Readers of my blog cannot have missed the complaints of BP pensioners about failures of BP to fulfil  its promises to its staff and former staff with pension promises.

There have been appeals to the good governance of the company by members of the scheme and lately by the Trustees. They have been turned away. Instead BP has left members short of increases in their pensions, something for which there is no explanation.

The FT have been investigating the departure of another Chairman, Albert Manifold. His departure comes amidst concern about the behaviour of BP’s executive.

Manifold was hired last year to shake up BP and planned to simplify and sell off large parts of the energy major, overhaul the company’s board of directors and cut costs.

In a statement after his departure, in which he took aim at the company’s culture of “excessive expenditure”, including chauffeurs, private jets and corporate tickets to sporting events, Manifold said “it felt to me that my priorities were not always shared by everyone”.

There is going to be no surprise amongst BP pensioners at this news. At the time when Manifold was fired for “bullying” , Aberdeen had been investigating the governance within BP

Here’s  a suggestion. Could we use the attitude of a company to  its current and future pensioners as an indication of its corporate culture?

If we’re serious about ESG,   whether  we’re asset managers, trustees or members –  we should take a company’s workplace pension as a measure of its claims.