Peter Howse
Thomson Reuters
Monday 04 April 2011
I read with interest the article relating to Thomson Reuters being one of the top employers [● Thomson Reuters rated one of Britain’s top employers] and also being voted a very ethical company by some outfit in New York [● Thomson Reuters again rated one of world’s most ethical companies]. I especially note the statement “exceptional for its strong ethics and social conscience”. All seems a bit odd to me as being a Reuters pensioner and not having a pension increase for the last three years because the company won’t provide any additional funding despite their strong financial position.
I am getting the feeling that the articles published above are all a bit meaningless and should be taken with a pinch of salt as they do not reflect what is actually happening where the pensioners are concerned. How come the pensioners never get a mention in these glowing company appraisals?
Perhaps Tom Glocer and David Thomson would like to comment.
Peter Howse
I am getting the feeling that the articles published above are all a bit meaningless and should be taken with a pinch of salt as they do not reflect what is actually happening where the pensioners are concerned. How come the pensioners never get a mention in these glowing company appraisals?
Perhaps Tom Glocer and David Thomson would like to comment.
Peter Howse
'A most ethical company'
Friday 18 September 2009
The feature relating to Thomson Reuters being "a most ethical company" could only have originated in New York. I wonder what the UK pensioners think about this article knowing that the company is no longer interested in supporting them despite having a very strong cash flow since the merger. Maybe the word "ethical" has a different meaning in the USA than it does in the UK.
I found the whole article suspect.
Peter Howse
I found the whole article suspect.
Peter Howse
