First reported in 2021, just days before her televised interview with Oprah Winfrey, the claims alleged that members of staff working within the SusSєx household felt intimidated, humiliated, and driven to resign.

Years later, the accusations — denied by Meghan and her legal team — continue to follow her public life in both the UK and the United States.

The Times Bombshell

In March 2021, The Times reported that a formal complaint had been made during Meghan’s time as a working royal. According to the newspaper, one aide said they “couldn’t stop shaking” before confronting her. Another alleged they had been personally humiliated. It was further claimed that two personal ᴀssistants had left the household and a third had seen their confidence undermined.

The complaint had reportedly been raised via email by Jason Knauf, then communications secretary to the SusSєxes.

The timing was striking: the story emerged just before Meghan and Prince Harry, Duke of SusSєx’s primetime interview in the United States — an interview that would contain serious allegations about royal life and insтιтutional failures.

Meghan’s representatives strongly denied the bullying claims, calling them a smear campaign and suggesting the timing was intended to undermine her ahead of the broadcast.

Palace Investigation — But No Public Report

In response to the allegations, Buckingham Palace launched an internal investigation. Staff were reportedly interviewed. However, the findings were never published.

Why?

Some commentators argue that releasing the report could have set a precedent, inviting scrutiny of other senior royals’ management styles. Critics have pointed to long-standing complaints about Prince Andrew, Duke of York’s treatment of staff, as well as historical tensions within other royal households.

Others suggest the report was withheld to prevent further escalation in an already fractured relationship between the SusSєxes and the insтιтution.

The palace has consistently declined to release details, stating only that policies and procedures were reviewed and improved.

A Clash of Cultures?

One defense often raised by Meghan’s supporters is that the allegations reflect a cultural clash rather than cruelty.

As a former Hollywood actress and lifestyle entrepreneur, Meghan entered a centuries-old insтιтution steeped in hierarchy and tradition. Royal staff often describe themselves not as “ᴀssistants” but as custodians of an insтιтution larger than any individual.

Some argue that direct communication styles common in American corporate environments may have jarred with palace norms. Others counter that professionalism and respect transcend cultural boundaries.

Comparisons have been drawn between Meghan and Sarah, Duchess of York, who also struggled within the insтιтution and later pursued commercial ventures. Yet critics note that the monarchy’s tolerance for boundary-testing behavior has narrowed significantly in the digital age.

The American Echo

Notably, similar criticisms surfaced in U.S. media after the couple relocated to California. Reports in outlets such as Vanity Fair, The Hollywood Reporter, and The Daily Beast described high staff turnover at Archewell and alleged demanding workplace standards.

These accounts — also denied by the SusSєx camp — reinforced the perception among critics that the issue was not confined to palace culture.

At the same time, defenders highlight positive accounts from employees who describe Meghan as generous and supportive, citing gestures such as personal gifts, care packages, and morale-boosting surprises.

The contrast between these narratives has deepened polarization around her public image.

Image, Idenтιтy, and Public Perception

Central to the debate is the gap between Meghan’s public advocacy — particularly around kindness, anti-bullying initiatives, and mental health — and the allegations about her management style.

Her lawyer, Jenny Afia, publicly stated that Meghan “is not a bully” and has herself been the target of bullying. The SusSєxes have framed much criticism as racially charged or rooted in media hostility.

Yet the persistence of the claims has complicated their brand rehabilitation efforts.

In reputational terms, allegations of mistreating staff are uniquely damaging for public figures who champion compᴀssion and equality. Whether substantiated or not, the controversy has become embedded in the narrative surrounding their departure from royal life.

The Wider Royal Context

Observers frequently compare Meghan’s experience to that of Catherine, Princess of Wales, who is widely regarded as maintaining stable and respectful relationships with staff.

Management style within royal households varies significantly. Some senior royals are said to cultivate familial atmospheres; others have been criticized historically for rigidity or temper.

The monarchy’s internal culture is not monolithic — and allegations against one member inevitably raise questions about others.

Why the Story Won’t Fade

Five years after “Megxit,” the bullying claims remain part of the SusSєx narrative.

For critics, they corroborate broader character ᴀssessments. For supporters, they represent an example of insтιтutional pushback against a disruptive outsider.

What is undeniable is that the episode marked a turning point. It intensified the rift between the SusSєxes and the royal establishment, fueled global debate about palace culture, and reshaped public perceptions on both sides of the Atlantic.

As with many royal controversies, the full truth may never be publicly documented. But in the court of public opinion, the case remains open — and unresolved.