EECO2 Engineer reviews

1.0

100% would recommend to a friend

(2 total reviews)
avatar

Robert Wallace

Not enough data to show CEO approval

Reviews by job title

2 reviews
1.0
11 Aug 2025
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Nothing much to say about, maybe the people work with

Cons

So many I can go on and on, disorganized, slave treatment and above all no progression.

avatar
EECO2 Response
2w
Thank you for taking the time to leave feedback. We take all comments seriously, whether raised internally or via external platforms, and we would welcome the opportunity to discuss your specific concerns directly. That said, we feel it is important to respond to several points raised here, as the claims made are broad and lack specific, substantiated detail. On organisation: EECO2 operates structured internal processes across its engineering functions. We acknowledge that no organisation is without room for improvement, but characterising the business as "disorganised" without reference to specific processes, teams, or incidents does not provide us — or readers — with meaningful context. On treatment of staff: This is a serious characterisation and one we firmly reject. We hold clear expectations around professional conduct, workload management, and respectful treatment at all levels of the business. If any individual has felt their treatment fell below acceptable standards, we strongly encourage them to raise this through our formal internal channels, where it will be taken seriously and investigated properly. On progression: This is perhaps the area where we would most strongly push back. EECO2 has an established performance review framework underpinned by a clearly defined skills matrix, designed specifically to support engineers in identifying development pathways and progressing their careers in a structured, transparent way. A number of our engineers have advanced through this framework in parallel with their professional institution progression — a route that also reflects the expectation, common across the engineering profession, that individuals take active ownership of their own development and continuing professional development (CPD). Career progression in engineering, by its nature, requires self-directed learning, initiative, and engagement beyond the day-to-day role. This is not an unreasonable expectation — it is consistent with the standards set by institutions such as the IMechE, IET, and CIBSE, and is a principle we support our engineers in embracing. We note that the review acknowledges the quality of colleagues as a positive, which we appreciate. Our people are central to what we do. We would reiterate our openness to a direct, constructive conversation. Formal, attributed feedback — rather than anonymous generalisation — allows us to respond meaningfully and, where warranted, act. We remain committed to being a place where engineers can build genuinely rewarding careers. EECO2 Management
1.0
7 Jul 2025
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Some colleagues are genuinely great people, stuck in a bad situation, just like you'd be.

Cons

Chronic Financial Instability & Deceptive Promises: This company is a financial mess. Expect constant delays for paychecks and expenses, and forget about those promised bonuses – they rarely, if ever, show up. Management seems way more concerned with showing off their fancy company cars and even company houses than making sure staff get paid on time or keeping clients happy. Dysfunctional Leadership & Self-Serving Focus: The executive team appears profoundly disconnected from operational realities and employee well-being. Strategic decisions often seem arbitrary and short-sighted, frequently prioritizing individual interests or external appearances over genuine, sustainable business growth. This consistent lack of coherent direction fuels pervasive internal chaos and severely undermines employee confidence. High Attrition & Client Instability: The organization experiences notably high employee turnover, especially among skilled professionals. This internal instability is mirrored by observable challenges in retaining key clients, indicating significant operational distress and raising serious questions about the company's long-term viability and industry standing. Culture of Blame, Absent Accountability & Entrenched Favoritism: This is a deeply ingrained blame-driven culture where accountability for systemic failures was consistently elusive from leadership. The company exhibits a notable degree of favoritism, where opportunities and decisions frequently appear channeled to a select few, suggesting a preference for personal connections over merit or company-wide success. The Human Resources function often seems ineffective in addressing legitimate grievances, perpetuating a culture that undermines fairness and morale. Unsustainable Workload & Demanding Management Tactics: Employees are subjected to an utterly unsustainable workload, frequently pressured into working excessive, unpaid hours – including evenings and weekends – with little regard for personal boundaries or well-being. Management often employs aggressive, confrontational, and unprofessional tactics, creating a consistently high-stress and unsupportive environment. Insufficient Response to Inclusivity & Harassment Concerns: Despite stated commitments to diversity, the company exhibits a concerning inability to effectively address issues of equitable treatment and workplace conduct. Concerns regarding discriminatory behavior, including those related to gender and race, along with instances of harassment, are often raised but are rarely, if ever, adequately addressed or taken seriously by management, leaving affected individuals feeling unsupported and exposed to an often dismissive environment Bottom Line: EECO2 is a prime example of a company prioritizing short-term, self-serving interests over ethical management, employee well-being, and sustainable business practices. The chronic financial instability, chaotic leadership, and deeply problematic workplace culture create an environment that is not merely challenging, but actively detrimental to professional growth and mental health. Prospective employees should approach with extreme caution, as the risks to personal well-being and career stability are substantial.

avatar
EECO2 Response
2w
This review raises some serious points, and we'd rather respond to them honestly than defensively. We will note at the outset, though, that while this is posted as a current employee of five to seven years, the account bears little resemblance to the experience of anyone currently with the business. We mention that not to dismiss the review, but because readers are entitled to weigh it accordingly. Some points we can address with evidence. Others — particularly those concerning how individuals are treated — matter too much to wave away, so our response is to be clear about how they can properly be looked into. On discrimination, harassment and HR. This is the most serious part of the review and deserves a straight answer. Concerns of this kind — relating to gender, race or anything else — are ones we take extremely seriously, and we have formal procedures precisely so they can be documented, investigated and acted upon. What we honestly can't do is look into an anonymous, unspecified account with no individual or incident attached. If the writer, or anyone reading this, has experienced something of this nature, we'd sincerely ask them to raise it formally — with HR or a director. It will be taken seriously, and we'd far rather be told and act than see it left where no one can be helped. On pay and bonuses. We're not aware of any late salary payment to employed staff, and none has been raised internally. Salaries are benchmarked annually against CIBSE and Hays and held at mid-market as a minimum. Contractors sit on separate terms with different payment cycles. Bonuses, where offered, are tied to clear criteria rather than guaranteed. On the mention of company cars and houses. The structure and remuneration of the business are ordinary features of a company of our type. Linking them to staff pay makes for a pointed line, but the two simply aren't connected. On workload and hours. This is among the less accurate parts of the review. Evening work is genuinely the exception rather than the rule. Where client deadlines press, our instinct is to protect our people rather than push them — in practice we are more likely to renegotiate timelines than to ask anyone to work late, which is the reverse of the pressure described here. The expectations around weekend work and travel are set out plainly at interview, factored into salary, and — unusually for our sector — accompanied by reimbursement for the time given up. We regard that as a deliberate point of difference, not a grievance. On leadership and culture. We haven't got everything right, and where structures stopped working — including a project management function since reshaped — we changed them. The broader points on blame and favouritism are hard to engage with constructively without specifics. On clients. Whatever the review suggests, the sustained trust of a portfolio of global blue chip clients, with their exacting due diligence, isn't the mark of a business in distress. We can hear the frustration behind this, and we don't dismiss it. The most serious concerns, though, can only really be resolved through the proper channels — and that door remains open to current and former colleagues alike

Glassdoor has 17 EECO2 reviews submitted anonymously by EECO2 employees. Read employee reviews and ratings on Glassdoor to decide if EECO2 is right for you.