employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

International Rescue Committee

Is this your company?

Client Services Resettlement Intern - Client Service Representative International Rescue Committee Employee Review

4.0
19 Mar 2020
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Most employees are dedicated to the mission and so everyone is working very hard. They have a wide variety of resources and provide lots of support for their clients. Office morale was good and the perfect amount of hustle and bustle. The staff that works with the clients really cares deeply about what they’re doing.

Cons

The organization has some flaws in terms of employee appreciation. Unfortunately because their funding has been cut, they have had to lay off some people etc and it had shuffled around some personnel in the office that seemed ill-informed. Some people were getting praised and recognized and getting raises for no reason and some staff was given more work with no recognition. From higher up, they seemed pretty blind to what their employees were actually achieving.

Explore other reviews about International Rescue Committee

5.0
25 Dec 2025
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Everyone is so nice here.

Cons

we have a lot of time to collaborate one project

2.0
22 Apr 2026
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

You will meet some amazing and passionate people here who are truly there for the mission. Many came to this country as refugees and immigrants themselves and continue to devote their lives to helping others going through similar experiences. If you end up on the right team, it's an extremely rewarding job.

Cons

Unfortunately, the HQ upper management makes it a toxic place to work. VPs regularly undercut each other publicly (including at all-team meetings and gossiping negatively with staff), especially when potential job cuts were on the horizon. C-Suite didn't listen to staff concerns about upper management and didn't investigate major departures by dedicated staff who left due to poor management despite their dedication to the mission. Leaders picked favorites, ignoring work performance (excusing mediocre performance in some, having high standards for others), and preferred yes-men over staff who wanted to think more critically about the work. Projects were pushed too quickly, despite concerns that it could be detrimental to clients. Positions given to unqualified internal staff who wouldn't be interviewed for the role as external candidates. Senior leaders (director and above) are more focused on keeping their jobs than the mission and will use lower staff work for their own career growth/safety. DEI didn't seem to apply for senior leader roles, where there was little, if any, diversity.

4
See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All