Pros
Decent health benefits, and you can make some good friends that you can later move to a better firm with.
Cons
Since the appointment of the PAL/Sr. VP, there have been noticeable concerns regarding workplace culture and leadership dynamics. While the PAL/Sr. VP has implemented an open-door policy, trust among employees remains low, with limited interaction, communication, and support for staff, particularly those who have been with the company since the early pandemic era. The PAL/Sr. VP’s hiring practices, favoring close friends and acquaintances, have raised concerns about fairness and accountability, as those hires often operate without direct oversight or consequences for their actions. Additionally, the PAL/Sr. VP’s frequent absences from the office have impacted productivity and morale within the team. There is a significant gap in mentorship and skill-building, especially among non-Project Manager (PM) employees. Some PMs in key departments—interior design, education, and public works—lack the willingness to train interns and junior staff, which often leads to blame being placed on interns for errors stemming from insufficient guidance. Employees are also sometimes placed in roles with unclear responsibilities or are tasked with work outside their original job scope, creating confusion and dissatisfaction. It is crucial that project managers actively support and mentor their junior staff to foster a productive and collaborative work environment. However, it has been observed that a significant number of them spend considerable time socializing or taking breaks rather than engaging in mentorship and leadership responsibilities. Addressing this concern could enhance team efficiency and contribute to the overall success of the company. The work environment suffers from inconsistent standards and inequities. Interns are expected to possess expert-level skills without adequate support, while even certain PMs struggle to use essential software like Revit. Disparities in pay rates persist, with women often receiving lower compensation compared to men, apart from those in upper management. Furthermore, the company’s policies do not reflect inflation or the rising cost of living, leaving staff with stagnant wages. Employees have repeatedly requested company-wide standards and updates to essential resources, such as computers and licenses. However, budget constraints have led to inadequate equipment, and attempts to introduce new study materials for professional certifications were dismissed by the PAL/Sr. VP. The workplace environment has become increasingly hostile, with behaviors from certain senior hires contributing to a lack of respect and professionalism. Some leaders have been reported to talk down to employees, make inappropriate comments, and display poor communication skills. When employees are targeted for dismissal, there is a pattern of excessive workload, unrealistic expectations, and misplaced blame. The consistent efforts by certain individuals in management to justify their actions—despite evident issues related to respect and accountability—reflects poorly on the caliber of leadership recruited by this firm. Recent changes in the office have led to an increase in micromanagement from certain staff members, some of whom appear to spend more time away from their desks than focusing on billable work. Leadership seems to operate under the assumption that unless employees are visibly seated and deeply engaged in their tasks, they are unproductive or have nothing to do. While this expectation is not explicitly stated, there is an unspoken pressure to work at least 50 hours per week. Adding to the frustration, there is a clear inconsistency—employees are discouraged from logging excessive hours on a project, yet they are simultaneously expected to ensure billable time is saved. This approach creates confusion and raises concerns about efficiency and fairness in the workplace. These issues require urgent attention to foster a more inclusive, supportive, and equitable work culture.
