employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

Oregon Humane Society

Engaged employer

Oregon Humane Society Reviews

2.7

38% would recommend to a friend

(72 total reviews)
avatar

Sharon Harmon

18% approve of CEO

36% positive business outlook

Oregon Humane Society has an employee rating of 2.7 out of 5 stars, based on 72 company reviews on Glassdoor which indicates that most employees have an average working experience there. The Oregon Humane Society employee rating is 28% below average for employers within the Non-profit and NGO industry (3.7 stars).

Reviews by job title

72 reviews
2.0
27 Feb 2016
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

If you are a homeless animal, the Oregon Humane Society is the place to be. We have a state-of-the-art medical facility, a dedicated animal behavior team, relatively new kennels, and an exceptional adoption/’live release’ rate. I am so proud to play a part in helping 11,000 + animals find homes every year. Employees also enjoy benefits such as paid time off and affordable health, dental and life insurance. We work closely with a dedicated army of volunteers that really help enrich the lives of our shelter pets. Lastly, you can’t very well mention OHS without giving kudos to our amazing executive director, Sharon Harmon. I truly believe that, even decades from now, Sharon’s legacy will play an integral part in both the history and the future of OHS.

Cons

Despite all of its perks, working for the Oregon Humane Society is emotionally and physically taxing. Though hourly staff are legally required to take two 10-minute breaks during our shifts, these breaks are extremely rare. If you need to make a phone call, take medication, or get a drink of water, you’re out of luck. On busy days, basic human needs like using the rest room are denied to you until you are on the brink of tears. There simply aren’t enough staff available to complete all the tasks that must be completed in any given day, and if your work isn’t finished, then an animal may suffer for it. It can’t be said that we do everything for the well-being of pets in our community. The shelter only allows four adult pit bulls to be available for adoption at a time, and while our local shelters are overrun with pits, we continue to transfer Chihuahuas up from California by the dozens. Cats and rabbits are not given post spay or neuter pain control, and small animals are often housed in the same room as screeching birds. Most disconcerting, we’ll adopt a pet to just about anyone. Our customer care staff are pressured into adopting out as many animals as possible, and they’re not allowed to deny an adoption. Staff can make notes under a pet’s file in our computer system about the pet’s adoption. I’ve seen such notes as “Adopter seemed intoxicated during showing,” or, “Adopter did not appear to be listening during behavior consult and was in a hurry to leave.” I used to enjoy fostering kittens for the shelter, but after seeing pets placed into homes such as these, I’m no longer comfortable doing so. Having said all of this, I believe all of the aforementioned cons can be improved. What worries me is the increasingly corporate business model that OHS seems to have adopted. For example, our Operations Manager has a background in banking, and the medical team’s newly hired hospital manager joined them after working at the Hannah Society—a local company that purchases pets from backyard breeders and leases them out. These managers, along with our P.R., Marketing, and Operations directors, have little to no contact with the animals. In contrast, those of us on the front lines—the customer care, animal care, medical and behavior staff—are not able to give any input on the way the shelter operates. In most cases, these decision-makers actually work on an entirely different floor than the rest of us. The divergence between the ‘upstairs’ (upper management) and ‘downstairs’ staff is staggering. Though it’s natural for lower level staff to make less money and work in positions which are more physically taxing than those in upper management, I have worked for other shelters where there is still mutual respect between employees of all positions and departments. From the lowliest kennel cleaner to the executive director, each one of us is an invaluable cog in the machine that is OHS. If one were to break, the gears would stop turning, and our organization would stop running. Our entire body of staff should recognize that. Much of this may sound like the rantings of a low-level employee who is jealous of his or her coworkers who are allowed to wear their own clothes, work in their own office, and are paid quite a bit more money—all without ever being exposed to the most difficult tasks that shelter work entails. Sadly, the one notable example that I could use to show the delusional image our ‘upstairs’ staff have about working downstairs could give away my identity, and I am very much afraid of retribution for telling the truth. Let me say this: I did not begin a career with a non-profit, particularly one that serves animals, to make money. Truthfully, it’s difficult to survive with the wages that I earn. But I LOVE what I do, and I want to keep doing it. I still believe that OHS is the best venue for me to help animals in my community, though I fear that the shelter is becoming more and more like a retail chain. It is perfectly acceptable that our directors would want us to continue to grow, to provide more services to the public, and to help more animals. I hope that we will continue to do so. But I also hope that we will not get so caught up in the ‘numbers’—our adoption, donation, and surgery totals—that the quantity of our work becomes more important than the quality. For now, it seems, we may be headed in that direction.

2.0
14 Feb 2016

External image is not the reality

Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Helping the animals is so rewarding. Many co-workers are kind, hard-working, and way smarter and more experienced than their positions represent. So many people are dedicated and passionate about the cause and the animals. Hands-on time spent caring for the animals is so great!

Cons

Upper management is completely out-of-touch. Directors of some groups have little to no "real world" experience in their disciplines, and yet have stayed for many, many years thereby holding back the organization. Employees of several departments, both in the business offices and in animal care are treated with condescension and disrespect. Favoritism runs rampant and is not based on quality of performance, but personal preference. Employees do not feel they can speak up for fear of repercussions or, worse yet, that nobody listens and nobody cares about them. Salaries for the animal care teams are so low. (Not a livable wage. Not even close.)

1.0
26 Aug 2016
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

The animals of the Portland Metro area are lucky to have the Oregon Humane Society. The organization accomplishes great things, keeping the animals of our area safe and healthy, and finding homes for tens of thousands of homeless pets. They offer much needed services to residents who would otherwise not be able to access them.

Cons

I don't want this review to sound like the bitter rant of a disgruntled former employee. I'm happy to have worked at OHS. They do good things for animals. But this review is about how they treat their employees. Therefore... Management receive no training in how to manage employees, even if they have no prior experience. This results in managers who don’t know how to manage without their personal feelings ruling their decisions. Managers’ personal friends will enjoy benefits not experienced by other employees. The organization sets ambitious goals, and the mandate from the top is that goals are to be achieved at all costs. Achieving those goals provides valuable publicity, and therefore increases donations. One example: in order to reach a yearly adoption goal, adoptions applications are almost never denied. Staff don't have the freedom to deny an adoption that they believe is harmful to the animal, because that would hurt the adoption numbers. I personally saw many staff forced to complete adoptions that were obviously not in the best interest of the animal. The work environment at the Oregon Humane Society is extremely toxic, and this toxic culture originates at the very top. The management of OHS view lower level staff as disposable and replaceable, and turnover is very high. There is no attempt at improving the work environment for employees, or to address employee concerns. If employees bring concerns about the work environment to HR or management, they are then viewed as a troublemaker, and often experience retaliation. Retaliation often takes the form of a system of subtle or overt harassment in an apparent attempt to drive the employee to quit. I witnessed this personally on several occasions, and experienced it personally. A few additional things I witnessed personally while employed there: • Negotiating with employees who management want to resign, and using "we won't contest your application for unemployment benefits" as a bargaining tool • Firing an employee without cause, and writing a policy after the firing that they can then say the employee violated in order to create cause and deny unemployment (unsuccessfully) These issues are pervasive throughout the organization, and are not particular to one manager or department.

Viewing 1 - 3 of 72 Reviews

Glassdoor has 75 Oregon Humane Society reviews submitted anonymously by Oregon Humane Society employees. Read employee reviews and ratings on Glassdoor to decide if Oregon Humane Society is right for you.