Employee-centric in words, not in decisions
Gut am Arbeitgeber finde ich
This used to be the best workplace I’ve had so far. I genuinely believe in the product, my tasks are interesting, my team is great, and collaboration with colleagues is still strong. Until recently, I felt proud to work here.
Schlecht am Arbeitgeber finde ich
The compulsory 4 days per week in the office policy has fundamentally damaged trust. Remote flexibility was not a “perk”, it was a core reason many of us joined, stayed, relocated, or built our family lives around this company. Taking it away without meaningful explanation or necessary exceptions for certain life situations (like having small children or having a family abroad) shows a complete disconnect from employees’ realities. Top level management communication style is just overall horrible, and the people who should be advising them, are too afraid of them to be honest. The policy doesn't affect all teams equally and it's nothing more than internal politics of who got more flexibility and who didn't.
Verbesserungsvorschläge
Show us that you care about our feedback. All of us are losing trust and morale.
Culture is more than slogans. It’s what leadership does when employee feedback conflicts with control. The back to office policy decision has already damaged morale, trust, and engagement. People will start leaving within months, and many who stay are disengaging. Unless leadership course-corrects ASAP, the company risks losing the very culture that once made it special.
Arbeitsatmosphäre
The atmosphere has changed dramatically since the announcement of the new back to the office policy. What used to be positive and collaborative now feels grim and fed-up. Morale is visibly low, people are anxious, and many are openly discussing leaving in the coming months.
Image
The product has good reputation and is well regarded externally. As an employer, however, the image is increasingly suffering. Public messaging about flexibility and being employee-centric no longer matches internal reality, and this discrepancy is becoming hard to ignore.
Work-Life-Balance
This policy disproportionately affects families, parents of small children, caregivers, and people with families abroad. For many, including myself, this level of mandatory office presence is not sustainable long-term. Zero flexibility, rigid core hours, and no structural accommodations make it effectively impossible for some to continue working here full-time.
Karriere/Weiterbildung
Opportunities exist, but career development often feels slow and unclear. Development plans take a long time, progression is inconsistent, and in the current climate many employees are questioning whether long-term growth here is realistic. Motivation to invest extra effort has noticeably declined since trust in leadership was damaged.
Gehalt/Benefits
Salary competitiveness depends on the role, but benefits are almost non-existent. Flexibility used to compensate for that, now it’s gone. Fruits and snacks are not benefits, especially when no public transport ticket, meal vouchers, or meaningful family support are offered.
Umwelt-/Sozialbewusstsein
Environmental and social responsibility do not appear to be strategic priorities. Occasional charity initiatives exist, but they feel more symbolic than impactful. Forcing increased office presence also contradicts any serious commitment to sustainability, especially when remote work was already established and functioning well.
Kollegenzusammenhalt
The people and teams were the strongest part of this company. Too bad the clear injustice of granting more flexibility and more home office days to "certain" teams who are closer to the right people... is ruining that too
Umgang mit älteren Kollegen
The company primarily targets young employees. There are very few older colleagues, and very little visible interest or effort to attract, retain, or value long-term experience. This reinforces the feeling that sustainability (both in careers and workforce composition) is not a core focus.
Vorgesetztenverhalten
The new back to office policy was clearly a top-level decision. CEOs made it, but communication and fallout were delegated downward. Most mid-level managers don’t support the policy but are forced to enforce it, which puts them in an impossible position and further erodes trust.
Arbeitsbedingungen
A certain level of mandatory office presence would be easier to accept if working conditions were acceptable. They are not. Ongoing construction noise, broken heating, recurring fire alarms, and overall unreliable infrastructure make the situation even worse.
Kommunikation
Edit: CEO's response to the clear negative feedback about this unfair HO policy is to claim it's a popular decision during an all-hands quarterly meeting. HR people who should be responsible for handling communication are nodding and smiling...There is no employee at this company who'd support this policy change, and we're all left speechless..
Engagement surveys and “employee-centric” messaging feel performative. Employees are repeatedly asked for feedback, only to see major decisions implemented in direct opposition to it. Leadership avoids owning unpopular decisions, and transparency is consistently lacking.
Gleichberechtigung
The new policy hits certain groups far harder than others. Families, mothers, single parents, expats, and caregivers bear the heaviest burden, with no consideration given. Equality cannot exist if policies ignore vastly different life situations. Furthermore, while there's no flexibility or accomodation given for any of these circumstances, they granted more HO to entire teams who are connected to the right people. The unfairness of that feels even more heavy.
Interessante Aufgaben
The work itself remains interesting, and many of us still believe in the product. Unfortunately, recent leadership decisions make it increasingly difficult to stay motivated or stand behind the company as an employer.