It's becoming average - Anonymous employee Leidos Employee Review

3.0
5 Feb 2018
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

If you know your market worth and negotiate to it, the base pay is pretty good. There are many people who've been there a long time 15+ years, from the employee owned days. They can navigate corporate processes really well. Work/life balance can be really good. Easily the best in my career for keeping normal weeks to about 40 hours. The vacation isn't great, but it's also harder to get burned out if the contract caps you at 40. Lots of positions available in lots of areas. Great if you want to stay with a company but need a change.

Cons

Poor raises and declining benefits every year. Between 2017-2018, paid-time-off (combined sick and leave pot) for loyal employees (10+ years) was cut by 3 days. It now costs $1200 more to insure your spouse (if you spouse has insurance available elsewhere). In 2018, the 401k match is significantly reduced for those working irregular hours (overtime is no longer eligible, and true-up is gone) OCONUS. Every year something else changes to become "more competitive" (average) and these were it for 2018. In 2016 there was no holiday/employee appreciation for our group. Leadership turnover is bad for vision purposes. Fat separation packages/golden parachutes are bad for morale. In the last 5 years, these leaders are no longer in place: John Jumper (CEO), Stu Shea (COO), Sarah Allen (CHO), Gulu Gambhir (CTO), Michael Leiter (EVP), Lou Von Thaer, Mark Sopp (CFO), Vince Maffeo (General Counsel), Mary Craft (CAO), Marty Miner (CIO), etc.

Explore other reviews about Leidos

5.0
20 Apr 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

great work life balance nice

Cons

none, i like it here

3.0
27 May 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Leidos provides opportunities to work on complex government programs with meaningful technical challenges. Depending on the contract and team, there can be exposure to cloud infrastructure, cybersecurity, systems engineering, networking, and mission-focused work that is difficult to find elsewhere. The company also has a large footprint, so there may be internal opportunities for people who are able to navigate the organization.

Cons

My experience was that the quality of management varied significantly by program. Communication around expectations, roles, and priorities was often inconsistent, and decisions that affected employees were not always explained clearly or handled in a transparent way. Work-life balance also depended heavily on local management. Flexibility that existed in practice could be changed quickly, and employees were sometimes left trying to reconcile changing expectations with existing workloads and personal obligations. In my view, the company would benefit from stronger oversight of program-level management decisions, especially where employee responsibilities, workplace flexibility, and performance feedback are concerned. I also found that technical decision-making was sometimes driven more by schedule pressure than by sound engineering judgment. On complex government programs, that can create unnecessary risk and frustration for employees who are trying to do things correctly.

See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All