employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

International Rescue Committee

Ist dies Ihr Unternehmen?

HQ Social Work Intern - Mitarbeiter (anonym) bei International Rescue Committee: Mitarbeiterbewertung

3.0
8. Okt. 2015
Mitarbeiter (anonym)
Empfehlen
CEO-Befürwortung
Geschäftsprognose

Pros

Great organization that does very meaningful work. Lots of employee resources and opportunities to learn and grow. Work environment and coworkers are very friendly and perpetuate a family-like environment.

Kontras

Large organization and can be difficult to navigate at time. The international and national (domestic) areas of the organization are very separate and relationship between the two can be tense. HQ seems a bit out-of-touch with offices on the ground.

Mehr Bewertungen zu International Rescue Committee entdecken

5.0
12. März 2026
Empfehlen
CEO-Befürwortung
Geschäftsprognose

Pros

Had a wonderful time interacting with the students and coworkers. Really appreciate the work of the IRC in supporting migrants.

Kontras

No Cons to speak of

2.0
22. Apr. 2026
Mitarbeiter (anonym)
Empfehlen
CEO-Befürwortung
Geschäftsprognose

Pros

You will meet some amazing and passionate people here who are truly there for the mission. Many came to this country as refugees and immigrants themselves and continue to devote their lives to helping others going through similar experiences. If you end up on the right team, it's an extremely rewarding job.

Kontras

Unfortunately, the HQ upper management makes it a toxic place to work. VPs regularly undercut each other publicly (including at all-team meetings and gossiping negatively with staff), especially when potential job cuts were on the horizon. C-Suite didn't listen to staff concerns about upper management and didn't investigate major departures by dedicated staff who left due to poor management despite their dedication to the mission. Leaders picked favorites, ignoring work performance (excusing mediocre performance in some, having high standards for others), and preferred yes-men over staff who wanted to think more critically about the work. Projects were pushed too quickly, despite concerns that it could be detrimental to clients. Positions given to unqualified internal staff who wouldn't be interviewed for the role as external candidates. Senior leaders (director and above) are more focused on keeping their jobs than the mission and will use lower staff work for their own career growth/safety. DEI didn't seem to apply for senior leader roles, where there was little, if any, diversity.

4
Bewertungen anzeigen nach: Hilfreich|Sterne|Datum|Alle