Fantastic place to work! - Recensione dipendente - Dipendente anonimo presso CPH

Good Environment work - fixability

Nothing at the moment .

Good starting point: This is a good place to begin your career, especially if you’ve recently graduated or are looking to gain professional experience. Supportive supervision: The MEP supervisors and managers were very caring and always willing to help employees understand key concepts. Much of the work involves program-based tasks, which makes it straightforward once you’re familiar with the process. Positive team culture: The people in the Sanford office were genuinely kind, collaborative, and supportive, which created a welcoming work environment. Flexible remote work: The company’s work-from-home policy is a strong benefit. They are flexible and understanding of individual circumstances, which helps maintain a decent work-life balance. Modern tools and standards: They stay current with most of the industry’s software platforms and building codes, which is especially helpful for staying up to date on project requirements. Educational support: The company offers assistance with tuition and exam fees for those pursuing education or professional certifications. There are certain stipulations, so it’s best to ask detailed questions about eligibility and reimbursement before committing. Competitive benefits: The company provides affordable medical insurance options, a decent 401(k) match, and recently added both maternal and paternal leave, which shows progress toward supporting employee well-being and family life.

Just a fair warning — this is the main reasons I decided to leave. That said, it doesn’t necessarily mean these issues occur in other departments. PTO policy is poorly structured: The accrual rate for paid time off is very slow, and PTO is combined for both vacation and sick days, limiting flexibility. Depending on tenure, employees only receive between 17 and 27 days per year. Additionally, when holidays like Christmas or New Year’s fall at the beginning or end of a week, employees are required to use their own PTO to cover the adjacent days, which should reasonably be paid by the company. This policy feels unfair and discouraging, especially given how limited PTO already is. Lack of defined job descriptions: Across the company, there are no clear job descriptions for each position. As employees become more efficient and reliable, additional responsibilities are often added without notice, which leads to increased stress and unclear expectations from mid- and upper-level management. Pay structure and recognition: Compensation does not always reflect the value or efficiency an individual brings to projects. Even when projects are delivered well under budget, salaries remain capped based on job titles. While management claims pay is “market-based,” upward movement is difficult—especially for those without a degree—despite some recent but minimal structural changes. Project management changes: The company recently implemented a new project management approach based on project type rather than discipline. While the intent was to identify resource gaps and improve efficiency, many discipline department directors had already noted these issues for years, which raises questions about the actual benefit of the change. Quality concerns: In many projects, quality has become a lower priority. The lack of experience, communication, and coordination among designers, architects, engineers, and project managers affects output significantly. Too often, deadlines are prioritized over accuracy—leading to low-quality deliverables being sent out just to meet schedule demands, resulting in more extensive rework later. Employee feedback is often ignored: Although the company promotes a culture of listening to its people, in practice, feedback tends to be dismissed. When I raised my concerns through management channels, they were escalated but never addressed. Only after I submitted my resignation did leadership reach out to discuss retention. I expressed my issues directly to the CEO, acknowledging that some changes take time, but certain matters could have been addressed. Overall, considering everything listed, I would have rated CPH three stars — not a bad company, but one with areas needing serious improvement. What ultimately disappointed me most occurred right before I left and lose an extra star: after negotiating a counteroffer that was declined, I later learned at the company’s annual meeting that new hires were being offered referral bonuses of up to $15K. Knowing that amount was well above what I requested, it felt like a clear sign that my contributions were undervalued.