Good Global Company, Poor Canadian Employer - Anonymous employee Pearson Employee Review

1.0
14 Aug 2014
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

You will encounter employees who either hate their experiences at this company or love it. Unfortunately with industry downturn and general reorganization of the company it is incredibly hard to find someone who loves working here anymore. Some perks: -In at 9 and out at 4:30. Short days allow for easy work/life balance and appeal to those with kids and a family (although you are only paid for a 35 hr work week so it comes at a cost) -Great health benefits and above average DC pension (although it is a 2 year wait for eligibility which is much longer than many employers) -Not many challenging days with this company and very little stress involved in most positions. Business appears to just continue on year after year. -60% discount on Pearson Canada textbooks

Cons

First and foremost Pearson is not a meritocracy. You can work your butt off and put in the extra hours, go above and beyond your job description yet are rewarded no more than the person next to you who rolls in 15 mins late and never meets a deadline. Too many problems to list here but I really hope the recent changes in Senior Management result in positive changes in the Canadian company. Globally this company is one that many wish to work for but within Canada it is not the case. Some specific inadequacies I experienced in my several forgettable years at Pearson Canada in Don Mills: -Salaries are well below market rates at Pearson. Too many employees had 2nd jobs (just visit the Leslie St. IKEA to meet some Pearson employees) and both HR and senior management have no explanation or answer to solve this. -Change management has been poorly handled by senior management and little information is cascaded down from the top leaving many employees guessing as to the future of their job and the company. -No integration of HR into the business. HR staff have little to no knowledge of the actual business and the skills needed for one to be successful in it as none have actually worked outside of HR. A new HR director who has actually worked in the operations of the company and not a career HR manager may be required to integrate this essential function into the business. -Too many complacent legacy managers who refuse to transform with the business and the industry. Upgrading of skills (leadership, management and functional skills) and a review of job titles/descriptions is desperately needed for many. -No meaningful employee review system (although an overhaul is apparently happening and a new system will be in place in Feb 2015) Hopefully Pearson will implement a meaningful employee review system where both employees and management are held accountable and action plans are put in place to develop the gaps and strengths identified during this process. -Little employee movement within the company. Very few opportunities to move upwards or laterally for even the highest performing employees. Even some senior management members encourage employees to leave because of this fact. -Senior management (globally and locally) do not communicate and encourage company strategies and targets. These need to be cascaded down to all levels of employees with personal targets set that ladder up to these for both short and long term. -Pearson is supposed to be a technology company yet paper copies of everything are required by many managers (I just thought this was ridiculous). -No salary review or explanation of how annual bonus is calculated. There is a bonus agreement signed each year yet when it comes to bonus time no explanation is given to how the amount is made up. -Job banding does not exist and therefore there is no minimum or maximum salary for each level of a position. Disparity of salaries for the same job or level is too great in many cases and HR and management also refuses to address this. -Zero accountability for most employees. Missing deadlines, consistently leaving early or coming in late and even documented bullying do not result in action from HR or most managers. -Office location in Don Mills is difficult to get to via public transportation and the office is dilapidated and almost depressing to walk around in. Half of employees work in offices with their doors closed while the other half work in cubicles with 5'6" walls that barely anyone can see over or around. This leads to little or no interpersonal communication. The President sits in his own side of the building and has no interaction with employees outside of the lunchroom. -Outsourcing!!! So many tasks and jobs (both locally and throughout the global offices) were outsourced and turnover within the outsourcing companies is so high that it is difficult to get consistent work. The outsourcing company (IBM and several others) work on Bangalore time so it is difficult to communicate live with members of the outsource team. So many more I could write but all in all I recommend you pass. My time here was regrettable and unfortunately far too long.

Explore other reviews about Pearson

5.0
22 Apr 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Smart people, supportive environment and good benefits

Cons

Tight deadlines and it gets busy at times

2.0
31 May 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Remote, $2300 a month for not that many hours of work.

Cons

The widespread incoherence of Pearson is irritating me to a significant degree. -the hiring committee mentioned the wrong pay rate so I spent a month worrying about money -the payroll agency shared the actual pay rate which was sustainable ($2,300 a month, my bills are $1,800, $2,100 with your fee baked in. - I procrastinated this week because I didn't know how to read the bureaucratese on the assignment - I figured out how to read the bureaucratese and went back to K. saying, I think I've developed something genuinely useful as a reference material for new employees. I had to synthesize information from 100 pages of PowerPoints into a two page document which cleared up the anxiety I had about how to start -can't believe K. and other managers worked as Classroom Teachers because the way they scatter information has no coherence. I had to peruse numerous documents in the SharePoint "cloud" folders, take notes, and develop a master reference document before I could interpret how to develop questions based on the bureaucratese. -I was never the most organized classroom teacher but my students knew what was expected of them. I put dates on assignments that were linear and in a consecutive sequence of beginning of week, midweek, end of week. If students had a test, I made a review sheet that was a consolidated 2-7 pages. I would never expect even my Honors students to consult dozens of pages in order to study. -I told K. about the reference document I developed and she met me partway: she recognizes one aspect of the process could be better done, new employees could be more adequately trained on the acronyms we use. That's like 25% of the way to completion. I had to figure out that "Administration 2" means the second half of a course AKA Economics for 5th and 7th graders, and 11E just means 11th grade Economics. But instead of the standards being sorted by subject, they are sorted by grade. Since the standards start with 5 for anything 5th grade, 7 for anything 7th grade, 11 for anything 11th grade, it would be coherent to just combine the standards into one document and organize by subject. -Some companies are smart, caring people trapped inside of bad systems. Like classroom teachers. Pearson feels like a repeat of my last company in its poor design and incoherence but less abusive. H) Pearson assigned us 11 questions in a spreadsheet. I think fewer mistakes would be made if they paid a college student Education major $15 an hour to type up our assignments with the criteria they want for each question. Our time is worth $30-$100 an hour. We are subject matter experts. But comprehending the bureaucratese drains cognitive energy. -I had anxiety about getting all 11 questions produced then K. said, oh you only turn in one question for the first week. Something they never said on the Microsoft Teams meeting we had last Wednesday for onboarding. If I received a sheet with 11 questions in the cloud and my name on it that's what I'm going to think I need to accomplish. But K. put in another email, only submit one question for a week. Email should be subordinate to the cloud, the cloud should supersede email ex. The federal government supremacy clause: federal government has greater authority than state governments. -Spent an hour trying to save the questions I developed in Abbi, only for them not to process and upload. Abbi feels clunky with technical failures of the early internet

See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All