Forum Topic

Raab gone

Bullying is never right. Enough said.

Maxine Campbell ● 1297d58 Comments

He's gone but sadly I think it will be a while before he's forgotten. 

Michael Ixer ● 1297d

I think you are right Michael

Maxine Campbell ● 1297d

I liked this quote from Attila the Stockbroker, circulating on Facebook: "Dominic Raab's career has just suffered Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly at the hands of the Left Wing Economic Establishment."I think a rapid reassembly is probably in progress at the moment …

Michael Ixer ● 1297d

Whatever happens, there is now a zero chance of this arrogant, self-centred pr*** ever running for party leader again and potentially becoming PM.

Michael Winstanley ● 1297d

"Whatever happens, there is now a zero chance of this arrogant, self-centred pr*** ever running for party leader again and potentially becoming PM."Oh! But I thought that being an "arrogant, self-centred pr***" was a prime requirement for even being considered for a Tory leader?

David Ainsworth ● 1297d

He seems to be pushing back against the report. It's interesting, I've worked for some managers who have been able to convince me to do things I wasn't in agreement with and make me feel good about it; there's others who have wanted me to do something that I know is the best option but have approached it in such an objectionable manner that I've immediately wanted to do the opposite thing! Sounds like Raab comes into the second category? I suppose being bad with people rules him out as PM?

Michael Ixer ● 1296d

If this is true perhaps his suitability as an MP should be considered?https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/gina-miller-dominic-raab-called-me-a-silly-btch-347146/

Michael Ixer ● 1296d

Never say never. As an HR professional after investigation I would have definitely terminated.

Maxine Campbell ● 1296d

The report is here:https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/investigation-report-to-the-prime-ministerWorth a read if you can't sleep!

Ed Robinson ● 1296d

Tis true and the next Tory leader is very likely to be another"arrogant, self-centred pr***". But not this one.

Michael Winstanley ● 1296d

'Whatever happens, there is now a zero chance of this arrogant, self-centred pr*** ever running for party leader again and potentially becoming PM'.Mr WinstanleyFrom the example of the type of language above you use in public, I can well imagine how kind, caring and thoughtful must have been the meetings between you and your work colleagues !

John Hawkes ● 1295d

'Oh! But I thought that being an "arrogant, self-centred pr***" was a prime requirement for even being considered for a Tory leader?'But Mr Ainsworth we all know how sophisticated is your political analysis !

John Hawkes ● 1295d

'It's interesting, I've worked for some managers who have been able to convince me to do things I wasn't in agreement with and make me feel good about it; there's others who have wanted me to do something that I know is the best option but have approached it in such an objectionable manner that I've immediately wanted to do the opposite thing'! Ah diddums !

John Hawkes ● 1295d

'As an HR professional after investigation I would have definitely terminated'.Ms CampbellGlad I never worked for any company when you were part of its HR department.Sounds like your investigation would not have been very professional as you imply your conclusion would have been pretty much pre-conceived.But I would have like to have watched you terminate !

John Hawkes ● 1295d

Good to see you back, Mr Hawkes. Hope that you are better now.

David Ainsworth ● 1295d

Given your multiple responses to the comments that's obviously a reflection of your feelings, Mr Hawkes :-)  I've not had time to look at the report yet but from looking at the news reports it sounds like Raabs abrasive approach to his colleagues detracted from achieving his objectives. I've always taken the approach that one doesn't, probably can't, like all one's colleagues but one has to accept then as they are and build a mutual respect with them in order to work collaboratively for successful outcomes. Sounds like Raab failed to do that? 

Michael Ixer ● 1295d

Whatever happens we can expect more "utterly useless and woeful" work from the civil servants.

Hugh Thompson ● 1295d

'Middle aged MP susceptible to job loss by the electorate bullies middle aged unionised senior civil servant in a job for life' !What a wuss !Would encourage people to read the official report of what Raab is supposed to have done.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65339102Bullying is what kids and those with no power and protection are subject to by those bigger and more aggressive than they.

John Hawkes ● 1295d

'Whatever happens we can expect more "utterly useless and woeful" work from the civil servants'.Mr ThompsonNot from the 10s of thousands who have not returned to the office as they are still fearful of or suffering from Covid.Get your passport and driving licence application in early !

John Hawkes ● 1295d

There is a substantial difference between the language and behaviour one might use on an internet forum, where no-one knows you, and how one should behave when in a position of responsibility with power over others.

Michael Winstanley ● 1295d

Most of the allegations of bullying were made by junior civil servants and were so pathetic e.g. he stared at me disapprovingly🙄they were not upheld, 18 in total I believe.  The remaining 2 or 3 complaints that were upheld came from senior figures who had their own ideas how the department should be run and resented taking instructions/orders from Raab who wanted things done differently.  Imo this was well orchestrated stitch-up from a few senior civil servants who wanted him out to get their own way.

Sue Hammond ● 1295d

The 2 incidences which were upheld were upheld after being laboriously examined by a KC. A Conservative Prime Minister has accepted his report as has, de facto, Raab by resigning.What would Raab's apologists be saying if someone were convicted on 2 out of 8 charges of aggravated assault or grievous bodily harm? Would they focus their attention on the 6 unsuccessful charges?Raab is a nasty piece of work who has been exposed for what he is. It speaks volumes about his character that he considers everyone but himself to be to blame. Raab's tragedy is that he was incapable of understanding that his personal style was the obstacle to him getting the things he wanted done, not the people who worked for/with him. High level jobs, whether in the public or private sectors require high levels of diplomatic and influencing skills. He shouldn't have been in those jobs - he simply wasn't up to them.The idea that it was the civil service to blame is risible. It's not every minister that has had this problem, it's just one or two. It has followed Raab round 3 different government departments. As the mafia say - once is chance, twice might just be coincidence. Three times - we ice the guy.

Michael Winstanley ● 1295d

In my personal opinion one should also be careful of one's language on social media. One can't be sure of their race, gender, financial circumstances, mental stability, etc and what the consequences of a rude or ascerbic comment might be. Although I know sometimes it's difficult not to react ... anyway on the SW15 forum one never knows who one might bump into in PHS :-)It's different on my FB group where my friends (well, most of them) know my views and when I'm being ironic, etc

Michael Ixer ● 1295d

Raab stated before the investigation that he would quit if found guilty and he was true to his word.  This has set a dangerous precedent.  Any Minister who wants his civil servants to implement any policy that they don't agree with is now in danger of being forced out as it seems that the tail now wags the dog.🙄

Sue Hammond ● 1295d

Mr WinstanleyDo you really equate the use of firm and direct language which some people perceive as bullying as being equivalent to 'aggravated assault or grievous bodily harm' ?Wow - Judge Jeffreys was a wuss compared to you !And your turns of phrase - 'Raab is a nasty piece of work' - shows little delicacy nor indicating to me the possession of 'high levels of diplomatic and influencing skills'.I would have been very concerned to have worked for you and have to face your counselling !Also, the Ministers like Suella Braverman that seem to get most stick are often those trying to implement policies that are probably quite popular within majority of the electorate but less so those from the Guardianistic tendency.

John Hawkes ● 1295d

But I'm not representing myself as of suitable calibre to hold one of the high offices of state you silly pillock. I'm commenting on Raab's suitability - ie the lack of it. And pointing to the obvious fallacy of the "only guilty of 2 out of 8 therefore on balance nor really guilty" argument.Of the obvious wrong'uns in the Cabinet, apart from the corrupt Jenrick, Braverman is the last obvious one. She's been sacked once already and criticised by colleagues for her racist language. As Attorney General she was a disaster - and dishonest with it. The liar Johnson has gone, the bullying Williamson, the tax-fiddling Zahawi and the totally inept Truss and Kwarteng. Braverman does not hold her office by virtue of her suitability or competence, she holds it purely because this was a necessary "bribe" to keep the right wing of the party on side.

Michael Winstanley ● 1295d

What, it sets a dangerous precedent for a Minister to keep their word? Raab was a fool to make that promise - he should have seen the writing on the wall. He must have an enormous ego not to have done so - he painted himself into a complete corner. But lets be clear, he would have had to resign anyway or be sacked when that report was published. He resigned not because of what he had promised, but because of what the report had found.This idea of a precedent being set is just nuts. Raab was most recently Justice Minister fgs? What policies was he trying to implement at Justice that his staff disagreed with? How come it was Raab of all people that was the "victim" of such a conspiracy? Why not the Home Secretary, Minister of Health or A N Other? How come 3 different departments had these issues with Raab but neither his predecessor nor successor at any of the 3 departments?The precedent really being set here is that any Minister who breaches the Ministerial Code is going to be disciplined appropriately. It is a welcome change from the last but one encumbent at No.10 and hats off to Sunak for having the balls to stand up to Raab and his small and ever diminishing number of friends.Raab is now in pole position for the Portillo moment at the next GE - if he isn't deselected first.

Michael Winstanley ● 1295d

Hello Sue,I am not too sure the tail is wagging the dog....How does the saying go?  If there is smoke there is fire....I never liked Raab much, cannot say exactly why, but I did not.  Also, his Bill of Rights gives an indication of the mesure of the man?There are so many strikes at the moment, so much discontent everywhere, that I am not surprised people are reacting so badly.  I do not know why, but I can easily imagine, that the longer people are in power, the more dictatorial they become.For some, as in the case of Cruella, it is innate.

Ivonne Holliday ● 1294d

I have read various reports about this investigation and cannot find anything that constitutes bullying and certainly nothing serious to warrant resignation. Perhaps I have missed something so I suggest you read the following carefully and perhaps enlighten me:https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-65339102P

Sue Hammond ● 1294d

Your link is "page not found".Perhaps you should ask yourself, if there was "nothing serious to warrant resignation" why Raab resigned? If you read the Tolley report, you will see that in his conclusion he refers to the relevant definition of "bullying" for the purpose of the Ministerial Code (which he has laid out in his introduction)  - not your understanding of that term, whatever it is. He also lays out his findings that in some of the instances about which complaints had been raised, Raab's actions fitted this  definition.tldr - he has Raab banged to rights.It's a very long and complicated report. Read it carefully. Rishi took a few hours before it sank in.

Michael Winstanley ● 1294d

This one without the 'P'?https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65339102

Philippa Bond ● 1294d

Thank you for supplying a correct link.Now that I see it, though it is just a BBC News summary rather than the report itself, I wonder which part of " Mr Tolley KC found a description of bullying had been met, whilst Mr Raab was foreign secretary and justice secretary. " is difficult to understand.I can only conjecture that people perhaps do not appreciate that under the Ministerial Code, members of our government are quite rightly held to the highest standards, under which "bullying" extends a little further than ganging up on a weak kid in the playground.

Michael Winstanley ● 1294d

Of course, perhaps the issue members of this government have is that they're completely out of their depth and hence resort to arrogance and agression because theyare so stressed? A further indication is that Braverman and, before he left, are prepared to break international agreements entered into voluntarily by the UK because their policies are in such a mess. At least Sunak negotiated the Windsor agreement to try and bridge the gap with the EU, even if the the DUP can't see that.

Michael Ixer ● 1294d

"before heleft, Johnson"!

Michael Ixer ● 1294d

Mr WinstanleySo I am a 'silly pillock'Offensive language such as this would deemed out of order in a Government department.If I were sensitive I might consider this verbal bullying.But instead I put it down to the outpouring of someone with a limited vocabulary, often heard late at night on the 39 bus.Still I am looking forward to Labour taking power and all of the offices of state taken by members of the Shadow Cabinet (if only I knew who they were were).At least I assume they will be conciliatory except perhaps Angela Raynor who thinks all Tories are 'scum' (but only when she is drunk !).She did however not endorse Labour's recent attack ads on Sunak where by implication he is accused of not being too concerned over paedophilia even though the legal attitude to this offence was I believe drawn up when Starmer was head of the Crown Prosecution Service.And of course he did not prosecute Jimmy Saville, paedophile par excellence.

John Hawkes ● 1294d

When you need to resort to the "didn't prosecute Jimmy Saville*" trope, which Starmer himself aptly described** as "a ridiculous slur peddled by right-wing trolls", you have clearly run out of anything worthwhile to say. The silly pillock epithet is yet more well-deserved (clearly you are no snowflake, or I would never have used it).*For younger readers, Jimmy Saville was a notable TV personality, charity fund raiser and personal advisor to Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. Some time after his death it became clear that he had also been a serial sex offender.**https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/who-was-jimmy-savile-what-did-pm-johnson-claim-about-labour-leader-2022-02-08/

Michael Winstanley ● 1294d

Mr WinstanleyTalking of bullying and the Ministerial Code apparently the Labour ex-PM Gordon Brown had quick temper.Ex colleague Alistair Darling described him as 'brutal and volcanic when dealing with colleagues and Civil Servants'.And according to Bloomberg and the Guardian 'he has a temper that has always been the subject of gallows humour among those who work with him.The prime minister, 58, has hurled pens and even a stapler at aides, according to one; he also says he once saw the leader of Britain's 61 million people shove a laser printer off a desk in a rage.Another aide was warned to watch out for "flying Nokias" when he joined Brown's team.Makes Raab sound like a pussycat !

John Hawkes ● 1294d

Why do you think I have any interest in any of this?

Michael Winstanley ● 1294d

Mr WinstanleyI note you make no response to what I said as regards Brown's behaviour in comparison to Raab's.Typical of Labour supporters that think they and their ilk are  perfect in their behaviour and you probably genuinely believe that the left of course is sweet, kind and gentle, would never mean to or do any harm to anyone and is surprised anyone could think otherwise.Conservatives on the other hand are all mean, vicious, selfish, boorish, bullying etc etcAs regard Starmer and Saville your own link states -'The inquiry found, while Savile might have been prosecuted if police and the CPS had taken a different approach, there was no improper motive for the decision not to prosecute. It made no reference to Starmer having any involvement in that decision. Starmer later apologised for the CPS's failings'.So there was no improper reason for the CPS not to prosecute Saville; they just made the wrong decision.Hence Starmer as head of the CPS was not protecting Saville, something no one even Johnson really believed.Anything Johnson said was just HoC knock-about.Starmer was just incompetent and did not know or take an interest in what was going on in the department he ran.But at least he is forthright in his support for  a campaign that implies Sunak is 'soft on paedophilia'. I am impressed that you are able to determine someone's character from what they write.  But as you resort to type and insult anyone who disagrees with you, I shall from now on just let you get on with your rants if they give you pleasure.

John Hawkes ● 1294d

well that's a shame as i am well regarded in my company and they are sure that i will always be fair. my wording maybe was incorrect as the assumption was that i would terminate whatever LOL. however termination Arnie style might be fun

Maxine Campbell ● 1293d

Interesting article from the Economist: if enough people think you're a bad boss you are:https://www.economist.com/business/2023/04/23/if-enough-people-think-youre-a-bad-boss-then-you-are

Michael Ixer ● 1292d

The bullying aspect of Raab's behaviour is appalling, but there's another side to this: don't people realise that the best way to get good work out of people is not through aggressively demeaning them, but through constructive criticism?An example: when I was in the civil service (and I'll ignore Hugh Thompson's silly and unpleasant comment from 23/04), I was part of a team tasked with producing briefing material for one particular minister. When we submitted the report we put together, the minister was highly critical of it, and said we really needed to start again as it was completely inadequate. In fact, we rather agreed with her, and worked over the weekend to produce a better version. When we presented that, she praised the revisions and thanked us for working hard.The difference from Raab? For a start, the minister criticised the work, not the people who had produced it, and recognised that we had really put in a lot of effort to do the revision and that it had worked. A shame that Raab was constitutionally incapable of working in a similar cooperative way.

Richard Carter ● 1292d

In the IT world if one bullies or mismanaged staff they tend to go and get jobs elsewhere …

Michael Ixer ● 1292d

Oh drone, drone.Talk about deflection! Gordon Brown is long gone and Jimmy Saville is long dead. And I am not a Labour supporterRaab has been sacked and is not coming back to government. His days even as an MP are numbered.  Apart from in some far-flung corner of the Daily Telegraph comments section, no-one cares. His own party has moved on and so should you.

Michael Winstanley ● 1292d

If one particular Minister wanted you to work over the weekend to produce a better version of the original. Why didn't they do it in the first place, their the ones earning all the money. They new how it should have been presented why criticize.

Barbara Stevens ● 1292d

It comes down to the choice between the carrot and the stick. Trouble with Raab is that, offered a carrot, he would use it to beat bureaucrats over the head.

Alexander MacLeod ● 1292d

If you want something done properly do it yourself. Perhaps they should practice what they preach.

Barbara Stevens ● 1292d

Barbara, is that how it worked when you write/wrote reports?Richard, is it possible that the minister didn't provide clear requirements so there were different expectations concerning the report's contents/presentation?

Michael Ixer ● 1292d

Not always an option though, Mr Ixer. I'm quite surprised by the reaction to Raab. My impression is that a large proportion of this country agrees with this kind of behaviour, in work and in politics. And people seem very happy to support Sir Keir Starmer, who is "'prepared to be ruthless' to win election".

David Ainsworth ● 1292d

David, that's why I send "tend. All I can speak from is in the IT industry where it's relatively easy to change jobs if you don't like the working environment. Possibly why many IT staff are allowed to work from home? Although that works for employers because they can recruit the best techies from around the globe without worrying about visas :-)

Michael Ixer ● 1292d

Well I've had owners/managers, want something done a different way. I would just say OK. Because I didn't go Oh no I don't want to do that. They would come back half an hour later and say were not changing it after all.

Barbara Stevens ● 1292d

"Richard, is it possible that the minister didn't provide clear requirements so there were different expectations concerning the report's contents/presentation?"No, Mike, the requirements were clear enough, we just didn't do a very good job the first time and we accepted that, hence the further work which rectified the situation.

Richard Carter ● 1292d

Fair enough, Richard:-)

Michael Ixer ● 1292d

Fair points Richard but a lot of todays snowflake generation would take constructive criticism as being wrong. I think another part is that many are not suited for the role. If you are opposed to a government's policies then don't work for it or be professional enough to do the job your paid for.A number of times I cane across staff that wouldnt do something because they disagreed with the policy,  at that point its time for them to look elsewhere or for managers to take appropriate action.

Andy Pike ● 1292d

Andy, as we're both retired I would think that we both have very little practical knowledge of the employment practices of the so-called "snowflake generation"; the columns of the Daily Mail are hardly a reliable source on anything. And in 30 years in the civil service I worked with governments of markedly different persuasions, but never met anyone who allowed their personal views to interfere with their professional responsibilities. Maybe local government was different?

Richard Carter ● 1292d

Richard, fair point to a point but I did have a couple of occasions where staff dudnt lije the policy they were asked to implement and needed a word. Old colleagues still at work in LG ( various boroughs)  actually tell me it's a growing trend with all the current wokeness ( there must because better word) .And folks for the last time I rarely read the Daily Mail unless I find one on the bus/ train or in waiting rooms.

Andy Pike ● 1292d

Here Livingston suggests devolved more powers to deal with such situations. Not possible in all departments but surely we are too centralised as a country!19 June 2008The former mayor of London has launched a scathing attack on Britain's civil service, accusing mandarins of being 'opposed to doing anything'.In his first speech after losing the May 1 election to Boris Johnson, Ken Livingstone said that it was no longer possible for the government to run Britain with the current civil service structure.'I expect I met a government minister once a week for eight years: an endless round of persuasion, persuasion — and no sooner had you persuaded them, then there would be a reshuffle and you'd have to start all over again,' he told the conference.'What did come across to me very strongly in all of this is that you could persuade ministers but civil servants were very hostile.'Livingstone called for an overhaul of the political neutrality governing the civil service, and for Cabinet ministers to be made the executive heads of their departments, with the power to hire and fire.He said that at every stage civil servants were opposed to doing anything, afraid of costs and of other things going wrong.Livingstone also said central government was unable to run services directly and should devolve far greater responsibility to a local level.https://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2008/06/civil-servants-are-scared-change-says-livingstone

Ed Robinson ● 1291d

Ah, sorry about the Daily Mail smear, Andy!

Richard Carter ● 1291d