Pros
Good product, great customers, some nice people work there
Cons
Over the last few years, there has been a noticeable shift in company culture, transparency, compensation expectations, and work-life balance. One major example was the move away from unlimited paid sick time to a much more restrictive policy with only 10 paid sick days annually, with additional time becoming unpaid. Despite public messaging around employee wellness and mental health, there were times employees felt guilt or pressure around taking sick time, even when legitimately unwell or dealing with family responsibilities. Work-life balance could also be difficult to maintain depending on your team and manager. While flexibility and accommodations were offered to some employees, others felt there was little willingness to meet in the middle when adjustments were needed, creating inconsistency across the employee experience. Compensation is also noticeably below industry standards for many roles. Leadership frequently stated that third-party contractors were used to benchmark salaries against similar companies to ensure compensation remained competitive, but many employees felt this did not reflect the actual market reality. A few years ago, this was easier to accept because the company still had more of a startup atmosphere: highly collaborative, less corporate, flexible, and genuinely people-focused. Employees were often willing to accept somewhat lower pay in exchange for a supportive, relaxed, and mission-driven environment. However, as the company has grown, the culture has shifted toward a more corporate structure with higher performance expectations, more pressure, less flexibility, and a stronger sense that employees are ultimately replaceable. The issue is that compensation has not meaningfully evolved alongside those increased expectations. If a company wants employees to operate in a high-pressure corporate environment with aggressive growth expectations and constant organizational change, compensation needs to better reflect that reality. The return-to-office messaging also caused frustration and confusion for many employees. For years, the company heavily promoted remote flexibility and hired employees under the understanding that roles could remain remote or optional hybrid. Leadership publicly emphasized that online collaboration was working well and that the company did not notice a dip in collaboration and development. More recently, messaging shifted significantly toward mandatory hybrid expectations, often framed as leadership noticing a dip in collaboration and development becoming stagnant. This felt contradictory to earlier company statements and left many employees uncertain about the long-term direction of remote work at the company. Employees asked valid questions about whether the long-term goal was eventually becoming fully in-office again, especially as new office spaces continued opening, but leadership often avoided giving direct answers. Compared to the transparency the company once had, communication in recent years has felt far more corporate, carefully worded, and less genuine. There were also concerns around consistency and fairness in internal hiring and interview processes. Employees applying internally for new opportunities often experienced vastly different interview expectations depending on the role, department, or hiring manager. Some candidates went through multiple rounds, presentations, and lengthy interview processes, while others appeared to move through far less formal processes or bypass stages entirely. At times, internal employees felt they were held to higher standards than external hires despite already having proven company knowledge and performance history. Feedback provided after interviews could also feel vague, inconsistent, or disconnected from the actual interview experience, leaving employees frustrated and uncertain about how hiring decisions were truly being made. As the company scaled, there were also growing pains around communication, shifting priorities, and workload expectations. High performance was strongly encouraged, but sustainable workloads and burnout concerns did not always feel meaningfully addressed.