Pros
Decent day-to-day work culture within the team, especially when you land a good group Exposure to real, large-scale automotive software projects Reasonably stable contract work for the duration of the engagement
Cons
Favouritism over merit in hiring decisions. After 3 years of consistent delivery on the same project, I was put through the full new-hire interview gauntlet for a permanent role — same panel rounds a fresh external candidate would face. Fair enough in principle, but the outcome told a different story: the role went to a former team member who had been laid off in 2024 and hadn't worked since, who also happened to be the manager's personal contact. Three years of proven output counted for less than who you know. Interview process quality is inconsistent. One of my technical rounds was conducted by someone who appeared unfamiliar with Kotlin/Android development. They couldn't follow a standard Suzuko-style problem solution — which raises legitimate questions about whether evaluations are actually merit-based or just a formality. Managers speak poorly of departing contractors. After leaving, I heard through contacts that the manager was telling people I "wasn't good enough in interviews — how did he survive 3 years?" That kind of backstabbing after years of contribution is unprofessional and says more about the culture at the leadership level than it does about any individual. Underinvestment in engineers. The company is notably stingy when it comes to spending on its technical workforce — training, tools, growth opportunities. Not a place that actively develops its engineers. Equity is a stated value, not a practiced one. GM talks about equity and inclusion, but in practice, internal networks and manager relationships drive outcomes more than performance.