Team driven to look good to business, not individual - Commissioning Engineer RED Employee Review

IT equipment Allowance for traveling Some of the people

* Workload can be excessive at times, with teams often under-resourced relative to project demands. * Technical decision-making may be influenced heavily by contractor direction rather than independent engineering judgement. * Limited structured training or clear career development pathways. * Inconsistencies in compensation, with individuals in similar roles receiving significantly different salaries. * Career progression can appear more reactive (e.g. through counteroffers) rather than based on sustained performance and loyalty. * Bonus structures lack transparency and may not always align with individual contributions. * Heavy reliance on a single key client creates potential business continuity risk. * Offboarding experience could be improved, as support and engagement may decline once resignation is submitted. Site teams are forced to approve everything even when they know it’s incorrect so leadership can say we keep the client happy.

IT equipment Fuel allowance if not site

Anonymous Review: There’s no clear structure for career progression at RED. People doing the same role are on different salaries, with no transparency on how that’s decided. Promotions don’t always feel based on performance or actual work. From what I’ve seen, it can come down to relationships with leadership rather than achievements, which is frustrating for those putting in the effort. Teams are also understaffed, so the workload is high and people are stretched. On top of that, pay doesn’t seem to match the market. Overall, based on my experience, I wouldn’t choose to work here.