Blue Origin reviews

PAY is the biggest deterrence. Non of the reqs in Florida/ Huntsville have a pay range. If you decide to take a pay cut and you accept a low pay based on the interview of "everyone starts low and once certified you get raises" you'll never get back to your pre-paycut pay. You get a 50 cent stipend per cert. No real raises. That alone will take any and all desire to perform. Even with all the classroom training, when it comes to putting all the training into practice there is a lot of chickens running around with no heads. I personally watched, leads, supervisors and senior techs cheat on certification tests and being helped to cehat by other leads, supervisor and senior techs. These are the techs most rewarded by management too. Management is aware of the cheating, Not by my doing and they're ok with it. Also, you are expected to create inspection techniques but don't get credited. Engineering needs a bit of a shake up as one in particular just has techs do all his work. The team is ran by 3 individuals Tony, Jeff and Brad. They run space coast, Huntsville and Kent. All 3 locations have tremendous attrition. Can't question their "leadership" or you'll be blacklisted. HR is absolute 0 help. They will ignore your emails or do nothing. The stock option plan is all smokes and mirrors. Those of us who decided to take the Blue position as opposed to other offers and or staying at our old positions have lost hundreds of thousands and for some millions in direct pay or stocks from other companies. The stock options cannot be exercised unless the company has an offering (open to non direct employees to purchase). Currently cannot be purchased even as an employee. They also expire. Dangled just out of reach.

The biggest issue is management culture. Across multiple industries, including startups and DoD work, I have not seen a workplace with this level of poor communication, inconsistent decision-making, and disregard for technical expertise. -Promotions and leadership assignments often appear disconnected from relevant experience. In some cases, managers with no subject-matter background have advanced over qualified technical contributors, seemingly because they were better at presentation materials or internal visibility. This creates a culture where optics matter more than execution. -There are also serious concerns around professionalism and accountability. I have personally observed or been made aware of inappropriate comments and behavior from management, including discriminatory remarks and blurred professional boundaries. HR has not inspired confidence that these issues are handled objectively or consistently. -Processes are poorly defined and constantly changing. Responsibilities between groups are often unclear, which leads to duplicated work, internal conflict, and confusion over ownership. Instead of solving these structural problems, leadership often seems to blame the technical teams stuck trying to operate within them. -The recent influence of Amazon-style management practices has made the environment worse. Employees are being pushed harder while receiving less respect for their actual work and expertise. The latest performance review cycle was especially concerning, with stacked-ranking-style outcomes and improvement plans reportedly assigned to employees who would normally be considered meeting expectations. This happened shortly before changes to the stock plan, which meant some employees received reduced equity based on what felt like an artificially harsher review process. -For systems engineering specifically, the company does not seem to value the discipline. Senior technical experts have either left or been pushed out, and systems engineering is frequently treated as a convenient target for broader program stagnation. This has been an ongoing trend, and it appears to be getting worse.