employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

International Rescue Committee

Is this your company?

Good org all things considered, biggest feedback hire more refugees and immigrants - Case Worker International Rescue Committee Employee Review

5.0
Jul 1, 2020
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Incredibly intelligent and talented co-workers, excellent benefits (1.6 days of vacation per paycheck starting off, 403b full match up to 3%, partial up to 6% +medical, dental, vision), accesible and knowledgable HQ support team and technical advisors, clear organizational principles and strategy. Very strict about working 8:30-5pm and kick you out of the office (however still expect you to meet all job responsibilities and outcomes).

Cons

Being an organization that works primarily with immigrants and diverse populations, leadership locally and within U.S. is majority caucasian and non-immigrant, which influences organizational culture and approach to aid. Very high workload, low pay (nonprofit pay). Grants and outcomes at times unrealistic for providing quality service. Lack of cooperation/communication between departments.

Explore other reviews about International Rescue Committee

5.0
Mar 12, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

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

Cons

No Cons to speak of

2.0
Apr 22, 2026
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

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.

Cons

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
See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All