I worked at LIAAC full-time (more than an year)Pros
The only good thing I can say about working at LIAAC is that at the time the salaries paid to employees were higher than most other not for profit agencies in the area.Cons
While the pay may have been above average, it was almost impossible to get approval for any time off. I was hired with three weeks vacation time annually, however every time I tried to get approval to take time off, I was turned down. Finally after being with the agency for almost a year, I was granted one week off. When I spoke to my supervisor about this, his response was that he donates several weeks a year of his time off back to the agency. Of course his salary was more than double that of mine, and he got twice as much vacation time. The atmosphere at the agency was one of intimidation, and you didn't dare question or contradict anything, including upper management, who basically were all the best friends of the Executive Director. I was once soundly chastised for daring to ask the director of another area an innocent question about a picture frame that a client's mother had asked about. As I mentioned, all of the upper management were hand picked best friends of the executive director, and if one of them had a friend who wanted a job, they were brought on board at the expense of demoting or dismissing an existing employee. The director of my area was the only one in the agency who didn't use a computer for anything, and he literally went through secretaries at the rate of one every month or two. The turnover rate at this place incredible, but benefits the executive director and her chosen circle. That's because any money that was put into a retirement fund that was paid by the agency would be distributed among the employees that remained after one was let go. Time and time again I would see someone let go for no apparent reason, and they would hire someone else to fill that job and have to train them all over again. Staff were also constantly "under the gun" to work on fundraising, whether this was their department or not. I could be here all night writing this, but suffice to say that pretty much all the allegations in the Newsday article that appeared in the mid 90's are true. The agency is run for the benefit of the executive director and her chosen inner circle. Not surprising that several former employees have brought lawsuits against this agency. Someone needs to put this agency under a microscope and do a complete evaluation of their finances.Doesn't RecommendDisapproves of CEO
5 people found this helpful
- Comp & Benefits
- Work/Life Balance
- Senior Management
- Culture & Values
- Career Opportunities
I worked at LIAAC full-time (less than an year)Pros
It was a pleasure and honor to assist clients and patients with the many facets of their needs. I have always found work in the social service field to be so rewarding.
LIAAC provides individuals and families living with HIV/AIDS with so many vital services, covering the spectrum from initial testing to end care support.Cons
It was a surprise, after knowing the valuable work that LIAAC does in the community, when I began my employment there. It was as if the organization was run by a group of OCD individuals, and the micro-management was at the most bizarre level I have ever witnessed. Employees from one area were afraid to have lunch with employees from another area, because they may not be in the same position grade, and believe it or not, you would get disciplined if you did this: both parties would be accused of fraternizing. Heaven forbid you sat at the same lunch table as a supervisor! Eventually, to avoid getting into any lunch time trouble, I resorted to eating in my car, which the majority of other case workers did as well: better lonely than written up!
On another occasion, it was a well liked employee's birthday. We were not allowed to get her a birthday card; there are no cakes, socializing, cards, etc allowed. This is all considered "unprofessional" and "fraternizing." Someone better tell the rest of Corporate America. One day I was spoken to for having a 3 minute conversation, where I asked someone how their daughter was doing.
The social restrictions were strange enough. There was also a very strict dress code that was quite bizarre. You could wear regular closed shoes, or open toe with closed back, or sling back shoes but then they had to have a closed toe - ok? No slapping of the shoe back up to your foot, or there would be big trouble. No deodorant, no body lotion, no perfume - ok, I get the perfume, the clients can be sensitive to that. You could wear nail polish, but only certain neutral colors which the powers that be were ok with. One girl had her own little version of rebellion: she painted her toes blue and wore closed shoes to hide them. Our clothing was dictated, and under inspection from your supervisor at all times.
Finally one day, I was called in to HR, and let go, I was told it "wasn't a good fit." Not poor performance, not some bizarre infraction or unknown violation, but "not a good fit."
I had incurred a migraine three weeks prior that would not go away. The day after I was let go for the "not good fit" I woke up with no trace of the headache.
They get away with this by recruiting young people right out of college. These kids are so eager to do well, and have little to no other work experience to compare this dysfunctional management style with, so they adapt well and come to believe that this is a normal work environment. The culture is controlling and oppressive.Doesn't RecommendNeutral Outlook