Pros
Casual Christmas hires can have an okay and fairly paid experience; this is not the case for office workers. A select few people are great to work with, but the Pros end there. Leadership—in particular Clarkson direct and extended family members, who essentially act as moles for the CEO—seem to struggle with insecurity, so much so that even a modest level of competence can feel threatening to them. Many in senior positions appear to lack the education, outside-experience, or critical thinking skills necessary for effective decision-making. Ironically, while they rely on staff to fill those gaps, anyone who shows too much initiative or insight risks being marginalized, especially if they speak up with ideas for improvement. I have seen really good and loyal employees at this company pushed out because they wouldn't pander to the micro-managing CEO's ego.
Cons
Note: This review is intended for prospective office staff — as stated above, casual Christmas hires tend to have a different experience. Unfortunately, this company is plagued by serious systemic issues. The CEO demonstrates a lack of respect for employees, often making disparaging remarks publicly. Leadership is weak and heavily influenced by members of the founding family, leading to a culture of favoritism and poor accountability. Pay is low, and KPIs are unrealistic. Questionable business practices appear to prioritize profit over ethics, with major concerns about how clients, suppliers, and even staff are treated. The software and operational systems are outdated and inefficient, adding to daily frustrations. The workforce is largely made up of individuals either new to the industry, dependent on visas, or those who may feel they have limited options elsewhere. High staff turnover is a constant — most employees leave within a year, many sooner. Even senior leaders have walked away; notably, a former Chief Financial Officer resigned after less than two years, citing ethical concerns and unreasonable expectations — such as being asked to take on extra roles without compensation, a pattern repeated across teams and to myself. When people leave, their positions often remain vacant under the guise of “cost-saving,” which only increases the burden on remaining staff. The result is a high-stress environment, reduced service quality, and frequent errors. There is no real appetite for improvement or change, and feedback is rarely welcomed. If you’re considering applying, my honest advice is: look elsewhere.
