An advertising agency with strong opinions about your private life.
Pros
The colleagues are kind. Some of the work had purpose. This is not nothing.
Cons
Every election cycle here arrives with a staff-wide email explaining how to vote. Endorsement lists are included. The voting is framed as being in the agency's interest. In years past, the owner sent directives tied to her company's interests, with disparaging characterizations of the opposing party. The emails go out on company time, from company addresses, to company recipients. In Texas, this is not, legally, a casual matter. It is treated casually here. While I generally agree with the owner's politics, the hypocrisy is astounding considering the anti-worker stance of the agency. Several years ago, staff were instructed to delete all email correspondence from before a certain date. The reason given was housekeeping. Housekeeping is, in my opinion, a generous word for that exercise. The paid time off policy was rewritten this year. Long-tenured employees lost the most. After internal pushback, a portion came back, and the walk-back was presented as a refinement. Returning a portion of what was taken is, in my opinion, not the same as giving something. The decisions, in my opinion, look like an owner protecting her exit rather than the people who helped build the agency. Compensation does not move. Professional development is not on offer. The implied benefit is stability. Stability is also under review. A new handbook was published this spring. Among other things, it now prohibits outside employment. Internal pay has been below the local market for some time. The ban appears to operate downward. Some at the top still maintain outside projects. The rest are told not to. Comments about employees' appearance have been made by leadership in meetings, in front of others. The medical and mental-health conditions of employees have been discussed by leadership, disparagingly, in their absence in both public and private. These are not stories I have heard. They are things I have watched happen. Recognition here is selective. Some staff receive elaborate coverage of their work and their lives. Others receive a closer look at their billable hours. The standard is, in my opinion, personal rather than systematic. Some employees are asked to return to the office. Others, including some of those doing the asking, are not. The rule is being applied privately. The owner has, in past staff meetings, addressed negative reviews on this platform and asked employees to post positive ones. That is, in itself, useful information for a prospective hire. The work, in my opinion, is not what the reception suggests. Awards are referenced often. They are largely from local industry events members vote on internally. The head creative turned new business guy carries himself as if the awards have settled the question of whether the work is good. In my opinion, he is a bully, and tacky besides. Attempts have been put other voices in charge of it. They have not, in my opinion, taken. What has worked, in my opinion, has come from female-led creative working apart from the brain trust, not from inside it.