Pros
Generally, it's not a bad place to work. The people are good people. The organization needs work. Your opinion of the company will vary greatly on where you work. If you work in operations you will be supported and given opportunities since those are the profit centers of the companies. If you are in an enabling function (HR/IT) your experiene may not be as good. People really care and they try to be employee centric. They attempt to support the employees and drive a caring and efficient culture. The leadershiop and employees have good intentions and generally want people to succeed.
Cons
Like any place of employement there are varying degrees of negativity or things that can improve. I will say that everything I am listing below is currently a con and that the company genuinely wants to fix them. However, give the size and structure of the company progress tends to be slow. The pay is not stellar for the amount of work and hassel you have to put up with sometimes. There is a lot of red tape to get through, they are not technology friendly, and it can take years to get people to accept a new point of view. While the company is trying to fix this, communication between leaders and direct reports is strained because each level only gets part of the picture with executives and officers being the only people who know the whole reason behind the why. Often frontline and middle management is left guessing or can only offer partial answers. The continuous stream of "i don't know" at these management levels often breeds gossip and incorrect perceptions among employees because they assume their leaders just don't want to tell them rather than believing they genuinely don't know the answer to the question. They are also incredibly inefficient in their processes since they have an excessive number of officers/senior leadership in the company who all have their own ideas and expectations. This often leads the operations departments holding the enabling departments hostage with expectations that will fix the moment but not the long-term goals. They need fewer cooks in the kitched and more in-touch executives who can think strategically. This replacement has happened in some areas than others. This company also tends to over-promise in it's job descriptions/recruiting pitch and under-deliver once you're in the role because upper management has control issues and wants to dictate what is done because they used to be in the position before they hired someone into it or they did the role at another company and want to recreate that at GMF because it's what made them successful. We have a high amount of change and a low amount of change management, communication, or workload planning to accompany it so it tends to leave people in a state of constant ambuiguity which makes it hard to be grounded and confident in the work they do.