Disappointing. They could do so much better
Pros
Those who don’t the run company and know who they are, are the kindest people.
Cons
London Office. I ignored warnings from employees, recruiters, candidates and industry contacts before joining. The company should take accountability before more employees are pushed into formal disputes and legal action. The products are strong. The culture is not. The owners set the tone, appear to enable nepotism and are ultimately responsible for the way they treat people. Intrusive monitoring raises serious questions about UK GDPR, data protection and employment law. Professional boundaries and trust are ignored. Access to basic tools and information is restricted, making simple work unnecessarily difficult. Staff sit in a windowless office Monday to Friday, 9–6, Zero flex. Little space and silent working expected. Ironically those same owners enforcing in-person working, routinely work from home or spend extended periods away. Approvals mount up with their absence and the office WiFi is so poor, it’s challenging when they call you externally. The company talks endlessly about modernisation and appears to use AI without sufficient context or understanding. Communication is chaotic, rude, contradictory and instructions, lacking context, clarity or practical sense. Expectations shift constantly, yet staff are blamed for failing to understand them. Rules after rules after more rules cause anxiety and IT seem to prefer you to have zero access or equipment. Free alcohol after work is a concern and doesn’t replace poor leadership, especially influencing junior interns. Turnover is relentless. Departures are rarely acknowledged. People give more than they are paid for and receive very little in return. The company treats confidentiality like a gag, but the truth is already out. Company performance is online and public. Glassdoor is public. Word of mouth is everywhere. The biggest red flag isn’t this review, it’s those previously, telling the same story. Leave with your head held high. Their failures were easy to document, the behaviour was inappropriate and the damage to the brand is self-inflicted. Consumers are already seeing the gap between the image being sold and how the people behind the brand say they are treated.
