Crossover for Work reviews

No salary increase, monitored by webcam and screen recording. You have to time your pee breaks so you aren't clocked as inactive. This is if you are not typing/clicking in a 10 minute period, you will be marked as idle even if you are reviewing offline. No chance at promotions or salary increase

Most of the cons can be found in previous reviews or Forbes articles. Specific to my role: - Effective Communication: While removing unnecessary meetings is a pro, ad-hoc meetings or checkins with leadership were discouraged. Weekly communication was through a weekly google doc loaded with passive-aggressive feedback in the comments section. This is where your 1:1s occur. - Weekly Decisions: It is expected that decisions are made on a weekly basis, meaning most updates are simply undoing what you proposed the week before. It's well known that Joe changes his mind on a 1-2 week basis, but you can't speak about previous decisions he made that you implemented that he no longer agrees with. - Authoritarian Leadership: The famous quote is that it's better to be aligned than right. Due to pay it's easier to just be a Yes man than disagree, and if you disagree based on your career experience you'll be targeted for removal (I was asked to write the JD for my role, even though there's only one). - CCAT: I understand why the organization uses tests to fillet out candidates (thousands pf applicants per week), but requiring a English section when your target audience are non-native speakers seems counter intuitive. In addition, hiring smart people means they spend their day bypassing WorkSmart requirements, meaning leaders need to spend their time catching them.