Think long and hard before heading into the land of the unaccountable - Director The Salvation Army Employee Review

2.0
23 Aug 2018
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Chicago needs charitable organizations, and the SA Metro Division has some good facilities throughout Chicago.

Cons

SA Legacy protects seriously bad apples. People who have SA family or are closely linked to Salvation Army hide within the structure. They would be literally unemployable elsewhere. There is a culture of religion and faith, but so much unacceptable behavior and lack of respect for staff by the legacy people that the hypocrisy is tangible; for example, regularly displaying destructive and abusive behavior like shouting at staff, while at other times praying before meetings and quoting bible verses. It's psychotic.

Explore other reviews about The Salvation Army

5.0
18 Feb 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Helping the homeless and getting paid to do it!

Cons

None! It was the best job I think I ever had!

2.0
2 July 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

The work itself can be incredibly rewarding. The role provides meaningful opportunities to create a safe, welcoming environment for families experiencing homelessness through engaging events, activities, and programming. It offers a great deal of creativity and the chance to make a tangible difference in clients' daily lives. The organization also provides good benefits and appreciated perks, such as snacks and meals for staff.

Cons

Communication is often inconsistent, and much of the information needed to perform the job relies on institutional knowledge rather than clear processes or training. Cross-department collaboration can feel disconnected, leaving staff feeling isolated and unsupported. Leadership is not always aligned, resulting in unclear expectations, inconsistent direction, and confusion that can affect both employees and the quality of services provided to clients. Requests for guidance or feedback may go unanswered, making it difficult to move projects forward effectively. Employees are encouraged to develop community partnerships and expand programming, but organizational processes can be rigid, making collaboration with outside organizations challenging. Significant time and effort may be invested in projects or partnerships that are ultimately delayed, canceled, or substantially changed late in the process without clear communication. Standards for employee accountability appeared to be applied inconsistently. In my experience, some employees were given repeated flexibility for attendance or performance issues, while others faced more severe consequences for less significant concerns. This created a perception of favoritism and undermined trust in leadership. I also observed decisions that raised ethical concerns for me. At times, organizational priorities appeared to take precedence over transparency, consistency, and client-centered decision-making. This made it difficult to advocate effectively for clients and maintain trust with community partners. Frequent leadership changes led to shifting priorities that were not always well planned or communicated, creating uncertainty for staff and disrupting continuity of services. Staff turnover was high, increasing workloads and contributing to inconsistency. While trauma-informed care was emphasized, implementation was inconsistent, and the overall approach could at times feel more directive than collaborative or client-centered.

See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All