty of airtime to defend their position, albeit it seems to be constantly through spokespeople.
I very much doubt that his statement was given to cause damage to the government but I'm sure causing grief to Ms Patel wouldn't have bothered him while explaining his decision.

silverharp

Peak Guardian

https://twitter.com/sajidjavid/status/1236624197658566662

ChikiChiki

Bowie wrote: »

An arsehole using ignorance and hate to sh*t on others for attention to raise their profile.

Honestly, I think we should start a petition to get this added to the Oxford Dictionary

Hopkins Morgan Type
adjective

Hopkins Morgan Type (emotional)

Being an arsehole using ignorance and hate to sh*t on others for attention to raise their profile

Practical Uses

- Hes being a Hopkins Morgan Type with me at the minute to get the central midfield position
-I don't understand why he is acting the Hopkins Morgan Type
-It made me really Hopkins Morgan Type