Does there seem to be diversity at McMaster-Carr?

the company has great pay and benefits; rotational program allows you learn a lot

the culture is very toxic. people are nice to your face but will go to HR over the smallest thing. HR is very involved with any and all gossip in the departments they serve. You can't trust your mentors because personal conversations between you and your mentor will be publicized when deciding what goes in your review. The turnover is super high. Very talented people are hired from Ivy leagues and other prestigious universities, but only 1-2 people survive more than 3 years. The company pretends to care about diversity but somehow all people of color hired into management are fired within 1-2 years. I wouldn't say anyone is overtly racist but the racial bias is ingrained in everyone in leadership. It's rare to see people of color make it into senior leadership... super rare.

Good benefits, good pay, some good people (but you never know who you can trust because it’s a dog eat dog environment). You won’t take work home, but will take home the feeling that you’re worthless, because they will deliberately make very intelligent people feel inferior by design.

Incredibly toxic environment, fear based culture, zero accountability. The company throws money at people instead of addressing any actual employee feedback, but creates new PR schemes to make it seem like they care (like the owner gaslighting a group of people talking about diversity being the focus because “it’s the right thing to do,” but having it only matter if/when it brings in profit). Any progress that moves the company in a positive direction (from the genuine people who do actually care) is quickly undermined, and those people are forced out. You also have zero say in your career trajectory, and they target people who see their value and want to do more. They hold financial control, just like an abusive relationship, and discredit your talent until you question your worth. Run.

So look, before you read this, I want you to know I’m a former member of management at McMaster-Carr. I’m writing this for anyone considering a management role there, and honestly, prospective individual contributors might get something out of it too. I can’t speak to that experience directly, but I wouldn’t recommend it. The way you’re treated, the way you’re viewed as expendable and “below,” the way you’re looked at as a number, it’s not great. I’m trying to be honest about the pros and really just tell my story. My time there had a significant impact on what I now consider tolerable and what I now recognize as absolutely not okay. I won’t say which branch I worked in, but I’ve found the sentiments I’ve described to be universal across management at all branches. Also, I ran this through Gemini for clarity. No, it’s not AI‑generated, I wrote it, but I did use AI to help clean it up. - Great great pay including profit sharing bonus at EOY - Great benefits - Competent people, both in management and on the individual contributor level. - You will be exposed to a storied operation that’s lasted 100+ years. It’ll show you operational excellence, but the means of achieving it may not be pretty. - Tuition reimbursement after a year in good standing - Cool coworkers, very smart and competent people (My fellow people of color, please be ready to code switch. Not much diversity in there.) - They run very lean, often not being in a rush to hire someone else when someone leaves or is fired, so you’ll get to wear a lot of different hats (This can be considered a con as well, but in the short term I found it helpful. It can burn you out though.) - The company moves you whenever they want to wherever they want based on “business need”. From warehouse to contact center, they can move you anywhere. (Again, could be a con, but for me it was a pro because I came in unsure what function of a company I wanted to do.)

Overall, my experience at McMaster-Carr was negative, and it isn’t a company I will remember fondly. However, I do think there are some valid reasons to be there, like if you have a degree you want to obtain and want it completely paid for, or if you just care about money in general. As a supervisor, you’ll be working 55-70 hours a week, but you’ll be making money like an entry-level investment banker. From the management side, I found the environment to be one of manufactured fear, designed so that no one ever feels truly comfortable about their job status. The constant evaluation makes everyone feel on edge in most meetings, so you must be able to thrive under that kind of persistent pressure. That pressure creates a culture where it is incredibly difficult to trust your coworkers. Some will throw you right under the bus to protect themselves, and even those you consider friends often won't try to save you. In this environment, people know that if they step in to help, they will likely be run over as well. McMaster-Carr promotes based on execution rather than actual management skills or leadership traits. This results in everyone in upper management being extremely technically smart, they can certainly grind out a spreadsheet, but they may have zero interest in managing the people below them, and that skill isn't heavily evaluated. Their preference for "self-starters" translates to a lack of interest in training you, they just want you to figure it out on your own. I also found the hierarchy to be extremely rigid regarding who actually moves up. You have to fit a very specific mold, and in you don’t see much thought or racial diversity at the top. Typically, those who rise are the ones who fit that specific mold, manage up effectively, and aren't afraid to deflect accountability for their own mistakes. In this culture, you are taught to lead with authority rather than collaboration. Generally speaking, orders come from the top and you are expected to tell your team to do it simply because you said so, as opposed to working with them to find solutions. On a similar note, you are expected to be a low-touch leader. While you will be exposed to people management, it is frowned upon to spend more than the bare minimum coaching and mentoring your team. Ultimately, I believe the company pays management so much so that they don’t have to address the nasty underbelly that most other businesses try to contain or eliminate. Instead, they give you a fat paycheck to navigate it day to day. There is a certain beauty in that I suppose, you learn the dark side of business and how to play defense for yourself, but I would not recommend this role unless you have specific educational goals you want funded or if money is your only priority. Some other thoughts: - Takes a brutal lack of empathy for your direct reports sometimes. - Unrealistic workload expectations. While they suggest a 40-hour week during interviews, that standard is only for hourly workers, salaried management is certainly expected to work much more. What I found particularly draining was being assigned 60 hours of work, completing it in 60 hours, and then being ridiculed by upper management for not "using my time wisely" because I exceeded 40 hours. It creates a dynamic where you are penalized for the very output they demand. - McMaster’s critical nature is truly not for everyone, certainly not the faint of heart. It has left me with lasting baggage, including a lot of new anxiety and stress whenever I recall a fact incorrectly or have to speak in front of an audience. It is a perfectionist place, and sometimes perfection is subjective there. - Upper management was also oddly apathetic, someone in your direct organization could be fired, seemingly at random, and no one would ever acknowledge it. The person who performed the firing would never mention it again and return to work as if nothing happened, which always made me feel uneasy. - On the deflecting accountability, I can recall a time where me and two peers had the same event occur in a span of two weeks where we received guidance from a senior, then someone more senior disapproved, and the person who gave us the guidance originally was nowhere to be found when they had the chance to take accountability. Some folks will snake you without thinking twice! - They have Employee Resource Groups, but I don’t believe in their efficacy, I think they’re just there to check a box. No real benefit or change goes to them and also the contributions you make to these groups is not at all in evaluation. - People above you will hardly ever say thank you, so don’t expect it. I get it’s a job but that’s just not really on anyone’s radar and that’s okay there, take that as you will. - I received a significant amount of positive feedback from individual contributors simply for acknowledging them with a 'hello.' While I appreciated the sentiment, it deeply concerned me. It suggests a cultural deficit where basic courtesy is viewed as exceptional rather than expected.

Pay, Benefits, Retirement, Education Stipend, and Non-management Coworkers are all phenomenal. I loved this job and company during my internship and my full-time role under my first three managers.

The commute is atrocious from the city. Upper management is extremely out of touch. The company touts diversity initiatives but higher-ups have made me and other coworkers feel uncomfortable on several occasions. It's very unusual how myself and other men of color always get placed in warehouse roles with more in-person time and less favorable hours than our white counterparts. Finally, your manager's opinion of you determines your entire life and future at this company. I performed extremely well and absolutely loved the company under my first three managers; however, my most recent manager was very inconsiderate and caused several problems with the team due to a huge ego combined with very little understanding of our processes. This manager made my life and the lives of several of my teammates horrible for a year. I finally had enough and am so happy that I left.

Good benefits by US standards

If you work here as a generalist, you gain no transferable skills outside of the company. Management moves you from one department to another with a weekend’s notice. It keeps things fresh, but it also makes it difficult to obtain a ‘highly successful’ rating for your annual merit increase if you’re constantly learning the ropes of a new department. They control your workday by scheduling when you can take your breaks and your lunch. Your schedule can change the day of, so if you want to schedule a quick appointment in town on your 45 minute unpaid lunch, forget about it. The company boasts an inclusive environment but is just as bureaucratic as any large company. Management holds ‘listening sessions’ to hear how employees are feeling. They validate concerns in the session and never take action on what they say they will. The company is making employees return to the office 3 times per week with 3 months notice. The days are assigned. My kids are grown enough to care for themselves, but several of my coworkers are scrambling to find before and after school care at their preferred daycare which fills up a full year in advance. Any concerns about going to the office have been snuffed because they do not care about the individual, only the company. Returning to the office really changed my perspective on the company. I read articles about other large corporations bringing employees back, and I used to think my company would never do that because everyone is happier working from home. Silly of me to think. I will stick around until my kids no longer use their college tuition benefit, but they have lost what would have been a lifetime employee. They always have cameras on during Zoom meetings. My friends at other companies told me this was weird, as none of their employers use cameras much. I didn’t know any different until they said something. The golden days of working for McMaster-Carr have come to an end. Everything is operationalized to the point where you are just a cog in their 100+ year old machine. Best of luck to those just joining. I hope you can change things for the better during your time here.

- No insurance premiums - Tuition Reimbursement (but you have to be at the company for one year before you can take advantage)

This is not a place to settle if you desire a career advancement or want to acquire skills that will make you marketable to other companies. If you are very young with absolutely no other job prospects, work here for 3 years or less. Save money, pay off some student loan debt, get a masters degree using their tuition reimbursement benefit (have to be with the company for one year before you can take advantage of this perk), and then leave. If you are a mid-career professional that wants to actually use your skillsets, wants to be valued, and would appreciate the chance to climb the ladder, this is NOT the place to invest a single second of time. This company’s culture and structure leaves much to be desired. There are two hiring tracks: management and individual contributors. They specifically hire very young people, with little to no work experience, into their management trainee program. They seek out these kids from top tier schools, as if a university’s badge is the best qualifier to be a manager at an industrial supply company. A degree from Harvard or Northwestern doesn’t automatically make one qualified for a manager role. I don't know of any other company that prefers to hire inexperienced outside people for management positions, rather than promoting talented and experienced people from within! It's actually jarring to see people who have been at McMaster decades forced to be supervised by fresh-out-of-college managers that don't know what they're doing, and have no experience leading teams in professional settings. It's an incredibly insulting and inefficient way to run an operation. If you are a hard worker that has ambitions for attaining leadership/executive positions in the future, you will not achieve this at McMaster, nor will you gain skills that would make you appealing to other companies. You can be the strongest person on your team, but instead of promoting you, they will shuffle you to a different team (without notice) so you can "develop" in another area. It makes no sense. It's like they're punishing you for being great at your job. And if you actually want to work on another team, there's no in-house job board or way to apply internally. It's down to your manager's mood and maybe a little luck. When I was recruited, a red flag that I ignored was the lack of a clearly-defined job description. I take full responsibility for being dumb enough to not trust my intuition about their intentional vagueness. Heed my warning and do not make the same mistake. In my interview, they led me to believe that because I spent almost 20 years in a previous career and had a wealth of transferable skills, that I would have a chance to flourish with their company as a generalist. It was a lie. I was essentially swindled into a data entry job that was made extremely tedious because of their antiquated systems and technology. They are using technology from the 1980s and 1990s and have entire departments built around working with ancient software. My role consisted of adding data into Excel spreadsheets and old IBM programs all day, every day. The most frustratingly mundane work. None of my professional experience and extensive education was optimized in this role. The same was true for most other generalists. I worked with people that had engineering degrees and years of experience in their previous careers, but at McMaster, they were relegated to data entry or working in the company’s customer contact centers. Such a waste of talent! I could see myself becoming apathetic and depressed if I stayed any longer because I was not stimulated creatively or intellectually. I also knew I had no chance of advancing because I was not hired into management. It was the perfect example of being a mindless cog in a corporate machine. I would echo others who have said that while the salary may seem desirable, you MUST consider everything else: toxic work culture, ever-changing performance metrics, no upward mobility, being supervised by incompetent 20-somethings, being shuffled to different departments with no say or notice, etc. Even working from home is not a perk because they give you desktop equipment instead of a laptop, which forces you to be tethered to a home office. I stayed long enough to pay off some debt and save a bit of money, but I refused to fall victim to the golden handcuffs and waste valuable working years on a road to nowhere.

High compensation. Great benefits, including 100% tuition reimbursement and excellent medical. The people who work here are generally very bright, creative, and fun to be around outside of work. Skills you build here can be very useful in the industry, with the caveat that McMaster tends not to use big-name software except basics like excel. Generalists are non-exempt hourly employees so they have to pay you for overtime, so you won't work outside of your normal 40 hours unless you sign up for it. In this way, work-life balance is pretty good.

Tracking: metrics are everything at McMaster-Carr and employee tracking is big-brother-esque. Absolutely everything about your job is tracked, measured, and picked apart. There is really no wiggle room for error. I was even spoken to about my bathroom breaks. This aspect can really breed anxiety and contribute to burn out. Lack of Control: All McMaster positions are rotational/based on "company need." This means you have next to no control over what job you do. It is accepted as common that you can be pulled into a meeting on a Friday that you'll be starting a new role on Monday and you really have no way to say no without quitting. You can also very easily get stuck in a department you hate for a very long time. Culture: Because of the above, basically everyone at this company is stressed out. In my experience, managers are incentivized and rewarded for throwing people under the bus when things aren't going well. This is a shame because I think many of the people who work here are bright, honorable, and genuinely interesting and lovely people, but the structure of the company can really make them act in cruel ways. Additionally, on an individual contributor level the people who are passionate tend to burn out and leave quickly or become jaded and stay for the money but resent their jobs. People who stay at McMaster for a long time have a tendency to say "just keep your head down" when things get tough (which is at least half the time). There is a general malaise that you shouldn't risk anything to try and change things because it's likely to be punished. Communication and silo-ing: For individual contributors, departments are extremely silo-ed and it can be extremely hard to know what's going on in different parts of the company, even when you make an active effort to do so. It seems to be part of the corporate strategy for this to be true with the excuse it allows you to "focus on your responsibilities". For this and other reasons, the work can be very isolating if you don't go out of your way to make connections with others! Opportunity: If you are a manager there's significant growth opportunity at McMaster but if you're a generalist or analyst it's very very rare to be promoted into management, so don't anticipate that being a realistic option if you take a job here. There is no internal application system. Diversity and Inclusion: This is an area where the compensation vs. culture aspect of McMaster is most stark. McMaster tends to have inclusive compensation policies, including being a very early adopter of extending medical benefits to same-sex partners before gay marriage was legal. They've made significant efforts to include gender affirming care in their medical coverage above and beyond the standard. However, the culture is extremely homogenous and not particularly accepting of anything other than the company line. I can't speak to the experience of people coming from non-US cultures, but I know my friends of color have struggled with microaggressions there consistently and their ERGs are little more than a recruiting tool rather than a substantive mentorship and organizing space. They could definitely do better in this area.

Benefits is probably the only thing to tick into "Pros". Everything else is extremely skewed in very professional manner.

You will find racism under the wraps of professionalism You will find people of certain color and race being promoted You will find favoritism under the wraps of performance reviews You will be presented with "token" hires to show diversity You will find that highest turn-over rate of certain "kind" of people If English is not your first language, you will find it extremely difficult to adjust (read perform and meet expectations)

-No expectation to think about work once I leave for the day. -Compensation and benefits are incredibly generous. -Product development teams are made up of brilliant people who think deeply about their work and how they communicate with others. -I get the opportunity to learn something new and engaging every single day. -Very diverse teams with people from unique walks of life.

-Requirement to work in-office 5 days/week for the first six months. 2 days/week from then on.

Management compensation sets you up well to become a solid, established adult very early on after undergrad; tuition benefits get you a degree for free; learn how to have difficult conversations, seek feedback, assess and improve operational performance, and interact with senior leadership; dated but effective warehouse management systems that may feel rigid or dated but is actually excellent; amazing individual contributors with excellent institutional knowledge to share if you are thoughtful and humble towards them

Reviews do not always feel based on merit or actual business impact. I saw some people save the business millions in direct labor costs year-over-year but not receive any better of a raise or performance eval than somebody who did not. As I've gotten exposure to other industry practices, I've seen that McMaster's are not normal. Very challenging to be promoted internally, and limited opportunities for people with English as a second language. When you go into other distribution environments that are as "elite" as McMaster, trainings are offered in multiple languages, and supervisors/managers are often fluent in Spanish and English and promoted from within. McM has a diversity problem and being more open to ESL folks with supporting structures and training would help. They also don't pay facilitators more than individual contributors and they really should. This is a standard practice in the industry that they are missing. Perfection was the expectation for management and ICs. Feedback felt more like personal attacks than real attempts at developing my skills and abilities. Was constantly made to feel like my personality was a problem and I could not communicate. New job provides exact opposite and positive feedback on both fronts almost every day from folks with a broad variety of styles & expectations. McM wants a bit of a one-size-fits-all personality type and way of thinking, but many can be effective. A lack of emphasis on the P&L and various cost structures really limits the business perspective that folks hired into management get. You can be very successful in leadership at McMaster-Carr with none of the financial literacy that would be expected of you at other companies. Last, the culture amongst management is very competitive and not collaborative. A lot of gossiping and unconstructive conversation happens. Director styles differ but fall into only a few different buckets, resulting in myopic visions for the company and limited growth/cost savings. They need more diversity of thought in upper management tiers and to bring some outside expertise in at the top levels. Too many directors+ are home-grown for 20 years and they'd benefit from hiring for some roles externally.