IN DEFENCE OF SIR PHILIP GREEN (DEFENDING THE INDEFENSIBLE?)

I’ve not actually spoken to Sir Philip Green since I last saw him in 1973, when I left my job in Old Street, City of London for the heady heights of the Ministry of Defence.

I had begun working for Martin Geminder Footwear Ltd, a family run import/export company, soon after completing my college course and returning from work experience in Milan in 1969, having studied Italian and French as well as secretarial skills.  The company, though mainly importing footwear from Hong Kong and China, also traded with Italy, so the job of translator/order clerk was ideal for me.

The Geminders were a Jewish family who I believe had fled Germany soon after or during the war.  It was rumoured that some of the family had been sent to a concentration camp. But I could be wrong. Anyway it was apparent that family ties and security was very important to them.  Philip Green, then aged about 17, a couple of years younger than me though we share a Birthday – the Ides (15^th) of March, was working for the Geminders, as his family was friends with theirs and from a similar background.  I must say that although you often read that Philip was a self-made man, it cannot have hurt that his family, who lived in Croydon when he was born but at that time lived in Finchley, were extremely well-heeled, with, I believe, a high-end car business. It is much easier I imagine to make good in business if you have family money and contacts behind you at the start.

My first impression of Philip was that he was a cocky youngster, a bit of a wide boy, with his expensive cars (I remember he had an Opel Rekord Sport, a very desirable beast which he kindly gave me a lift in on occasion), his mop of curly hair a la Leo Sayer, and expensive smart and fashionable suits which perfectly suited his then slim frame and it cannot be denied, attractive features. I found him likeable once you got the hang of him.

I’m not sure what his actual role was in the Company; we the hoi polloi office workers saw him as a sort of up-market apprentice, with his family connections to the boss.  He did a bit of everything (except actual office work of course); Sorted out the showroom, showed prospective clients the ranges of shoes, and did ‘deals’ which was his raison d’etre, so it has proved.  He also seemed to have the whip hand in the warehouse.  On occasion, when a company such as Dolcis decided to send back a whole consignment of footwear because they had too many ‘returns’, the warehouseman Charlie would spend hours pairing up still new and saleable items, which he then offered to the staff at knockdown prices, like a pound or 50p a pair. When we had our pick, the rest would be offered to market traders and minor shoe shops. 

Philip got in on this too, but then we usually had to scramble in the piles of shoes to find a pair ourselves, and he was not quite so generous to the staff as was Charlie, with whom he often argued. Still, in those heady days of late 60s early 70s when London was still swinging, I had umpteen pairs of fashionable cork-heeled sandals, long white stretch boots, and even thigh length suede ones. 

Philip liked nothing better than to haggle, and when we clinched a deal at a negotiated price, we both went home happy.  I did particularly well out of this, as I was and am still a petite size 4, and all the sample footwear for Ladies came in at a 4, so I was often used to ‘model’ for clients, and indeed photographed wearing new styles for ‘Shoe Monthly’ or whatever. When a style in the showroom became obsolete, it was then sold to me as a one-off. Happy days. He never smiled wider than when he had sealed a ‘Deal’. It was meat and drink to him.

He was not too keen on putting his hand in his pocket though; a trait shared by the owners of the company, and probably part of the reason for success both of this company and later on Philip’s own empire. He sometimes accompanied the staff to the pub on special occasion lunchtimes, (as was usual in the 70s), but was always the first to leave, eager to be back at work, not wanting to miss any business.  He loved it when the boss and his son were abroad on buying trips, and really lorded it over us then, or at least tried to. But no-one could deny he worked hard; even though he liked a good looking woman on his arm – I remember seeing a picture of him in the newspapers with ‘actress socialite’ Viviane Ventura in the 70s, before he married Tina. Work always came before pleasure then, and I am sure it still does, in spite of the lavish multi-million-pound-yacht/Monaco/Kate Moss/Rod-Stewart-singing-at-his-Birthday-bash type of lifestyle he now so publicly leads.

I find it sad to see the pickle he has got himself into.  In fact I find it hard to believe that with all the money to buy lawyers and advice, as well as his own business acumen, he would have been so daft as to actually do anything wrong. I do not think he truly believes he has done anything other than do what’s best for the business.  I certainly wouldn’t want to be one of his advisors if it turns out he was wrongly accused.

Of course, this may not have been what was best for the many workers who now find themselves in terrible financial difficulties.   By wrong, I mean illegal. After all, adultery is not illegal, but it is probably immoral   and certainly results in people being hurt. I hope he hasn’t done anything illegal in his dealings with BHS workforce, for I believe he just does not fully understand how doing legal business could land him in trouble with what he, rightly I think, calls a kangaroo court. Of course, whether whatever has been done is immoral is another matter.  When young, he just did not understand that the rest of us in the office had no real money behind us nor any way of getting it, hard as we might all work.  He had the firm belief back then that if you worked hard, you could make money.  As I said earlier, easy for him to say with a safety net of parents and business contacts behind him!

I can well imagine that as a matter of principle, he cannot understand why he should fork out his own cash when he does not legally have to! But of course, we, and certainly I, do not have the entire story so I could be barking up entirely the wrong shoe tree. So I am not judging the case one way or the other. Anyway, that’s a couple of things to ponder on, and I don’t imagine anyone will take it as an excuse for what has happened, but maybe it will just give a little insight into what drives this man who, let us not forget, has brought loadsamoney and employment into the British economy over many years.

Let’s hope, for everyone’s sake including his own, and the knighthood he is so rightly proud of, Sir Philip will do the right thing, whatever that is, even if not legally obliged.