Problematic faces?
A curator’s experience of redundancy by Andrew Loukes
Despite staging a series of innovative and successful exhibitions, Andrew Loukes was made redundant as House and Collections Manager at Petworth House because he was not deemed capable of attracting ‘new and different audiences.’
His story shows that removing specialist curators from National Trust properties does not always lead to cost savings.
Having read the articles by Sir Nicholas Penny and Dr Bendor Grosvenor regarding recent National Trust redundancies on the Restore Trust website I felt compelled to disclose my own story which perhaps evidences much of what they say regarding Covid providing an opportunity to remove staff whose faces were perceived as a problematic fit by the new curatorial regime. I was made redundant by the National Trust in February 2021 having worked as House and Collections Manager at Petworth House since 2009. My redundancy, like hundreds of others in the organisation, fell under the umbrella of its ‘Reset’ programme – the stated intention of which was to save money.
My circumstances were as follows: my role was put at risk in August 2020; a new role of Property Curator (at the same pay-grade) was introduced and I was invited to be interviewed as the sole candidate in November 2020; I was subsequently made redundant on the grounds that I did not have sufficient curatorial capability for the new role (which also incorporates much of the old role). I was very surprised by this outcome as not only did I feel that my performance in the interview hardly merited such a drastic decision but also prior to joining the National Trust I had enjoyed a successful curatorial career with Tate Britain and Manchester Art Gallery. Moreover, amongst other considerable contributions during my time at Petworth (such as commissioning the largest easel-painting conservation project ever undertaken by the National Trust) I initiated and curated a series of ambitious art exhibitions related to the house’s collection and history, featuring such major painters as Turner, Constable and Blake. Exhibitions of this nature were a first for the National Trust and they drew new audiences and clear profits of around £1milllion, as well as high-profile and positive reviews in the national media (not common features of National Trust schemes – in fact during my time at Petworth I witnessed sums of up to six figures being spent on projects which have brought little or no benefit to the property). In 2019 I was even asked by central National Trust staff to contribute an article about the success of the Petworth exhibitions programme for Views, their annual staff-journal.
I therefore felt justified in appealing against the decision to make me redundant and as part of my case gathered 25 statements of support from leading directors, curators and academics from outside the National Trust and with whom I have worked on various projects during my 30-year involvement with museum collections, country houses and art history. I also sent copies of these testimonies to the Director-General and other senior National Trust staff. The conclusion of the internal appeal was that my interview had produced a ‘perverse outcome’ and, therefore, my redundancy was ‘overturned’ and I should be interviewed a second time. For this, I ensured that I addressed all the points of negative feedback I had been given first-time round (and submitted notes to help demonstrate this), but to my amazement I scored even lower marks and was given my final notice, leaving me with just three weeks to find another job and move my family out of our National Trust accommodation (which came with my duties as a key-holder). This time, the principal reason given was that I did not have the capability to attract ‘new and different audiences.’
Fortunately, Lord and Lady Egremont (the resident donor family at Petworth) – who had strongly opposed my redundancy – immediately gave me the job of Curator of their private collection (a much larger number of objects in the house than those owned by the National Trust) in recognition of my knowledge of Petworth and my loyalty of service to the house as a whole. I was equally flattered that their recognition of my ability was also reflected by the staunch (and sometimes brave) support of all my National Trust colleagues at the property (along with numerous national and regional members of staff) and its 300 volunteers, many of whom sent touching messages and who collectively presented me with an extremely generous leaving gift.
While I am actually now much happier to be utilizing my knowledge and experience of the house and its collections in my new role, and am delighted to be still employed at a place with which I feel deeply connected, I remain utterly baffled (as do many in my sector and beyond) as to why I was treated in this way: aside from anything else, far from saving money, my redundancy has come at a considerable financial cost to the National Trust because of my substantial settlement.
Andrew Loukes