Queen cancels staff Christmas party

Just a thought...does anyone know if the ConDem Cabinet intend having a Christmas party?
Anyhow I've a feeling our time is up, this thread is becoming silly....

@Will -

Ah I see... Asda sell Quails' eggs I am sure - not too sure about the dlivery driver though... :)

Dash it all Chris, a gentleman does not venture to purchase his own groceries. Mine are apparently delivered to the kitchen door by the little man sent by Fortnum and Masons, old bean. I do not doubt that Kellogg's cornflakes are the same the world over, it's just that I start my day with a lightly boiled quail's egg brought to my apartments by my butler.

Chris, well said - i wish there was one by where I live. As the old saying goes, those who mind dont matter, those who matter dont mind.

@Will,

Hmmm... I fail to understand why Asda food is less attractive than food from amywhere else... After all - a box of Kellogs Cornflakes is the same whether you buy it from Asda or Harrods...

I am guessing you haven't visited the place in a while... not worth mixing with thegreat unwashed masses huh!

@Jodie

Bonus - not familiar with the concept. Please elucidate. Christmas? Bar, humbug (both optional).
with apologies to C. Dickens

I think that was a nice gesture from Asda, even if it is a marketing ploy it still adds to the festive good will.

I don't think any of us 'expect' a Christmas party, but when a company has a regular tradition and then takes it away it is disheartening. It's like annual bonuses, you shouldn't rely on them but many of my colleagues have already told me what they'll use the extra money for next year - I think it's called human nature.

Some of you are obviously unfortunate that you don't receive Christmas parties or any other such event from your employer, those of us that work for companies able to do so look forward to a fun annual event.

@Carol

Oh my God! Just as the palace staff thought things couldn't get any worse! If there's one thing grimmer than having your Christmas party whipped away from you, it must be having one with fifty grands worth of Asda food. Think of quite how much gristle and MRM fifty thousand pounds buys from Asda. Even Tiny Tim wouldn't RSVP to that one.

Why on earth should employees ( and I am one) expect a paid Christmas Party? The contract is that I work and I get paid for that work. I don't expect parties, free days out, presents etc. If I get something extra, great, but it's not a right- no matter who you work for. As Iain says above , if I want to celebrate something with my friends I will.

I did read right that Asda have stepped into the breach and offered the food to Buck' Palace free of charge?

I would imagine the queen would have consulted her advisers before making the decision that made the headlines.
I know from experience that for many people Christmas parties are a nightmare anyway, whether it's sucking up to the boss, moaning about work or sacrificing an evening they would rather spend with friends or family.
Has anyone seen a report of anyone in the Royal household complaining about not having a party?
Friends can still celebrate christmas together whether they work together or not. I still think the Queen did the right thing.

@Iain

I think you may have missed the point a little. There are issues of the monarchy that some people take issue with. However, the idea that cancelling the party is an exercise reducing waste seems a little harsh to those people who would commonly be invited.

It appears most people that have responded to this news item can only justify the monarchy as a tourist attraction! If most people do believe this the case then why do the English have a constitutional monarchy at all - why not just build another Disneyland in London?
Personally I don't care who our head of state is, it doesn't affect me in the slightest, but at least she is setting an example of reducing waste. Good for her!

Oh come on you lot!

Every employer spends most of the year exploiting and cajoling every last iota of productivity from its staff in order to make a few quid.

Come Christmas.. traditionally, a thank you is in order. A party is usually the way, or maybe a meal.

The business benefits are huge! Improved morale. greater loyalty and so on.

Why is this a bad thing and why is the monarchy so opposed?

Now then Gareth, yes but no but yes, the infrastructure, equipment, wages and other below the line costs are already budgeted for including fuel so don't suppose in actuality that it costs any extra just offencive for public institutions to be seen to be having any sort of jollies at the expense of others whether it's the house of commons wine tasting procurement quango or flights to wonderfull places anywhere but here fact finding or nipping over to Germany to buy a few beers for a 'mini October beer fest' in the mess or popping the odd thing on a pre-scheduled flight home from wherever except a bit of dope on Air-UK.

Giving your life 24/7 to Queen & Country maybe fine when no action around but,
when the reallity of the contract is potentially putting yourself in harms way and therefore may result in a little serious injury or result in something more terminal it does focus the mind on enjoying work/life and playing hard as a counter balance to maybe not being here at some point in the foreseeable future.

Friendly fire whether in the workplace or frontline still results in collateral damage and no one really wants to be a statistic regardless of how hard we try to convince ourselves it is gonna be someone else who cop's it.

Be happy and stay safe.

Lets start a campaign to put the bankers in the Tower and put the Queen back in charge of the privi purse to free up, ok lets say 90% to start with, mortgages for the people based on 3.5 times gross - now that would be reasonable wouldn't!

Nigel, you can't seriously be defending the 'nip out for a practice flight over a war torn Golf course, land and join the ground forces, practice attacks all the way to the 19th then back to the old helli-practice training flight return to barricks for a debrief and an early night, to be on fighting form for the next days defence of queen and country' excuse as appropriate behaviour from a senior RAF officer let alone Prince of the Realm but I digress.

I'm just annoyed that the excuse made for the cancellation was because of the economic down turn as if this is the Queen's personnal sacrifice and contribution to the National Debt. This from an organisation renowned for low wages and the justification myth that working for the Royal household is in its self a greater reward than mere salary. Lets not forget, without their loyal staff, Royalty inc could not maintain the history this nation capitalises on so much [see figures above]. So a bit of a party every two years [custom and Practice?] is not too much to ask for, considering, as Nigal puts it, "da Queen is in profit". Profits do pay wages but success in the work place depends on so much more than financial reward. Yet again something of value judged only on its monetary cost. So The Queen gets it in the neck again while her lord and lady advisors hide behind her skirts in anonimity waving two fingers of one hand at her peasant subjects and lining their pockets with grace and favour with the other.

I think the trick cyclists call it 'displacement' where the disaffected twitter and bisted unhappy depressed focus the blame for their disatisfaction in life on something else and in this case it seams to be the Queen inc. rather than the Bankers or dot-gov for our present dire straits......

At least da Queen is in profit, i know it's a dirty word but, profit is what pays everyones wages and as ex-RAF the only reason we fly planes is to add hours to the crews flying time so that when needed they have had just a little practice so whether navigating a fantisy journey or one to a party really matters not as already paid / budgeted for in flying time schedules.

As a "social enterprise" and philanthropic PR machine Queen inc. is still working into her eighties at a pace that seams undiminished and for all the vitriol "we" will still be sorry when she is gone pro or anti .................

The funny thing is that when Prince Andrew wanted to attend a golf tournament the other year, he flew there in a Navy helicopter (at tax payer’s expense). How many other sailors would have been afforded the same privilege? I would guess that the cost of the crew, fuel, maintainance on the helicopter, security etc... would have been more than a few vennison sausage rolls and roast swan sandwiches (or whatever royal houshold employees eat).

Good point.
11,000,000 people visit Darmoor (not the prison) - that's free
London Eye - 3,000,000 - that's not free
London Attractions - 3.21million (not including the Palace or Castle) - many of the Museums are free.
No Queen in sight at the above - so the above numbers aren't because of the Royal Family.
So if the Queen generates so much income (and gets £2,370,000) why cutback?

Just a few figures I've found out;

In 2006/07 the revenue surplus paid INTO the Treasury by the Crown estates was £200,000,000.

The Queen receives £7,900,000 per annum from the civil list. 70% of this is used to pay the salaries of her staff, i.e. the jobs she creates. This means she receives (a very tidy, admittedly) £2,370,000. The papers at the moment are taking about Wayne Rooney getting four times this amount if he signs for Man City as a comparison.

500,000 people approximately visited Buckingham Palace last year. The adult entry price is £17
1,000,000 people approximately visited Windsor Castle in the same period. The adult entry price is £8.50

What a load of tosh. I'd use 'Employer' in the loosest of terms. This institution basically spends the public purse (funded by us, OK, in part for social engagements) and keeps the system of patronage and privilege alive in Britain.
The Labour party, despite its many faults, implemented tax paying for the Royal family and reigned in the power of the House of Lords - if that's pro-social then that's also progress.
This cut by the Queen is simply a platitude, designed to grab headlines just as so many other things the Royals do.
I wondered how long it would take for the 'bringing tourism into the country and benefiting the economy' line to be trotted out like the hackneyed argument it is. France has no Monarchy yet as many people visit Versailles as Buckingham palace and it isn't just for the weather.
This cut affects staff more than the Queen- she can, after all party all year round, just as her grandson’s do (as documented in the tabloids- although you can’t give any credibility to the ‘red tops’).

Bankers? Where's the parallel? Investment Banks by and large haven't been bailed out, much of the rest have. So Goldman Sachs' bonus structure, for example, is irrelevant.
In any case, whilst some Bankers are privileged in the hereditary sense, many more aren’t and most work their behinds off to get where they are.
It’s only until recently, with the Freedom of Information act for example, that we can see the contribution by us to the Monarchy – this announcement is a pretty cynical PR exercise to a/ say ‘look at us we’re transparent and b/ capitalise on another now hackneyed phrase from Cameron et al; ‘we’re all in this together’ – absurd to say the least.

Ive been arguing for an All Night Party for yaers with a campaign slogan of 'More Beer', sorry wrong thread. Anyhow, lets be honest here. THe party is a gesture, and conversely not having the party is a gesture. I'm not referring to the Royal Household in particular, but across the Nation. Does anyone seriously think that a sinking business is going to be saved through not allowing a half day leave and a few drinks for the team? Its rather like fish being on the ration alongside coal in WWII. (We live on islands made of coal, surrounded by fish If my point is obscure) Mr Cameron, and the Chancellor and that other chap, (looked like the ghost of christmas future on the telly yesterday) Clegg I believe is his name)have told us that were all in this together and we must make sacrafices. HM has been advised to show willing and this really is a non issue. I detect the dark minions of the CIPD here attempting to manage out risky behaviour rather than economics or politics!

What a deprived lot and if anything evidences how much moral is affected by a pro-social British seasonal cusstom and practice where applicable to employers who have cellebrated the winter break with a festivity of some kind.

I am sorry for those especially in the Queens household who have lost out on this years seasonal festivities purely because of fear driven potential PR harm as media pressure denies employees the perceived recognition of appreciation.

All employers, even the Queen, should have the freedom to manage not only their own finances and budgeting but how inclusively they manage their relationships with their employees without the Spanish Inquasition or any other Blue Meenies diminishing their occupational health strategies designed to support and/or sustain a sense of belonging to a team / institution and well-being especially during a critical fiscal emergency braught about through no fault of their own.

I bet the Bankers are having their bonuses and seasonal festivities !!!!!!!!

Agree with earlier comment that damned if she does, damned if she doesn't. It seems to me (probably) the correct decision based on the current economic climate to show some sort of example and many of the other examples cited would not provide the spin this option has. We have the monarchy we deserve and have created as a society.

Everyone is entitled to opinions on the monarchy. Whilst I have no affection towards the institution I imagine the country to be poorer without them. Having read recently the cost is less than 70pence per head/ per year to each of us, maybe it's money well spent for the heritage it helps preserve.

Christmas parties should not be a given. As with any bonus they should be reliant on the businesses ability to afford them. Having said that I hope not too many miss the opportunity to spread some sort of goodwill to beleagured workforces this year.

'tis the season.