decent place - Consultant RCH Solutions Employee Review

2.0
6 Sept 2021
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

small flat org specialized R&D IT work nice CEO

Cons

staffing company uncompetitive comp + benefits (no 401k match, high insurance premiums) small project pipeline

avatar
RCH Solutions Response
4y
Thank you for your feedback. I’d be happy to discuss your specific experience in more detail if you’re interested. In the meantime, I’d like to clarify a few points. Since the inception of our 401k program, RCH has provided a company match regardless of employee contribution. Additionally, we regularly assess our compensation and benefit options to ensure they both align with industry standards and help attract top team members. Just this year, we introduced a new parental leave policy and increased paid vacation time available. RCH is growing rapidly. In fact, we’ve doubled in size over the past two years thanks to our excellent reputation and robust and growing customer and services pipelines. We’ll continue to leverage our growth to enhance the experience we offer RCH employees and customers. Thank you again for sharing your perspective. - Michael Riener, CEO

Explore other reviews about RCH Solutions

5.0
7 Apr 2025
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Great team with a great managers

Cons

Pay is a bit low and not according to market value

2.0
28 Jan 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Exposure to the Bio-IT industry with opportunities to learn terminology and client projects Small company structure can allow for collaboration across teams Some team members are knowledgeable and technically strong

Cons

Management at both the middle and upper levels appeared unprepared to hire for entry-level or junior roles, with unrealistic expectations and limited willingness to train or mentor. Leadership did not align with the company’s stated values of being a close-knit, team-oriented, people-first organization. Little to no constructive feedback, proactive coaching, or professional development was provided. Feedback was consistently negative or vague rather than actionable. Requests for guidance or clarification were often met with criticism instead of support. Work was frequently taken over rather than explained. Communication was often passive-aggressive, with an expectation to infer direction instead of being given clear instructions. Performance tracking and reporting lacked transparency and accuracy, and was later used without collaborative review.

See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All