Business
Hagley butcher calls for more support as business folds
Kate JusticeHagley and
Tanya GuptaWest Midlands
BBCA small business owner has had to close her shop and go into liquidation because of rising costs and a fall in customer spending.
Rachel Edmonds, who started The Butcheress in Hagley, Worcestershire, in 2017, and is known for her bright pink vans and logos, said the price of meat had doubled in the past six months, and at the same time, the average spend per customer had dropped dramatically.
She said increased energy and National Insurance costs meant she had been making a loss for months and she called on the government for more support for small businesses.
A Treasury spokesman said the government was pro-business and trying to create a fairer business rates system.
Ms Edmonds said: “Buying trends have changed. The expensive products like beef, lamb, fillet steak – we used to sell a lot of those. They’re now buying sausages, bacon, chicken fillets, chicken thigh meat and gammon steaks.
“They are lower cost products that obviously feed more of a family and fill them up.”
She said the average basket spend had gone from £28.30 per customer to £5 or £6 per customer and the number of customers had also dropped.
‘Rising costs’
People were going to supermarkets because they had cheaper products, she added.
Ms Edmonds said the cost of beef had “more than doubled in the last six months”, adding: “I just think there’s a massive effect on the meat industry at the moment with the rising costs of meat that’s rising every week.”
She said the industry was suffering because of a number of factors, including supply shortages involving British farmers and British meat, abattoirs operating for fewer days, high costs of abattoir licences, staffing costs, transport costs, packaging costs and feed costs for animals.
“Everything is going up and it’s getting out of control,” she said.
She said she had paid out wages that were more than half her weekly turnover, and electricity was £3,000 a month for a small shop.
“How is anyone going to survive going forward? We need help from the government,” she said.
“I’m not going to be the first person to shut and I certainly won’t be the last.”
A Treasury spokesman said: “We are a pro-business government that is creating a fairer business rates system to protect the high street, support investment, and level the playing field.”
He said the government intended to permanently introduce lower tax rates for retail, hospitality, and leisure properties from next year.
He added that last year’s tax decisions had delivered on “priorities of the British people, from investing in the NHS to cutting waiting lists and putting more money in their pockets”.
Business
Adani Power, Adani Green: Adani Stocks Soar Up To 9% As SEBI Dismisses Hindenburg Allegations
Last Updated:
News18
Adani Group stocks, including Adani Enterprises, Adani Green Energy, Adani Power, and Adani Ports & SEZ, rallied as much as 9% in Friday’s session after the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) dismissed allegations by US-based short-seller Hindenburg Research. The regulator said that while related-party transactions through entities such as Adicorp, Milestone, and Rehvar did take place, they were fully disclosed and complied with existing regulations.
September 19, 2025, 09:53 IST
Read More
Starbucks is facing legal challenges in three US states after workers initiated action over a new dress code. Employees claim the coffee giant broke the law by not reimbursing them for new clothing required by the updated policy.
Backed by the union organising Starbucks staff, workers have filed class-action lawsuits in state courts in Illinois and Colorado. Additionally, complaints have been lodged with California’s Labor and Workforce Development Agency. Should the agency opt not to pursue penalties against Starbucks, the employees intend to launch a class-action lawsuit in California, according to the filings.
The new dress code, implemented on 12 May, mandates that all North American staff wear a plain black shirt, either short or long-sleeved, beneath their signature green aprons. These shirts must cover the midriff and armpits, with collars being optional. Starbucks did provide each employee with two complimentary T-shirts that meet the new specifications.
Employees must wear khaki, black or blue denim bottoms without patterns or frayed hems or solid black dresses that are not more than 4 inches above the knee. The dress code also requires workers to wear black, gray, dark blue, brown, tan or white shoes made from a waterproof material. Socks and hosiery must be “subdued,” the company said.
The dress code prohibits employees from having face tattoos or more than one facial piercing. Tongue piercings and “theatrical makeup” are also prohibited.
Starbucks said in April that the new dress code would make employees’ green aprons stand out and create a sense of familiarity for customers. It comes as the company is trying to reestablish a warmer, more welcoming experience in its stores.
Before the new dress code went into effect, Starbucks had a relatively lax policy. In 2016, it began allowing employees to wear patterned shirts in a wider variety of colors to give them more opportunities for self-expression.
The old dress code was also loosely enforced, according to the Colorado lawsuit. But under the new dress code, employees who don’t comply aren’t allowed to start their shifts.
Brooke Allen, a full-time student who also works at a Starbucks in Davis, California, said she was told by a manager in July that the Crocs she was wearing didn’t meet the new standards and she would have to wear different shoes if she wanted to work the following day. Allen had to go to three stores to find a compliant pair that cost her $60.09.
Allen has spent an additional $86.95 on clothes for work, including black shirts and jeans.
“I think it’s extremely tone deaf on the company’s part to expect their employees to completely redesign their wardrobe without any compensation,” Allen said. “A lot of us are already living paycheck to paycheck.”
Allen said she misses the old dress code, which allowed her to express herself with colorful shirts and three facial piercings.
“It looks sad now that everyone is wearing black,” she said.
The lawsuits and complaints filed Wednesday allege that Starbucks’ dress code violates state laws that require companies to reimburse workers for expenses that primarily benefit the employer. Colorado law also prohibits employers from imposing expenses on workers without their written consent, according to that lawsuit. The plaintiffs seek damages on behalf of all Starbucks workers in those states, whether or not their stores are unionized.
Multiple plaintiffs, like Allen, said they requested reimbursement from Starbucks to conform to the dress code but were denied. Gilbert Cruz, an employee in Aurora, Illinois, requested $10 for the cost of removing a nose piercing.
Worker-led lawsuits in state courts are a shift in tactics in the multi-year effort to unionize Starbucks’ stores.
Starbucks Workers United, the labor group that has unionized 640 of Starbucks’ 10,000 company-owned U.S. stores, has filed hundreds of unfair labor practice charges against Starbucks with the National Labor Relations Board. The union filed an charge over the dress code in April.
But the board’s ability to hear cases has been curtailed under President Donald Trump. Trump fired an NLRB member in the spring, leaving the board without the quorum it needs to decide cases.
Business
‘India & China are ancient civilisations’: Russia slams Trump tariffs; warns threat won’t work – The Times of India
Russia slammed US tariff threats against India and China, calling them “ancient civilisations” and claiming that threat to them “won’t work,” and that both the nations are unlikely to bow down to ultimatums.Speaking on Russia’s main Channel 1 TV programme “The Great Game,” Foreign minister Sergei Lavrov said, “Both China and India are ancient civilisations. And talking to them like ‘either you stop doing what I don’t like or I’ll impose tariffs on you’ won’t work. And the ongoing contacts between Beijing and Washington, between New Delhi and Washington, show that the American side understands it, too.”The comments came against the backdrop of escalating US criticism of India for continuing to import oil from Moscow despite the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war.The Donald Trump administration recently hiked tariffs on Indian goods from 25% on August 7 to 50% by August 27, directly citing New Delhi’s oil purchases from Moscow.Lavrov pointed out that US trade threats have forced countries like India and China to look for “new markets, new sources of energy supplies” and pay higher costs.“Besides the fact that this undermines the economic well-being of those countries, it at least creates very serious difficulties for them, forcing them to seek new markets, new sources of energy supplies, (and) forcing them to pay higher prices,” he said.“But beyond this, and perhaps even more importantly than this, there is a moral and political opposition to this approach,” he added.
Trump: Close ties but tough measures
During his recent state visit to Britain, Trump struck a contradictory tone, stressing his personal ties with Prime Minister Narendra Modi even as he defended sanctions on India.“When I found out that the European nations were buying oil from Russia, I am very close to India and to the PM of India, I wished him a happy birthday the other day, we have a very good relationship, but I sanctioned them (India),” he said.“If the price of oil comes down, Putin will have no choice but to drop out of that war,” he added. He further argued that India’s continued energy trade with Moscow was “not playing fair with the US.”White House trade adviser Peter Navarro echoed this hard line, branding India the “maharaja of tariffs” and accusing Indian refiners of “profiteering” by working closely with Russian suppliers after the invasion. “Indian refiners were in bed with Russian refiners immediately after the invasion. They make money off us via unfair trade and many workers get screwed. They use that money to buy Russian oil, and Russians use that to buy weapons,” Navarro alleged.
Lavrov dismisses Russia sanctions
Lavrov, however, dismissed concerns over new rounds of sanctions, saying Russia had already adapted to such measures. “Frankly speaking, I don’t see any problem with the new sanctions imposed on Russia. An enormous amount of sanctions, unprecedented for that period, were imposed during President Donald Trump’s first term,” Lavrov said.Reflecting on the broader trajectory of US policy, he added, “We have started to draw conclusions from the situation when the West imposed these sanctions. Later, during President Joe Biden’s term, sanctions were used as a replacement for any diplomatic effort. There was no search for a compromise.”Despite tensions, India and the US have been in talks for an interim trade deal over the past few months. But with tariffs rising and geopolitical pressures mounting, both New Delhi and Beijing continue to assert their independent paths, reinforced by Moscow’s backing.
Ashwin Chandran takes charge as new CITI chairman
‘State your source’: Trae Young responds to Patrick Beverley with nearly 12-minute video
Kirk killing sparks fierce US free speech debate
-
Fashion7 days agoAcne Studios expands in France with redesigned historic HQ
-
Tech6 days agoHow a 2020 Rolex Collection Changed the Face of Watch Design
-
Fashion6 days agoMexico imposes ADD on footwear originating in China
-
Tech6 days agoCancel Culture Comes for Artists Who Posted About Charlie Kirk’s Death
-
Tech6 days agoOpenAI reaches new agreement with Microsoft to change its corporate structure
-
Fashion7 days agoVintage concept Styx debuts in Porto with luxury fashion and art
-
Fashion6 days agoDior names Greta Lee as brand ambassador
-
Fashion6 days agoUK real GDP grows 0.2% QoQ, 1.2% YoY in May-Jul 2025: ONS