Pros
there was a review on here a while back that summed up what everyone is thinking - not sure what happened to it but i screencapped it and im posting it again because i feel it belongs here for good to warn noobs:
Pros
The people at this company are incredible, no doubt about it. Great team atmosphere and very friendly. Broad exposure to greenfield and brownfield exploration with ample opportunity for both field and desktop work. Ongoing experience with various software used in exploration including ArcGIS and Datamine. Work is project based so there is great diversity.
Cons
Oh boy, where do I begin. First and foremost, compensation is undoubtedly below the industry average. Base is low with no cost of living adjustment for location and bonuses are very haphazard and infrequent. There is little structure to how compensation increases and bonuses are assessed and awarded and no transparency to the process. Despite the majority of employees repeatedly expressing desire for better compensation, management has continued to waste money on expensive annual retreats that employees care little for and don't want to attend (because we've been in the field and away from friends and family enough as it is). There is no field/site uplift for rotational work and employees are often forced to spontaneously extend rotations due to poor planning/staffing. Generally, HR processes are disorganized and also without structure. Hiring processes are brutal, students and contract employees are treated quite poorly and taken advantage of, and contract administration is almost non-existent. There is constant potential for multiple valid MoL complaints. Turnover of HR and administrative staff has been high, presumably due to poor employment and HR practices and resistance to reform. Client contracts are taken without regard to feasibility of execution and deliverables are often underquoted with respect to timeline, both of which result in understaffing of projects, overworking of committed employees, rushed work, and rampant blaming of those employees by upper management when timelines are unsurprisingly not met. There is little to no middle management and inadequate senior management. Junior employees are not advanced efficiently or at all and development is not a priority. Senior management alternately micromanages and provides no guidance at all, depending on their schedule, the project, or sometimes their mood. This results in terrible internal communication, inefficient workflows, inadequate guidance, and failure to meet deliverables. Employees are often left high and dry to deliver on unrealistic expectations and blamed/treated poorly when failures occur. The CEO is incredibly manipulative and has a history of treating employees very poorly when things don't go her way. The second in command is a good person at heart but does not stand up to the CEO and lets these terrible business and employment practices occur. All of this is underscored by senior management putting forth a common theme to both clients and employees: the reason why Orix is good is because of our people and our culture. The people are good and the culture amongst them is as well, but not because of senior management who is simply good enough at fooling a group of really great people that has no other employment prospects.