Training Developer, Military Contractor - Military Instructor and Training Developer CGI Employee Review

1.0
20 Sept 2016
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

As part of a large company, you may stand a better chance of not being booted off of a government contract. Maybe.

Cons

All electronic systems, including payroll, mandatory training, benefits enrollment, etc. are a technical mess and a nightmare to navigate. Every website related to CGI is visually and functionally flawed. This is astounding for what is supposed to be a technology company. The disconnectedness is evident in every operation. For example, I was ordered to create multiple resumes and descriptions of my KSAs for multiple purposes: performance reviews, specific statements of capabilities for contract bidding, human capital inventory (theoretically), you name it. But none of these systems talk to each other. CGI has no idea who is working for them and what they can do. because they have no means (or interest, apparently) in capturing and using this data. If they need something done, they hire somebody. If they needing something they let you go. Bad business.

Explore other reviews about CGI

5.0
18 Jun 2026
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Work life balance, growth, quality

Cons

Less pay compared to market

1.0
16 Jun 2026
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

no specific positives to highlight from my perspective

Cons

I worked at CGI in both India and the USA and observed similar workplace culture concerns across both locations. The only real difference was HR—India HR felt more supportive, while my experience with USA HR was disappointing. My employment ended shortly after maternity leave due to an alleged “lack of projects,” which I experienced as a layoff. I also observed what appeared to be misuse of position by some leaders, including blurred professional boundaries, preferential treatment, and expectations that went beyond normal workplace roles—at times resembling personal-assistant-style demands rather than professional conduct. Surprisingly, I also noticed inconsistent “policies” applied differently to different individuals. In some cases, it felt like the rules changed depending on who you were. When leadership became aware that someone was related to another employee in the organization, it sometimes felt like that person was singled out or targeted rather than treated objectively. Overall, these practices—whether through inconsistent treatment, perceived power misuse, or favoritism—undermine trust, damage workplace culture, and raise serious concerns about fairness and professionalism.

See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All