Proceed with Caution – High Turnover and Limited Support
Pros
One of the most meaningful aspects of my time here was the bond shared with coworkers at the ground level. Despite limited support and unclear direction from leadership, my peers were resourceful, kind, and committed to helping one another succeed. The environment was often unpredictable, but that only strengthened the relationships among those of us trying to navigate it together. There was a shared understanding, an unspoken resilience — the kind of connection that can only form when people are leaning on each other to get through tough situations. These coworkers became my biggest source of encouragement. We collaborated, problem-solved, and did our best to support each other in a workplace that often felt chaotic or disconnected from the values it claimed to uphold. If you're someone who values authentic, supportive relationships and can find strength in shared experience, you may appreciate the people you'll meet at the peer level.
Cons
If you're considering a role here, I recommend reading employee reviews online. Many of them reflect what I personally experienced. There were concerns from the beginning. On the day of my first scheduled interview, no one showed up on time, and I had to call to confirm if the meeting was still happening. The interview began about ten minutes late, which left a poor first impression. Later, when I accepted the position and gave notice at my previous job, I was surprised by the negative response I received. Ironically, leadership seemed confused or upset when others left without notice. Training was minimal and unstructured. Some sessions weren’t relevant to the role, and much of onboarding relied on navigating a complicated and outdated internal wiki. I often felt I was expected to figure things out on my own with little support. The culture is described as “high-level” by leadership, and that phrase is used repeatedly. In my experience, it often came across as a way to reinforce hierarchy rather than collaboration. I sometimes felt that employees were reminded of how elevated leadership was, which created a sense of distance and left little room for open dialogue or peer-level contribution. I observed internal changes—especially related to contract terms and PTO—that felt inconsistently communicated. In one instance, time off I had entered was reclassified without a clear explanation, which added to the confusion. I submitted feedback through an anonymous survey and also filed a confidential concern through HR. Neither seemed to result in any follow-up or discussion. My employment ended not long after, which left me questioning how safe or effective those channels really were. The culture appeared to emphasize control and compliance more than transparency or collaboration. During my time there, turnover was high, and team changes were often unexplained. Company responses to critical reviews felt scripted and didn’t seem to address the actual issues being raised. The organization promotes values like helping “struggling friends,” but in practice, many employees seemed to be struggling with unclear expectations, inconsistent support, and a lack of psychological safety. I left the role feeling emotionally depleted and professionally disappointed.
