Connect with us

Published

on

The Post Office has announced that more than a hundred larger crown branches – those owned by the company directly – could close with the possible loss of hundreds of jobs.

The Communication Workers Union has signalled a fight ahead as the Post Office confirmed details of its transformation plan.

The affected branches collectively employ close to 1,000 people and are said to be significantly loss-making.

The full list of at-threat branches is as follows:

Bangor – 143 Main Street, BT20 4AQ
Belfast City – 12-16 Bridge Street, BT1 1LT
Edinburgh City – Waverley Mall, Waverley Bridge, EH1 1BQ
Glasgow – 136 West Nile Street, G1 2RD
Haddington – 50 Court Street, EH41 3UU
Inverness – 14-16 Queensgate, IV1 1AX
Kirkwall – 15 Junction Road, KW15 1DD
Londonderry – 3 Custom House Street, BT48 6AA
Newtownards – 8 Frances Street, BT23 4FA
Saltcoats – Chapelwell Street, KA21 5EX
Springburn Way – 230 Springburn Way, Glasgow, G21 1BU
Stornoway – 16 Francis Street, HS1 2AD
Wester Hailes – 14A Westside Plaza, EH14 2SW
Barnes Green – Lee Road, Manchester, M9 4DL
Bransholme – 51A Goodhart Road, Bransholme, Hull, HU7 4JF
Bridlington – 15-17 Quay Road, YO15 2AA
Chester Le Street – 137 Front Street, Chester-le-Street, DH3 3AA
Crossgates – 9 Austhorpe Road, Crossgates, Leeds, LS15 8QS
Eccles – 63 Church Street, Manchester, M30 0NS
Furness House – 5-7 Dalton Road, LA14 1LE
Grimsby – 67-71 Victoria Street, DN31 1AA
Hyde – 30-32 Market Place, SK14 2QU
Kendal – 75 Stricklandgate, LA9 4AA
Manchester – 26 Spring Gardens, M2 1BB
Morecambe – 2-6 Victoria Street, LA4 4AA
Morley – 129A Queens Street, Leeds, LS27 8TB
Poulton Le Fylde – Teanlowe Centre, FY6 7BB
Prestwich – 2 Kingswood Road, Manchester, M25 3NS
Rotherham – 3-5 Bridgegate, S60 1PJ
Salford City – 112 Rossall Way, M6 5DS
Sheffield City – (unclear which branch)
South Shields – 8 King Street, NE33 1HT
St Johns – (unclear)
Sunderland City – 45-47 Fawcett Street, SR1 1RR
The Markets – 6-16 New York Street, Leeds, LS2 7DZ
Birmingham – 1 Pinfold Street, B2 4AA
Breck Road – 11 The Mall, Liverpool, L5 6SW
Caernarfon – Castle Square, LL55 2ND
Didsbury Village – Albert Hill Street, Manchester, M20 6RJ
Harlesden – 2 Wendover Road, London, NW10 4RU
Kettering – 17 Lower Street, NN16 8AA
Kingsbury – 439-441 Kingsbury Road, London, NW9 9DU
Leigh – 17 Silk Street, WN7 1AA
Leighton Buzzard – 7-9 Church Square, LU7 1AA
Matlock – 14 Bank Road, DE4 3AA
Milton Keynes – Unit N1 802 Midsummer Boulevard, MK9 3QA
Northolt – 46 Mandeville Road, UB5 5AA
Old Swan – 489 Prescot Road, Liverpool, L13 3BU
Oswestry – 17 Willow Street, SY11 1AG
Oxford – 102-104 St Aldates, OX1 1ZZ
Redditch – Threadneedle House, Alcester Street, B98 8AB
Southall – 38 The Broadway, UB1 1PY
St Peters Street – 14 St Peters Street, St Albans, AL1 3AA
Stamford – All Saints Place, Stamford, PE9 2EY
Stockport – 36-40 Great Underbank, SK1 1QF
Wealdstone – 4-12 Headstone Drive, Harrow, HA3 5QL
Barnet – 63-65 High Street, EN5 5UU
Cambridge City – 57-58 St Andrew Street, CB2 3BZ
Canning Town – 22 Barking Road, London, E16 1HF
Cricklewood – 193 Cricklewood Broadway, London, NW2 3HR
Dereham – Quebec Street, Dereham, NR19 2AA
Golders Green – 879 Finchley Road, London, NW11 8RT
Hampstead – 79-81A Hampstead High Street, London, NW3 1QL
Harold Hill – 17 Farnham Road, Romford, RM3 8EJ
Kilburn – 79A Kilburn High Road, London, NW6 6JG
Kingsland – 118-120 Kingsland High Street, London, E8 2NX
Lower Edmonton – 1-7 South Mall, Edmonton Green, London, N9 0TX
Roman Road – 138 Roman Road, Bethnal Green, London, E2 0RX
South Ockendon – 8 Derwent Parade, RM15 5EB
Stamford Hill – (unclear, two possible locations)
Bideford – The Quay, EX39 2EX
Dunraven Place – 4-5 Wyndham Street, Bridgend, CF31 1AB
Gloucester – Kings Square, GL1 1AD
Liskeard – The Parade, PL14 6AA
Merthyr Tydfil – 3 John Street, CF47 0AB
Mutley – 38 Mutley Plain, Plymouth, PL4 6LL
Nailsea – Crown Glass Place, Bristol, BS48 1RA
Newquay – 31-33 East Street, TR7 1BU
Paignton – 34 Torquay Road, TQ3 3EX
Port Talbot – 139 Station Road, SA13 1NG
Stroud – 16-17 Russell Street, GL5 3AA
Teignmouth – Den Road, TQ14 8AA
Yate Sodbury – 1 South Parade, Bristol, BS37 4BB
Baker Street – 111 Baker Street, London, W1U 6SG
Bexhill On Sea – Devonshire Square, TN40 1AA
Cosham – 13 High Street, Portsmouth, PO6 3EH
Great Portland Street – 173 Great Portland Street, London, W1W 5PH
High Street (10) – (unclear, multiple locations)
Kensington – 208-212 Kensington High Street, London, W8 7RG
Knightsbridge – 6 Raphael Street, London, SW7 1DL
Melville Road – 20 Melville Road, Hove, BN3 1UB
Paddington Quay – 4 Praed Street, London, W2 1JX
Portsmouth – Slindon Street, PO1 1AB
Raynes Park – 1a Amity Grove, London, SW20 0LL
Romsey – 15-25 Church Street, SO51 8WA
Westbourne – 10-12 Seamoor Road, Bournemouth, BH4 9AW
Windsor – 38-39 Peascod Street, SL4 1AA
Worlds End – 351-353 Kings Road, London, SW3 5EX
Aldwych – 95 Aldwych, London, WC2B 4JN
Brixton – 242 Ferndale Road, London, SW9 8FR
Broadway – 1 Broadway, London, SW1H 0AX
City of London – 12 Eastcheap, London, EC3M 1AJ
East Dulwich – 74-76 Lordship Lane, London, SE22 8HH
Eccleston Street – 6 Eccleston St, London SW1W 9LS
High Holborn – 181 High Holborn, London, WC1V 7RL
Houndsditch – 11 White Kennet Street, London, E1 7BS
Islington – 160-161 Upper Street, London, N1 1US
Kennington Park – 410 Kennington Road, London, SE11 4QA
London Bridge – 19A Borough High Street, London, SE1 9SF
Lupus Street – 121-125 Lupus Street, London, SW1V 3EW
Mount Pleasant – Rosebery Avenue, London, EC1R 4SQ
Vauxhall Bridge Road – 167 Vauxhall Bridge Road, London, SW1V 2ST

Continue Reading

UK

‘You feel so violated and vulnerable’: Single mum ‘sexually assaulted’ in ambulance by paramedic

Published

on

By

'You feel so violated and vulnerable': Single mum 'sexually assaulted' in ambulance by paramedic

WARNING: This article contains language and content some readers may find distressing

As a single mum, Lucy* looked forward to her rare nights out. A few years ago, during after-work drinks at a local pub, she started feeling unwell. When she collapsed and passed out, a bouncer called an ambulance. Lucy’s drink had been spiked.

The ambulance was crewed by two paramedics, a man and a woman. Still unconscious, Lucy was placed on a stretcher, strapped on to the bed, and driven towards the hospital.

After a scary episode, Lucy’s friends must have breathed a sigh of relief. She was safe, and being looked after. But, as the female ambulance driver looked in her rear-view mirror to check on Lucy, she says she saw the unimaginable – her male colleague sexually assaulting his patient.

Lucy still doesn’t remember what happened, but she has the police report and crime scene pictures of the inside of the ambulance.

Pointing to a photo of where she was strapped down, she says almost matter-of-factly: “He put my legs up, so my knees were up, and put his hand inside my groin area – possibly touching my vagina.”

When she regained consciousness, she was told what had happened to her. Years later, she is still struggling to process it.

The paramedic denied the charges and was found not guilty at trial, but later struck off by the paramedics’ regulator, the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC).

They have a lower standard of proof than the criminal courts, and found against him, calling him a “serious threat to patient safety”.

Lucy still wouldn’t feel safe getting into an ambulance today. “It’s awful, you feel so violated and vulnerable,” she says.

Rebecca Hendin illustration for Rachael Venables piece

“It’s a shock to think someone in that position would do that, when they’re supposed to be there to look after you.”

Her story is horrific, but Lucy is not alone. It forms part of a year-long Sky News investigation into sexual misconduct in the ambulance service, which has revealed a culture where abuse and harassment among staff are rife and patients are sexualised.

A senior ambulance boss admits the service has “let victims down”, while stressing that perpetrators are the “minority”.

Jason Killens, head of the Welsh Ambulance Service and the Association of Ambulance Chief Executives, says he expects “a steady increase” in the number of cases, with more paramedics being sacked for sexually inappropriate behaviour over the coming years, because of the work his organisation is doing to change the culture.

Data shared with Sky News shows one in five of the sexual misconduct complaints made against paramedics to their regulator, the Health and Care Professions Council, in 2023 were for acts against patients or members of the public.

While fewer than 1% of all HCPC members had concerns raised against them last year, in sexual misconduct cases, paramedics were hugely over-represented.

They make up just 11% of the HCPC register, but account for 64% of all investigations into sexual harassment against colleagues. The regulator’s chair, Christine Elliot, thinks the sexual misconduct cases are “just the tip of the iceberg”.

Rebecca Hendin illustration for Rachael Venables piece

“This is all about patient safety,” she says. “Patients need to know when they see a practitioner, they can rely on them giving the best care possible with the best behaviour possible.”

‘Totally unnecessary breast examinations’

Cases like Lucy’s are rare but several whistleblowers across multiple trusts have spoken up about a culture in which “banter” or jokes about groping patients are commonplace.

Current and former paramedics claim to have heard patients, particularly young women, being sexualised by the men who had helped to treat or even save them.

One former paramedic revealed the phrase “totally unnecessary breast examinations” (or TUBEs), and said she had heard paramedics talking about “TUBEing” young, drunk women. She also claims to have seen a colleague grope another colleague’s breasts, telling her: “I just TUBEed you.”

A second woman said the same phenomenon was called “jazz hands” in her trust. Both said these were widely understood phrases which referred to colleagues accidentally, or deliberately, touching a woman’s breast during treatment.

A third paramedic told us she’d heard colleagues talk about patients in an explicitly sexual manner, saying things like: “She had nice tits” or “those were silicone”, while bragging about getting a patient’s number and having a “good feel”.

“That is assault. That is sexual assault,” she says.

Rebecca Hendin illustration for Rachael Venables piece

‘It will be fun. Your career will progress’

“One of my biggest fears was that I wouldn’t be believed because of where I worked. It was the ambulance service and he was the man in charge,” says Ellie*, whose first job was as a call handler in an ambulance control room.

She loved the camaraderie and the idea that she was making a difference. Until one day, the manager called her into his office and invited her to a conference with him. At first, she was flattered and a little confused.

“He explained that he’d taken a liking to me and then he reached out and touched my leg.” Shocked, Ellie froze. “I was in my early 20s and didn’t know what his intention was. I was a bit naive, probably.” As he carried on talking, her boss slid his hand “as far up my thigh as it could go”.

Horrified, she shot back in her chair and asked him what he was doing.

“If you come, we’ll share a room. It will be fun. Your career will progress,” her boss replied.

“No,” she exclaimed, rushing out the room in a panic. Back at her desk, she carried on taking 999 calls while he watched over her.

Then she claims the messages started: “They were photos of his private parts, as well as messages suggesting meeting in the car park for sex and saying he wanted to kiss me. A whole manner of very descriptive sexual actions that he said he wanted to do with me.”

The messages carried on “for months”, she says, despite her pleading with him to stop. She was left dreading going to work for fear of seeing him, and avoided going to the toilet in case she ran into him in the corridor.

Venables paramedics piece

Eventually she showed the messages to HR, she says, but claims they suggested moving her to a different office. He wouldn’t be punished.

“It was sexual harassment,” Ellie says, caught between anger and despair. “They didn’t do anything. There was no investigation. No meeting with him that I’m aware of. No statement from me. Nothing. I was the problem.”

She eventually quit the service, but alleges he still works there to this day, an injustice that “makes me feel sick” she says.

An NHS England spokesperson said new national guidance and training has been recently introduced “to stamp out this awful behaviour”.

“Any abuse or violence directed at NHS staff is totally unacceptable and will not be tolerated, and the NHS is committed to tackling unwanted, inappropriate or harmful sexual behaviour in the workplace. We have recently introduced new national guidance and training that will help staff recognise, report and act on sexual misconduct at work to stamp out this awful behaviour,” they said.

‘We failed those individuals… I’m sorry’

Ellie’s story is simply “not right”, says ambulance boss Mr Killens.

“We failed those individuals,” he admits, saying “I’m sorry” to both staff and patients who have “been subject to poor behaviour from our people”.

What should the NHS do if a serious complaint of sexual abuse is made about a paramedic?

Anyone can raise a concern about a paramedic’s fitness to practise including patients, colleagues, police or members of the public.

Where the complaint is serious the NHS is expected to directly raise a concern with the regulator, the Health and Care Professions Council.

What happens when a paramedic is referred to the HCPC for a complaint of sexual abuse?

If the concern is very serious they can apply for an interim order to prevent someone from practising or to place conditions on how they can work until the case has been closed.

The claim is investigated and eventually considered by an independent tribunal panel who can impose a number of sanctions.

They can strike someone off the register or impose a temporary suspension; place a condition of practice or a caution order; or decide no further action is necessary.

How long does it take?

In 2023/24 it was around 160 weeks from receipt of a complaint to reaching the final decision

Why does it take so long?

Last year, there were a total of 2,226 concerns raised, a 26% increase from the previous year.

The HCPC say they face external pressures, like delays from NHS trusts, complex investigations, or having to run alongside the criminal justice system.

They also say “archaic” laws mean they have to take a huge amount of cases to a full tribunal, even when the preference might be to drop the case sooner and want legislative change.

Work is being done, he says, to tackle this kind of behaviour, citing it as his, and his organisation’s, top priority.

That will involve rooting out the perpetrators, but also playing the “long game” to change the culture “so that we can begin to tackle low level misconduct or inappropriate behaviour early, rather than let it fester and get worse,” he says.

According to the HCPC’s chair, cultural change is needed from leadership down. Sexual harassment, Elliot says, needs to be treated as high a priority as “waiting times and crumbling hospitals”.

Read more from this investigation:
Life as a female paramedic
‘Toxic’ culture of harassment revealed

But many of the victims we have spoken to say the HCPC takes too long (an average of three years) to investigate misconduct allegations.

Elliot agrees that isn’t good enough, but says they are running initiatives to speed things up, and wants to see legislative change to give her organisation more power to speed up investigations.

They have also created a sexual safety hub for both victims and witnesses of inappropriate behaviour.

It can be hard to hear allegations like Lucy and Ellie’s, contrasting their stories with a service in which the majority of people are dedicated to saving lives.

But it’s also clear that for far too long, abusers and those who commit sexually inappropriate behaviour have operated with impunity in the ambulance service. Some were perhaps protected by allegiances or cover-ups, many others simply hid behind the veneer of “banter”.

Ambulance and NHS bosses have made it clear to Sky News they are determined to root out not just the perpetrators of serious sexual violence, but also to stamp out the culture that breeds this behaviour.

But in the meantime women like Lucy, Ellie and countless others won’t hear an ambulance siren and feel safe, telling us they would even struggle to dial 999 in the case of a medical emergency.

*names have been changed

Illustrations by Rebecca Hendin

Anyone feeling emotionally distressed or suicidal can call Samaritans for help on 116 123 or email jo@samaritans.org in the UK. In the US, call the Samaritans branch in your area or 1 (800) 273-TALK

Continue Reading

UK

Apple sued by Which? over iCloud use – with potential payout for 40 million UK customers

Published

on

By

Apple sued by Which? over iCloud use - with potential payout for 40 million UK customers

Consumer rights group Which? is suing Apple for £3bn over the way it deploys the iCloud.

If the lawsuit succeeds, around 40 million Apple customers in the UK could be entitled to a payout.

The lawsuit claims Apple, which controls iOS operating systems, has breached UK competition law by giving its iCloud storage preferential treatment, effectively “trapping” customers with Apple devices into using it.

It also claims the company overcharged those customers by stifling competition.

The rights group alleges Apple encouraged users to sign up to iCloud for storage of photos, videos and other data while simultaneously making it difficult to use alternative providers.

Which? says Apple doesn’t allow customers to store or back-up all of their phone’s data with a third-party provider, arguing this violates competition law.

The consumer rights group says once iOS users have signed up to iCloud, they then have to pay for the service once their photos, notes, messages and other data go over the free 5GB limit.

More on Apple

“By bringing this claim, Which? is showing big corporations like Apple that they cannot rip off UK consumers without facing repercussions,” said Which?’s chief executive Anabel Hoult.

“Taking this legal action means we can help consumers to get the redress that they are owed, deter similar behaviour in the future and create a better, more competitive market.”

Apple ‘rejects’ claims and will defend itself

Apple “rejects” the idea its customers are tied to using iCloud and told Sky News it would “vigorously” defend itself.

“Apple believes in providing our customers with choices,” a spokesperson said.

“Our users are not required to use iCloud, and many rely on a wide range of third-party alternatives for data storage. In addition, we work hard to make data transfer as easy as possible – whether it’s to iCloud or another service.

“We reject any suggestion that our iCloud practices are anti-competitive and will vigorously defend against any legal claim otherwise.”

It also said nearly half of its customers don’t use iCloud and its pricing is inline with other cloud storage providers.

Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp

Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News

Tap here

How much could UK Apple customers receive if lawsuit succeeds?

The lawsuit will represent all UK Apple customers that have used iCloud services since 1 October 2015 – any that don’t want to be included will need to opt out.

However, if consumers live abroad but are otherwise eligible – for example because they lived in UK and used the iCloud but then moved away – they can also opt in.

The consumer rights group estimates that individual consumers could be owed an average of £70, depending on how long they have been paying for the services during that period.

Apple is facing a similar lawsuit in the US, where the US Department of Justice is accusing the company of locking down its iPhone ecosystem to build a monopoly.

Apple said the lawsuit is “wrong on the facts and the law” and that it will vigorously defend against it.

Read more from climate, science and tech:
The almighty row over climate cash that’s about to boil over
Oil state Azerbaijan is ‘perfectly suited’ to hosting a climate summit, says Azerbaijan

Big tech’s battles

This is the latest in a line of challenges big tech companies like Apple, Google and Samsung have faced around anti-competitive practices.

Most notably, a landmark case in the US earlier this year saw a judge rule that Google holds an illegal monopoly over the internet search market.

The company is now facing a second antitrust lawsuit, and may be forced to break up parts of its business.

Read more: Google faces threat of being broken up

FILE PHOTO: The logo for Google LLC is seen at their office in Manhattan, New York City, New York, U.S., November 17, 2021. REUTERS/Andrew Kelly/File Photo
Image:
File pic: Reuters

And in December last year, a judge declared Google’s Android app store a monopoly in a case brought by a private gaming company.

“Now that five companies control the whole of the internet economy, there’s a real need for people to fight back and to really put pressure on the government,” William Fitzgerald, from tech campaigning organisation The Worker Agency, told Sky News.

William Fitzgerald at Lisbon's Web Summit, where he spoke to Sky News
Image:
William Fitzgerald at Lisbon’s Web Summit, where he spoke to Sky News

“That’s why we have governments; to hold corporations accountable, to actually enforce laws.”

Continue Reading

UK

Referees’ body taking ‘very seriously’ video that appears to show David Coote snorting white powder

Published

on

By

Referees' body taking 'very seriously' video that appears to show David Coote snorting white powder

A video appearing to show a Premier League referee snorting white powder is being taken “very seriously” by the referees’ body.

Professional Game Match Officials Ltd (PGMOL) suspended David Coote on Monday over derogatory comments he allegedly made about ex-Liverpool manager Jurgen Klopp and the club in previous footage.

PGMOL and the Football Association are investigating Coote who, it is alleged, used an expletive to describe Klopp and called Liverpool FC “shit”.

Now it has emerged the UEFA Referees Committee also suspended Coote until further notice on Monday, ahead of the upcoming round of UEFA matches “when it became aware of his inappropriate behaviour”, it said.

On Wednesday evening, another video appeared on The Sun’s website which it said showed Coote snorting white powder during this summer’s Euros in Germany, where he was officiating.

A PGMOL spokesperson said: “We are aware of the allegations and are taking them very seriously. David Coote remains suspended pending a full investigation.

“David’s welfare continues to be of utmost importance to us and we are committed to providing him with the ongoing necessary support he needs through this period. We are not in a position to comment further at this stage.”

More on Jürgen Klopp

The Sun said the video was filmed on 6 July, the day after the Euro 2024 quarter-final clash between Portugal and France, for which Coote was an assistant VAR.

A statement from UEFA said: “The UEFA Referees Committee immediately suspended David Coote until further notice on 11 November – in advance of the upcoming round of UEFA matches – when it became aware of his inappropriate behaviour.”

David Coote. File pic: PA
Image:
David Coote. File pic: PA

The previous video footage, appearing to show Coote making derogatory remarks about Klopp and the Anfield club, began circulating online on Monday.

He was subsequently suspended by PGMOL pending a full investigation, and the FA then said it was also investigating the matter.

Coote officiated Liverpool’s most recent Premier League game – a 2-0 win over Aston Villa on Saturday night.

Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp

Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News

Tap here

He was criticised by some fans after Liverpool forward Mohamed Salah was brought down by Aston Villa player Leon Bailey.

Liverpool forward Darwin Nunez went on to score after play wasn’t stopped – but a replay showed Coote had chosen not to stop the game because he believed the challenge on Salah wasn’t a foul rather than because he wanted the Reds to keep their advantage.

The PA news agency has approached the FA for comment regarding the Sun’s story.

Continue Reading

Trending