EECO2 reviews

2.1

38% would recommend to a friend

(15 total reviews)
avatar

Robert Wallace

100% approve of CEO

32% positive business outlook

EECO2 has an employee rating of 2.1 out of 5 stars, based on 15 company reviews on Glassdoor which indicates that most employees have an average working experience there. The EECO2 employee rating is 43% below average for employers within the Construction, Repair & Maintenance Services industry (3.7 stars).

Reviews by job title

15 reviews
1.0
Nov 21, 2024

Green goals, Red flags

Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Not at all after further reflection

Cons

Beneath EECO2 facade of sustainability and innovation lies a workplace that often feels disorganised, inequitable, and out of sync with modern professional standards. A Culture of Promises, Not Delivery: When you join EECO2, you're sold a dream—exciting projects, global impact, career growth. But once you’re in, it becomes clear: these promises rarely materialise. Decisions are made behind closed doors, leaving employees in the dark and fostering an atmosphere of mistrust. Leadership lacks accountability, creating a top-down approach that feels both opaque and arbitrary. Favouritism Over Fairness: The “one team” mantra is repeated often, but actions speak louder than slogans. Opportunities aren’t distributed based on merit but on personal connections. Those without the right relationships will find themselves overlooked and undervalued. It’s disheartening to see a workplace where who you know matters more than what you bring to the table. An Unequal Playing Field: There’s also a troubling pattern of uneven treatment among employees. Some are disproportionately burdened with challenging tasks and given little recognition, while others seem to skate by with far less effort. The whispers of bias—whether based on background, gender, or other factors—are hard to ignore, and they tarnish the company’s credibility. Overwork with Minimal Reward: Weekend travel is common, but don’t expect fair compensation. Half pay for giving up your personal time? That’s well below industry standards. Add delayed reimbursements and payments to the mix, and the financial strain becomes a regular burden for employees. A Company Without a Compass: The lack of clear strategy and direction is palpable. Projects are launched without proper planning, leaving teams scrambling to adapt to shifting priorities. Leadership often seems disconnected from the technical realities, creating a chaotic environment that sets employees up to fail. Bottom Line: EECO2 is a case study in wasted potential. It could be a leader in its field, but systemic issues—favouritism, inequity, mismanagement—keep it from achieving greatness. If you value transparency, fairness, and a workplace that respects your time and effort, look elsewhere. This is not an organisation where you’ll thrive.

avatar
EECO2 Response
2w
Thank you for taking the time to share this feedback. We take all employee perspectives seriously, but a number of the claims made here require clarification and context. On tenure and context Only two individuals at EECO2 have 10 years of tenure, both directors holding equity through our EMI share scheme — relevant context when interpreting claims about strategy, compensation, and decision-making. On weekend travel The "half pay" characterisation omits considerable context. Our travel compensation framework was deliberately designed to ensure fairness and parity with contractor arrangements. In many comparable organisations, weekend travel attracts no additional compensation at all. Employees travel business class, stay in five-star hotels, and where assignments take them to international destinations — from South America to Japan — we actively support extended personal stays. We consider this a genuine differentiator and are proud of it. On salaries and payment timelines Salaries are benchmarked annually against CIBSE and Hays surveys, with all roles at mid-market minimum and clear performance-managed pathways to the upper band. No instance of delayed salary payment has ever been raised internally. Contractors operate under separate commercial terms with different payment schedules — conflating the two is misleading. On bias and fairness Serious allegations, presented without a single specific example. Our internal processes exist precisely to address such concerns formally and without prejudice. We urge anyone with a genuine grievance to use them. On project management and strategy We acknowledge a period of operational friction, attributable in part to a PMO function that has since been disbanded — a deliberate, evidence-based decision that has made us a leaner and more effective organisation. Our sustained relationships with a portfolio of global blue chip clients speak more reliably to our strategic capability and delivery standards than an unqualified anonymous review. A final note If this is, as we believe, a long-standing senior team member, we would encourage direct and formal dialogue. Experience and honest challenge are valued and rewarded here. Our door remains open
1.0
Jan 13, 2025

Toxic Chaos

Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Some good colleagues around to help

Cons

A workplace centered on the personal interests of one individual, with leadership that promotes a toxic and micromanaged environment. The executive directors exemplify control and manipulation, undermining professional autonomy. Promises of bonuses and benefits often go unfulfilled, and greed seems to outweigh fairness. Favouritism dominates decision-making processes, eroding trust. Concerns about inclusivity are significant, with little support for minority groups and the LGBTQ+ community. Allegations of late payments, unclear financial dealings, and disorganised management persist, creating an environment of instability. Sexual harassment complaints and diversity issues appear neglected, further highlighting systemic flaws. The workload is relentless, frequently requiring unpaid weekend travel and late nights. Chronic overwork, unreasonable demands, and poor project management render work-life balance nearly impossible, with management intruding into personal lives. HR provides little support, leaving contractors feeling voiceless. Leadership frequently fails to demonstrate maturity, fairness, or transparency, driven by an unchecked pursuit of profit that jeopardises the company's long-term viability. If you seek a supportive and ethical workplace, consider exploring other opportunities.

avatar
EECO2 Response
2w
Thank you for raising these points. We'd rather respond to them openly than brush them aside. On inclusivity, harassment and HR. These are the most serious matters raised, and we won't be defensive about them. Conduct of this kind has no place here, and we have formal procedures so that any such concern can be reported and properly investigated. What we honestly can't do is act on an anonymous, general statement with no person or incident attached. If anyone — employee or contractor, current or former — has experienced or seen something of this nature, we'd sincerely ask them to bring it forward formally. It will be heard and acted on, and we'd much rather be told and put something right than have it left here. On bonuses and payments. No late salary payment to employed staff has ever been raised internally, and we're aware of none. Pay is benchmarked annually against CIBSE and Hays and held at mid-market as a minimum. Bonuses, where they apply, are discretionary and tied to clear criteria rather than guaranteed — something explained from the outset. On workload and travel. This doesn't reflect how we actually work. Late and evening working is the exception, and where deadlines tighten we tend to adjust timelines rather than lean on people. Any role involving travel, weekends included, is set out clearly at interview and written into the contract, with pay structured to reflect it — and weekend travel is reimbursed, which is uncommon in our sector. None of it is sprung on anyone after the fact. On leadership and culture. We won't pretend everything has always run perfectly — where ways of working stopped serving teams, we changed them. But the wider claims of favouritism and control are offered without a single example, which leaves little to engage with constructively. On contractors. Contractors are engaged on separate commercial terms by design, and treating them as interchangeable with salaried staff tends to confuse rather than clarify. We don't dismiss the frustration behind this. But the concerns that genuinely warrant attention can only be looked into through the proper channels — and those remain open to colleagues and contractors alike. Response from the Management Team, EECO2
1.0
Oct 17, 2024

Worst Experience

Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

No bothering on weekends Co workers are good

Cons

Poor management style, micro management Habit of blame games Low paid salaries Professional engineering staff has left due to weird policies, new staff is not geared enough Adhoc policies Seniors attitude is worst Management always finds a reason to snub and is always after a reason to snub Working environment is very suffocated No motivation Very less/ slow career progression

avatar
EECO2 Response
2w
Thank you for this review. We'd rather engage with it properly than offer a polished non-answer. A year or two is long enough to form a genuine view, so we won't suggest this one isn't sincerely held. We do see several points differently, though. Salary. Every role is benchmarked annually against CIBSE and Hays data and held at mid-market as a floor, with a clear performance-linked path beyond it. "Low paid" is hard to square with that framework — though if there's a specific comparison behind it, we'd want to hear it. Progression. Advancement tracks capability rather than time served, which won't suit everyone. The routes exist and are communicated openly — but we accept that having a framework and feeling its benefit aren't always the same thing. Hiring and fit. Here we'll be candid. A strong engineer isn't automatically a strong consultant, and those new to the environment can be stretched quickly. We've sometimes let that mismatch persist too long, hoping people grow into the role — which isn't always fair on them or the team. It's an area we're actively sharpening. Management and culture. We won't wave away words like "micro-management" or "blame". By way of context, some structures in place during that period — including a project management function since reshaped — didn't serve teams as well as intended, and we've adjusted. The broader characterisations are harder to address without specifics we'd have valued discussing at the time. Retention and capability. Some movement is simply the nature of specialist consultancy. Our confidence in our people is reflected in the trust of a demanding global blue-chip client base — and that isn't an accident. We're sorry this wasn't the right fit. If something went unsaid, the offer of a frank conversation still stands — leaving the business doesn't close that door.
Viewing 1 - 3 of 15 Reviews

Glassdoor has 17 EECO2 reviews submitted anonymously by EECO2 employees. Read employee reviews and ratings on Glassdoor to decide if EECO2 is right for you.