Thomas Cook loses its 'moral compass'

Tour operator Thomas Cook triggered outrage with its response to the deaths of two children on one of its holidays in 2006.

Tour operator Thomas Cook triggered outrage this week with its response to the deaths of two children on one of its holidays in 2006. Bobby and Christi Shepherd, aged 6 and 7, died of carbon monoxide poisoning in Corfu. The cause was a faulty boiler in their hotel room. Thomas Cook did not own the hotel, but an inquest that ended this week found that the group had not done enough to ensure the property had carried out proper safety checks.

During the inquest, chief executive Peter Fankhauser said he sympathised, but that Cook had "no need to apologise" as it hadn't done anything wrong. It also emerged that the company had received £3.5m in compensation from the hotel owner, around ten times the sum the family had received.

After paying its lawyers, Cook has now donated the remaining £1.5m to Unicef. Amid the outcry, Fankhauser said he was "deeply sorry" and admitted the company "could have handled its relationship with the family better".

What the commentators said

During the trial and inquest, the company "presented itself as the very model of the legalistic corporation", said economist.com's Gulliver blog. The family pleaded for a "smidgen of contrition", but the firm kept rejecting any responsibility. It must have been "encouraged in its intransigence by legal advice that a real apology might amount to an admission of culpability".

Still, said Alistair Osborne in The Times, you'd think Cook's lawyer "might have found a form of words that got around that, or that Cook's directors might have insisted it did". An apology that comes after a public outcry "looks grudging". The Unicef payment was also "cack-handed", added The Guardian's Nils Pratley.

Fankhauser said it was the right thing to do, failing to explain why it wasn't right when the cash was received in 2013 and 2014. It's not yet clear what "[mislaying] its moral compass" could cost Cook, said the FT. But it's interesting to note that monthly Google searches for the company have dropped by 18% year-on-year.

Recommended

Imperial Brands has an 8.3% yield – but what’s the catch?
Share tips

Imperial Brands has an 8.3% yield – but what’s the catch?

Tobacco company Imperial Brands boasts an impressive dividend yield, and the shares look cheap. But investors should beware, says Rupert Hargreaves. H…
20 May 2022
Investing in drugmakers: uncommon profits from curing rare diseases
Share tips

Investing in drugmakers: uncommon profits from curing rare diseases

Treatments for medical conditions with only a small number of sufferers can still be very attractive for pharmaceutical companies and investors becaus…
20 May 2022
Share tips of the week – 20 May
Share tips

Share tips of the week – 20 May

MoneyWeek’s comprehensive guide to the best of this week’s share tips from the rest of the UK's financial pages.
20 May 2022
Delivering profits: should you buy Royal Mail shares?
Share tips

Delivering profits: should you buy Royal Mail shares?

The volume of parcels delivered by Royal Mail soared during the pandemic, and so did its profits. But it has been coming under pressure lately. So, as…
19 May 2022

Most Popular

The ten highest dividend yields in the FTSE 100
Income investing

The ten highest dividend yields in the FTSE 100

Rupert Hargreaves looks at the FTSE 100’s top yielding stocks for income investors to consider.
18 May 2022
Aviva: a share for income investors to tuck away
Share tips

Aviva: a share for income investors to tuck away

Insurance giant Aviva is one of the highest yielding stocks in the FTSE 100 – and it’s cheap, too, making it a tempting target for income investors. R…
18 May 2022
Inflation is now at its highest since 1982 – is this the peak?
Inflation

Inflation is now at its highest since 1982 – is this the peak?

At 9%, UK inflation is at its highest for 40 years – and it’s not going anywhere soon, says John Stepek. That means you need to be much more active a…
18 May 2022