Media coverage regarding Meghan Markle’s tenure as a working royal has intensified following additional commentary from British journalists regarding her treatment of prospective employees. The latest discussion stems from an account detailed by columnist Sarah Vine and subsequently amplified by Daily Mail royal editor Richard Eden on the Palace Confidential platform.
According to the account, an incident took place within the royal household prior to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s step back from senior royal duties in 2020. A young woman in her early twenties arrived for a job interview with the Duchess. Reports claim that upon entering the room, the candidate was left sitting in complete silence for several minutes while Meghan reviewed paperwork on her desk without offering a greeting or acknowledgment. Meghan then reportedly looked up briefly, examined the candidate, returned her eyes to her papers, and stated, “You can leave,” effectively concluding the meeting before any formal questioning took place.
Richard Eden characterized the alleged encounter as consistent with broader patterns reported regarding workplace culture within the Sussex household during their time at Kensington Palace. The story connects to historical allegations first brought to light in March 2021, when a 2018 email from former communications secretary Jason Knauf detailed HR concerns over the alleged departure of personal assistants due to workplace stress.
In response to these renewed claims, a spokesperson for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex strongly rejected the narrative. The statement questioned the reliability and timing of the claims, pointing out the absurdity of recounting specific, unverified secondhand details from over a decade ago through third-party media commentary.
The commentary has also reignited discussion around Buckingham Palace’s internal 2021 inquiry into workplace conduct allegations. While the investigation concluded in 2022 with updates to internal HR policies, the official findings were never made public, citing the privacy of participating staff members. Commentators like Eden argue that releasing the report could provide definitive clarity, while representatives for the Sussexes maintain that the persistent focus on unverified anecdotes represents an ongoing effort to undermine the couple’s reputation.
Source: Compiled from various sources
