Cons - I was hired as a project coordinator although I had years of more senior experience. Within two weeks of starting the role, I was asked to take on leadership responsibilities that a project coordinator would typically not do. However, my pay and official job title remained at the much lower, junior rate. I was given more work than could be reasonably done within the contracted 40 hours, however was told that the program did not pay for overtime hours. My suggestions for basic things the program could do to improve performance were ignored (note that these are things most programs of this size already have in place.) The overall program deadlines were simply not achievable, and instead of working to determine a reasonable schedule, program leadership instead added to the confusion and stress levels of team members by insisting they work harder. During my last two weeks before I resigned the position, program leadership engaged in a series of what I can only describe as 'mind games' to try and make it seem like my performance was not up to par. It is my understanding that my experience was not unique, and that the turnover for project coordinators on this particular program is unusually high.
Additional con - It is my belief that the core project leadership team (I was told that several of them refer to themselves as the "Big Three") are colluding together. I don't know if they just want to keep the program going so that they themselves continue to get paid, or if there is some other ulterior motive. Either way, the normal path of raising issues will not work, because they will stick together and you will be the only dissenting voice when you point out any abnormalities.
