employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

LGBT Foundation

Is this your company?

Better strategic vision, but leaving behind inclusion - Anonymous employee LGBT Foundation Employee Review

3.0
26 Sept 2023
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

The vast majority of staff are incredibly passionate and skilled people. There are some incredibly innovative ideas taking place, and their staff networks are excellent. Training delivery is fantastic, and there’s been a lot more investment into previously under-resourced areas like HR, Research, and Comms. Service delivery is fantastic and many staff working with service users have incredible emotional intelligence. Every day is different and very interesting work. Compared to most other jobs, LGBTQ+ people can be far more open about themselves and meet other staff with similar experiences.

Cons

Senior management (ie the top four people) make rash decisions in isolation and do not involve even other senior staff. They have moved to casualising and underpaying a lot of jobs that involve working with the most marginalised members of LGBTQ+ community members. They are unfortunately not investing in community work and are not being honest with their service users about the removal of posts relating to marginalised communities. White men are continuously protected when they are discriminatory in management and trustees. The organisation has a consistent issues with misogyny and ableism, that HR are trying to address but don’t receive support from senior management, as they are also involved. While they did commit to anti-racism work a few years ago, they have not continued this work for some time and due to high turnover of staff the impact of this will fade quickly. Trans and non-binary staff make up a large proportion of staff, which is really positive, but almost all are in low-paid, highly demanding jobs and are often overlooked for promotion, given a lot of extra work outside of their job role, and treated as incompetent by some staff. The organisation is moving towards more corporate practices towards its staff and management have been challenged recently by the union around dishonest presentation of how much funding they have available for paying staff.

Explore other reviews about LGBT Foundation

1.0
5 Jan 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Officers and coordinators, do the best they can in the circumstances handed to them.

Cons

Where to start? - Management, heads of, directors, managing directors, CEO.... none of them on the front line, none of them can relate to us, and get paid so much more to make decisions that do not affect them. - Constantly reminded that it's our job to fundraise to keep the company afloat (not in the fundraising team btw) - Where does the contract money go? To "core"? Would love to see how the money from council/NHS contracts gets split between the services, core and SLT pockets. - CEO, sorry Dr CEO, only wants yes men and women (very few trans and enby around him) to tell him how inspirational he is, have 2 PAs to run after him and remind people of how important and connected he is.

1.0
24 July 2025
Anonymous contractor
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

The organisations mission sounds admirable on paper. Some frontline staff users are genuinely committed to service users (indigo team). You’ll learn resilience, if nothing else.

Cons

Working here felt a bit like shouting into the void—my manager was more elusive than helpful, often “working from home” or in endless meetings that made contact nearly impossible. Leadership seemed more focused on chasing the next contract than actually supporting existing services (or staff, for that matter). The co-working space had all the warmth of a high school clique reunion—friendly, but only if you fit their very narrow mold of “inclusivity.” My team, disappointingly, often discussed service users in unprofessional and negative ways—deeply unsettling in a support-based environment. The organisation prides itself on delivering multiple services, but it’s very much a “jack of all trades, master of none” situation. The result? A diluted impact that ultimately fails those it’s supposed to serve. There’s a noticeable culture of flattery and sycophancy—staff queuing up to polish the boots of anyone with a job title in the hope of vague recognition. Cringe levels: high. As for the CEO—imagine a TED Talk where the only subject is himself, peppered with name-drops of minor celebrities like confetti. Not exactly inspiring leadership. HR? A masterclass in gaslighting, followed by a sudden appeal to neurodiversity when held accountable—an incredibly disappointing misuse of language meant to promote understanding, not avoid responsibility. In short: come for the mission, stay for the chaos—if you must. Just bring your own sense of ethics and a working BS detector.

See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All