SWEATSHOP - TOO LITTLE PAY FOR TOO MUCH WORK - Mitarbeiter (anonym) bei Liberty Mutual Insurance: Mitarbeiterbewertung

Used to be great company to work for. Now more interested in becoming one of the largest insurance providers in the world (and keeping top officers well-remunerated) than in providing the exceptional customer service (to external customers and employees) that the company was once known for. It used to be fairly easily to move to other business units/career paths. Although "promote from within" is touted, it can be an uphill battle. Low pay, particularly for lower level jobs. Pay ranges not adjusted for actual cost of living in given locations, or for volume of work expected to be produced. (Of course, top corporate officers' pay and benefits is exceptionally good.) Retirement plan has been modified, and medical insurance coverage switched to a different (not as good) provider this year. Cutting costs by reducing staff (by attrition or lay-offs). Only place I've ever worked where replacing leaving employees has to be approved by top managers (which may or may not happen). Since work volume doesn't reduce when staff reduces, workload on remaining staff is catastrophic. They're paying lip service to "work / life balance", but if you're so tired and stressed out from work that you can't enjoy the rest of your life there is no "balance." The message transmitted to employees, directly or subliminally, is to "do more, do it faster, but do it perfectly with no mistakes!" Focus is now on "metrics"...great in a manufacturing environment, doesn't work that well in a service industry. There is no real concept by management of the time involved in providing good customer service in a service-focused industry. They ask for input from employees, but ignore anything that doesn't agree with their pre-conceived ideas. And even if a suggestion is good and worthy of implementation it must be approved by each level of management before it's implemented...that can take many, many months. Supervisors micromanage, treat employees like children rather than experienced professionals. "Pay for performance" is a joke. The new corporate expectation introduced last year is that you are performing perfectly all day, every day, and that justifies your current salary. To get an increase you have to perform exceptionally. Problem is, evaluations are based on the entire year, not how you are performing by the end of the year. And, evaluations are subjective...if you are one of your supervisor's favorites you are more likely to get a good evaluation, hence a pay increase (usually marginal, certainly not in the 5-10% range) and decent bonus. The annual "Employee Opinion Survey" is by and outside contractor, professionally prepared format and results, and is, technically, anonymous. But EOS doesn't really allow for employees to give true opinions of company and management since opportunities for narrative comments come with the caution that writing style and word choices may allow direct managers to discern who the author is. Managers are now subject to "360" review, but only their direct reports can review. A more honest review would take it down a couple of levels to the workers in the unit the manager actually directs. I'm still here because my managers/supervisors did such a good job of undermining my confidence in my self as a knowledgeable, productive professional that it's taken me until now to realize I should have left within the first year. Now I'm stuck because I'm an "older worker". I do, however, continue to look.