Viatris Certified as a Great Place to Work® in Canada Français
Great Place to Work® is the global authority on workplace culture, employee experience and the leadership behaviors proven to deliver market-leading revenue, employee retention and increased innovation. This recognition is the result of an independent evaluation, which uses a rigorous two-step process that includes an anonymous survey to employees and a specific evaluation of the company's corporate culture, assessing the practices, policies, and HR and leadership culture of the organization. Taking everything into account, 94% of Canadian employees stated they would say this is a great place to work, with 96% stating they are treated fairly regardless of their gender.
"Great Place to Work Certification is a highly coveted achievement that requires consistent and intentional dedication to the overall employee experience," says Sarah Lewis-Kulin, the Vice President of Global Recognition at Great Place to Work. She emphasizes that Certification is the sole official recognition earned by the real-time feedback of employees regarding their company culture. "By successfully earning this recognition, it is evident that Viatris stands out as one of the top companies to work for, providing a great workplace environment for its employees."
Viatris Canada Country Manager Jeffrey Long states, "We are very proud to receive this certification. It's a reflection of the inclusive, purpose-driven culture we've built together as a team."
About Viatris
Viatris Inc. (Nasdaq: VTRS) is a global healthcare company uniquely positioned to bridge the traditional divide between generics and brands, combining the best of both to more holistically address healthcare needs globally. With a mission to empower people worldwide to live healthier at every stage of life, we provide access at scale, currently supplying high-quality medicines to approximately 1 billion patients around the world annually and touching all of life's moments, from birth to the end of life, acute conditions to chronic diseases. With our exceptionally extensive and diverse portfolio of medicines, a one-of-a-kind global supply chain designed to reach more people when and where they need them, and the scientific expertise to address some of the world's most enduring health challenges, access takes on deep meaning at Viatris. We are headquartered in the U.S., with global centers in Pittsburgh, Shanghai and Hyderabad, India. Learn more at viatris.com and investor.viatris.com, and connect with us on LinkedIn, Instagram, YouTube and X.
About Great Place to Work Certification™
Great Place to Work® Certification™ is the most definitive "employer-of-choice" recognition that companies aspire to achieve. It is the only recognition based entirely on what employees report about their workplace experience – specifically, how consistently they experience a high-trust workplace. Great Place to Work Certification is recognized worldwide by employees and employers alike and is the global benchmark for identifying and recognizing outstanding employee experience. Every year, more than 10,000 companies across 60 countries apply to get Great Place to Work-Certified.
About Great Place To Work ®
As the global authority on workplace culture, Great Place to Work® brings 30 years of groundbreaking research and data to help every place become a great place to work for all. Their proprietary platform and For All™ Model helps companies evaluate the experience of every employee, with exemplary workplaces becoming Great Place to Work Certified™ or receiving recognition on a coveted Best Workplaces™ List.
Learn more at greatplacetowork.com and follow Great Place To Work on LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook and Instagram.
Forward-Looking Statements
This statement includes statements that constitute "forward-looking statements." These statements are made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such forward-looking statements may include statements regarding new product launches. Because forward-looking statements inherently involve risks and uncertainties, actual future results may differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to: actions and decisions of healthcare and pharmaceutical regulators; our ability to comply with applicable laws and regulations; changes in healthcare and pharmaceutical laws and regulations in the U.S. and abroad; any regulatory, legal or other impediments to Viatris' ability to bring new products to market; Viatris' or its partners' ability to develop, manufacture, and commercialize products; the scope, timing and outcome of any ongoing legal proceedings, and the impact of any such proceedings; Viatris' failure to achieve expected or targeted future financial and operating performance and results; risks associated with international operations; changes in third-party relationships; the effect of any changes in Viatris' or its partners' customer and supplier relationships and customer purchasing patterns; the impacts of competition; changes in the economic and financial conditions of Viatris or its partners; uncertainties and matters beyond the control of management, including general economic conditions, tariffs and trade restrictions, inflation and exchange rates; and the other risks described in Viatris' filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Viatris routinely uses its website as a means of disclosing material information to the public in a broad, non-exclusionary manner for purposes of the SEC's Regulation Fair Disclosure (Reg FD). Viatris undertakes no obligation to update these statements for revisions or changes after the date of this press release other than as required by law.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Globe and Mail
3 hours ago
- Globe and Mail
Better EV Stock: Alphabet vs. Tesla (Hint: Robotaxis Are the Key)
Key Points The future of the auto industry lies in electric vehicles and ridesharing in autonomous vehicles. After many years in service, Waymo still can't point to a timeline of profitability. Tesla also faces challenges with its robotaxi offering, but it's well positioned, provided it can demonstrate safety and efficacy. These 10 stocks could mint the next wave of millionaires › Alphabet (NASDAQ: GOOG)(NASDAQ: GOOGL) isn't, strictly speaking, an electric vehicle (EV) company. However, its autonomous driving technology company, Waymo, is committed to only using EVs in its fleet. Funnily enough, it could be argued that Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) isn't really a pure EV company either. After all, most of its sky–high valuation is attributable to the potential of its robotaxis. However, the comparison of these two as EV companies is valid because the future of the auto industry is EVs, and ridesharing in autonomous vehicles will be a larger part of the industry in the future. But which company is better placed, and which is the better stock? Where to invest $1,000 right now? Our analyst team just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks to buy right now. Continue » Alphabet vs. Tesla It's entirely possible that Alphabet could decide to spin off Waymo, not least because it reportedly could be valued at more than $45 billion. Meanwhile, one of Tesla's biggest supporters, Cathie Wood's Ark Invest, ascribes 88% of Tesla's enterprise value (market cap plus net debt) to robotaxis in its investment case for the stock, producing an expected value of $2,600 for the stock in 2029. As I have previously discussed, the Ark targets should be taken with a pinch of salt, as its track record on Tesla hasn't been good. However, Ark's core argument is sound and points to Tesla being potentially a far more valuable stock than Waymo ever will be. Pathways to profitability The core argument is that Tesla's business model is scalable to profitability while Waymo's is far less so. The issue of Waymo's profitability arose in a recent CNBC interview with Waymo co-CEO Tekedra Mawakana, where she was asked whether Waymo is profitable. She replied, "We're proving out that it can be a profitable business." When asked when Waymo would be profitable, she replied, "not clear." It's also not clear if Alphabet/Waymo doesn't have an internal forecast for when it will hit profitability, or if Mawakana preferred not to divulge what the company considers an uncertain forecast. However, it's inconceivable that Alphabet is not internally crunching the numbers on this, and if it does decide to spin off Waymo, it's a question that needs to be answered. The point here is that a business that can't be profitable isn't worth anything, let alone $45 billion, so at some point, its management is going to have to set some timelines. Tesla and timelines Whereas investors need to hear more about timelines from Waymo, whose public self-driving ride-hailing service was launched in 2018, there's probably a need for fewer declared timelines from Tesla, or, rather, a need for more accurate ones. For example, in 2019, CEO Elon Musk famously told investors to expect a million self-driving vehicles on the road by mid-2020. In April 2022, he also stated that Tesla aspired to reach volume production of a dedicated robotaxi (Cybercab) in 2024 -- a timeline that has now been pushed back to 2026. These timeline estimates matter because plugging overly optimistic assumptions from them into valuation models can produce dramatically erroneous conclusions. Why Tesla is better positioned With all that said, Tesla has clear advantages over Waymo, provided it can demonstrate safety and reliability and achieve regulatory approvals. Its advantages include: Lower vehicle costs, with Musk aiming for a $30,000 price tag for a dedicated robotaxi, the Cybercab. Meanwhile, Wall Street analysts estimate Waymo's current vehicles cost more than $120,000. In addition, Tesla manufactures its own cars (Waymo does not), and existing Teslas can be converted into robotaxis using Tesla's as-yet-unreleased-to-the-public unsupervised full self-driving (FSD) software, giving Tesla a significant advantage in scaling the robotaxi business. Tesla's use of camera-centric technology is inherently less expensive than Waymo's combination of cameras, light detection and ranging (Lidar) lasers, and high-definition maps. Every Tesla car (robotaxi or not) on the road is effectively a data gatherer, with the data used to improve the AI that powers its AI models. As such, even though Waymo was first, Tesla has significantly more data than Waymo. Which is the better EV stock? Waymo may become profitable in the future, particularly if Lidar costs continue to drop. However, it's challenging to think that it will be a strong competitor to Tesla, provided Musk's company can master safe, unsupervised FSD using a camera-centric approach. That's a big "if" at this stage, but it becomes a smaller "if" as time goes by and Tesla expands its nascent robotaxi offering across new geographies. Tesla's next robotaxi launch is expected to be in Phoenix, as it plans to continue slowly building its robotaxi business. I think Tesla is the better EV stock when comparing Tesla and Alphabet. Don't miss this second chance at a potentially lucrative opportunity Ever feel like you missed the boat in buying the most successful stocks? Then you'll want to hear this. On rare occasions, our expert team of analysts issues a 'Double Down' stock recommendation for companies that they think are about to pop. If you're worried you've already missed your chance to invest, now is the best time to buy before it's too late. And the numbers speak for themselves: Nvidia: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2009, you'd have $449,961!* Apple: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2008, you'd have $40,603!* Netflix: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2004, you'd have $636,628!* Right now, we're issuing 'Double Down' alerts for three incredible companies, available when you join Stock Advisor, and there may not be another chance like this anytime soon. See the 3 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of July 21, 2025
Vancouver Sun
3 hours ago
- Vancouver Sun
Trump's tariff threats against Canada face legal hurdles ahead of August deadline
Donald Trump's plan to realign global trade faces its latest legal barrier this week in a federal appeals court — and Canada is bracing for the U.S. president to follow through on his threat to impose higher tariffs. While Trump set an Aug. 1 deadline for countries to make trade deals with the United States, the president's ultimatum has so far resulted in only a handful of frameworks for trade agreements. Deals have been announced for Japan, Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines and the United Kingdom — but Trump indicated last week that an agreement with Canada is far from complete. Start your day with a roundup of B.C.-focused news and opinion. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Sunrise will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. 'We don't have a deal with Canada, we haven't been focused on it,' Trump told reporters Friday. Trump sent a letter to Prime Minister Mark Carney threatening to impose 35 per cent tariffs if Canada doesn't make a trade deal by the deadline. The White House has said those duties would not apply to goods compliant with the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement on trade. Canadian officials have also downplayed expectations of a new economic and security agreement materializing by Friday. 'We'll use all the time that's necessary,' Carney said last week. Countries around the world will also be watching as Trump's use of a national security statute to hit nations with tariffs faces scrutiny in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The U.S. Court of International Trade ruled in May that Trump does not have the authority to wield tariffs on nearly every country through the use of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act of 1977. The act, usually referred to by the acronym IEEPA, gives the U.S. president authority to control economic transactions after declaring an emergency. No previous president had ever used it for tariffs and the U.S. Constitution gives power over taxes and tariffs to Congress. The Trump administration quickly appealed the lower court's ruling on the so-called 'Liberation Day' and fentanyl-related tariffs and arguments are set to be heard in the appeal court on Thursday. The hearing combines two different cases that were pushing against Trump's tariffs. One involves five American small businesses arguing specifically against Trump's worldwide tariffs, and the other came from 12 states pushing back on both the 'Liberation Day' duties and the fentanyl-related tariffs George Mason University law professor Ilya Somin called Trump's tariff actions a 'massive power grab.' Somin, along with the Liberty Justice Center, is representing the American small businesses. 'We are hopeful — we can't know for sure obviously — we are hopeful that we will continue to prevail in court,' Somin said. Somin said they are arguing that IEEPA does not 'give the president the power to impose any tariff he wants, on any nation, for any reason, for as long as he wants, whenever he feels like it.' He added that 'the law also says there must be an emergency and an unusual and extraordinary threat to American security or the economy' — and neither the flow of fentanyl from Canada nor a trade deficit meet that definition. U.S. government data shows a minuscule volume of fentanyl is seized at the northern border. The White House has said the Trump administration is legally using powers granted to the executive branch by the Constitution and Congress to address America's 'national emergencies of persistent goods trade deficits and drug trafficking.' There have been 18 amicus briefs — a legal submission from a group that's not party to the action — filed in support of the small businesses and states pushing against Trump's tariffs. Two were filed in support of the Trump administration's actions. Brent Skorup, a legal fellow at the Washington-based Cato Institute, said the Trump administration is taking a vague statute and claiming powers never deployed by a president before. The Cato Institute submitted a brief that argued 'the Constitution specifies that Congress has the power to set tariffs and duties.' Skorup said there are serious issues with the Trump administration's interpretation of IEEPA. 'We don't want power consolidated into a single king or president,' he said. It's expected the appeals court will expedite its ruling. Even if it rules against the duties, however, they may not be immediately lifted. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has said the Supreme Court should 'put an end to this.' There are at least eight lawsuits challenging the tariffs. Canada is also being hit with tariffs on steel, aluminum and automobiles. Trump used different powers under the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 to enact those duties. Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here .
Global News
5 hours ago
- Global News
As Trump's trade deal deadline approaches, his tariffs face legal pushback in court
Donald Trump's plan to realign global trade faces its latest legal barrier this week in a federal appeals court — and Canada is bracing for the U.S. president to follow through on his threat to impose higher tariffs. While Trump set an Aug. 1 deadline for countries to make trade deals with the United States, the president's ultimatum has so far resulted in only a handful of frameworks for trade agreements. Deals have been announced for Japan, Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines and the United Kingdom — but Trump indicated last week that an agreement with Canada is far from complete. 'We don't have a deal with Canada, we haven't been focused on it,' Trump told reporters Friday. Trump sent a letter to Prime Minister Mark Carney threatening to impose 35 per cent tariffs if Canada doesn't make a trade deal by the deadline. The White House has said those duties would not apply to goods compliant with the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement on trade. Story continues below advertisement Canadian officials have also downplayed expectations of a new economic and security agreement materializing by Friday. 'We'll use all the time that's necessary,' Carney said last week. Countries around the world will also be watching as Trump's use of a national security statute to hit nations with tariffs faces scrutiny in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The U.S. Court of International Trade ruled in May that Trump does not have the authority to wield tariffs on nearly every country through the use of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act of 1977. Get daily National news Get the day's top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day. Sign up for daily National newsletter Sign Up By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy The act, usually referred to by the acronym IEEPA, gives the U.S. president authority to control economic transactions after declaring an emergency. No previous president had ever used it for tariffs and the U.S. Constitution gives power over taxes and tariffs to Congress. The Trump administration quickly appealed the lower court's ruling on the so-called 'Liberation Day' and fentanyl-related tariffs and arguments are set to be heard in the appeal court on Thursday. The hearing combines two different cases that were pushing against Trump's tariffs. One involves five American small businesses arguing specifically against Trump's worldwide tariffs, and the other came from 12 states pushing back on both the 'Liberation Day' duties and the fentanyl-related tariffs. Story continues below advertisement George Mason University law professor Ilya Somin called Trump's tariff actions a 'massive power grab.' Somin, along with the Liberty Justice Center, is representing the American small businesses. 'We are hopeful — we can't know for sure obviously — we are hopeful that we will continue to prevail in court,' Somin said. Somin said they are arguing that IEEPA does not 'give the president the power to impose any tariff he wants, on any nation, for any reason, for as long as he wants, whenever he feels like it.' He added that 'the law also says there must be an emergency and an unusual and extraordinary threat to American security or the economy' — and neither the flow of fentanyl from Canada nor a trade deficit meet that definition. U.S. government data shows a minuscule volume of fentanyl is seized at the northern border. The White House has said the Trump administration is legally using powers granted to the executive branch by the Constitution and Congress to address America's 'national emergencies of persistent goods trade deficits and drug trafficking.' There have been 18 amicus briefs — a legal submission from a group that's not party to the action — filed in support of the small businesses and states pushing against Trump's tariffs. Two were filed in support of the Trump administration's actions. Story continues below advertisement Brent Skorup, a legal fellow at the Washington-based Cato Institute, said the Trump administration is taking a vague statute and claiming powers never deployed by a president before. The Cato Institute submitted a brief that argued 'the Constitution specifies that Congress has the power to set tariffs and duties.' Skorup said there are serious issues with the Trump administration's interpretation of IEEPA. 'We don't want power consolidated into a single king or president,' he said. It's expected the appeals court will expedite its ruling. Even if it rules against the duties, however, they may not be immediately lifted. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has said the Supreme Court should 'put an end to this.' There are at least eight lawsuits challenging the tariffs. Canada is also being hit with tariffs on steel, aluminum and automobiles. Trump used different powers under the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 to enact those duties.
