PartsBase reviews

2.5

39% would recommend to a friend

(212 total reviews)

Robert A. Hammond

31% approve of CEO

39% positive business outlook

PartsBase has an employee rating of 2.5 out of 5 stars, based on 212 company reviews on Glassdoor which indicates that most employees have an average working experience there. The PartsBase employee rating is 33% below average for employers within the Management & Consulting industry (3.7 stars).

Reviews by job title

212 reviews
5.0
Jun 10, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Many of the negative reviews I’ve read on Glassdoor do not reflect my experience. I’ve never felt monitored or spied on, and no one has ever pressured employees to leave reviews. My manager is the best I’ve worked with, and the other managers I’ve met have been equally supportive and professional. The onboarding process is excellent. The company gives you the time and training needed to understand the business, the market, and the sales approach. Whenever I needed help, I received it. I’ve never felt alone and have always found support from both managers and colleagues. This is a demanding job, but the company genuinely invests in helping people improve and succeed. Like any remote company, there are tools to ensure accountability, but they are not used to constantly monitor employees. The expectation is simple: if you’re working remotely, you’re expected to work and deliver results. Overall, I’ve had a very positive experience and am genuinely happy to be part of the company.

Cons

One area where the onboarding process could be improved is training on internal systems and day-to-day operational tasks. The company does an excellent job teaching the market, the sales process, how to run demos, handle calls, and close deals. However, I believe more time could be dedicated to practical training on internal tools and procedures, such as sending contracts, opening accounts, and navigating the company’s internal software.

1.0
Jun 10, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

The paycheck generally arrives on time.

Cons

Work-life balance? More like leaving work unsure if you'll still have a job the next day. From the moment you start, there is a constant sense of instability that hangs over everything. No matter how hard you work, how many extra hours you put in, or how consistently you perform, there is always a feeling that your position is far more fragile than it should be. The company talks about performance constantly, yet many employees spend more time worrying about protecting themselves than actually performing their jobs. Trust is practically non-existent. One of the biggest problems is management accountability or more accurately, the lack of it. Your reporting manager may tell you that doing something a certain way is perfectly acceptable. You follow their instructions because they are your manager and you assume they know what they are talking about. Then productivity monitoring gets involved. Someone questions the process. Someone questions the numbers. Someone questions your actions. Suddenly, the same manager who approved everything develops selective memory and acts as though the conversation never happened. The support disappears. The guidance disappears. The accountability disappears. What remains is you. Employees carry the consequences while management distances itself from the decisions that created the problem. Your managers will not protect you; they will throw you under the bus and then get rid of you. That sounds dramatic until you experience it yourself. There is no real leadership here, only authority without accountability. Not sure how they even got the positions they are in. Many decisions seem disconnected from operational reality, and employees are often expected to absorb the consequences of poor planning, inconsistent communication, and shifting expectations. Another recurring issue is the feeling that employees are sometimes set up to fail rather than positioned to succeed. Expectations are often unclear. Processes change. Instructions change. Priorities change. Yet employees are somehow expected to navigate all of it flawlessly. At the same time, it doesn't even matter if you execute something so flawlessly, if the top management wants you gone, YOU ARE GONE. The environment creates a situation where failure often feels less like a possibility and more like an inevitability waiting for the right moment. This leads to the single most important piece of advice I can give anyone considering employment here: 1. Always. Always. Have everything in writing. 2. Save emails. 3. Save Teams messages. 4. Save chat logs. 5. Save meeting notes. 6. Save screenshots. 7. Document instructions. 8. If a manager tells you something verbally, send a follow-up email confirming it. 9. Build your own paper trail. You may need it. Verbal instructions have a way of disappearing when accountability enters the room. The culture itself feels heavily transactional. Employees are not treated like long-term investments. Employees are treated like resources. Resources are useful until they are not. The company appears far more comfortable replacing employees than retaining them. High turnover should surprise absolutely nobody. After spending enough time here, the turnover starts making perfect sense. People leave because trust erodes. People leave because support disappears. People leave because the environment becomes exhausting. People leave because.. well, they get fired. Productivity monitoring deserves its own mention. Rather than feeling like a tool designed to improve performance, it often feels like a mechanism designed to identify shortcomings. Employees frequently feel monitored rather than supported. The focus appears to be on measuring activity rather than enabling success. As a result, people spend their energy worrying about metrics, reports, and scrutiny instead of focusing on meaningful work. There is also very little psychological safety. 1. Speaking honestly carries risk. 2. Providing feedback carries risk. 3. Questioning decisions carries risk. 4. Disagreeing with management carries risk. Many employees eventually learn that remaining silent is often safer than being transparent. Then there is the internal culture around information. It doesn't take long to notice patterns. Mention something to one person and somehow the information travels. Raise a concern privately and suddenly management seems aware of it. Plant a seed in one corner and watch where it grows. Before long, you begin to understand who talks to who. You learn which conversations stay private and which conversations become management talking points. You learn that discretion is not always guaranteed. The result is a workplace where people become cautious about what they say, who they say it to, and how openly they share concerns. Healthy organizations build trust between colleagues. This environment often encourages the opposite. Then there is HR. From an employee perspective, HR is effectively non-existent when meaningful support is required. If you are expecting an independent department that objectively reviews concerns, advocates for fairness, or provides confidence during difficult situations, you may be disappointed. Throughout my experience, HR appeared significantly more focused on protecting management and company interests than helping employees navigate legitimate workplace concerns. Issues are acknowledged. Meetings happen. Conversations happen. Yet meaningful outcomes often seem absent. Employees are frequently left feeling as though they are handling problems alone. The unfortunate lesson many people learn is simple: 1. HR is not there to protect employees. 2. HR is there to protect the company. Once you understand that reality, many interactions begin to make much more sense. Career growth is unclear. Long-term development does not appear to be a priority. Employee retention does not appear to be a priority. Building loyalty does not appear to be a priority. The company seems to operate under the assumption that if one employee leaves, another can simply take their place. Unfortunately, that mindset becomes visible in how people are treated. The overall culture feels reactive rather than proactive. Problems become emergencies. Communication becomes inconsistent. Expectations become unclear. Accountability becomes selective. Employees become exhausted. The people doing the work are expected to absorb the consequences of management failures, process failures, communication failures, and planning failures. Eventually, many decide the effort is no longer worth it. This is not a workplace where trust flourishes. It is not a workplace where employees feel protected. It is not a workplace where employees feel valued. It is a workplace where many people spend their time documenting conversations, protecting themselves, watching what they say, and wondering whether they will still be employed tomorrow. The system is built for output, not for people. You are not valued, you are utilized until you are replaceable. This is not a long-term workplace. It is a revolving door. Oh, and another thing, just because you managed to close a deal in the last work week for the month, it does not mean anything for your KPI, your KPI is not yours, but it's for your manager to decide if you hit it or not, and that means they will overlook anything they want to fail you.

1.0
May 11, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Remote work meaning you can work with them anywhere but I’m mixed if that’s a positive considering the VPN and computers offered.

Cons

During my time at PartsBase, a major concern was the expectation of overtime without compensation. Although I was salaried, there was a consistent expectation to stay late and complete workloads that were often not realistically achievable within standard working hours. Work was frequently assigned in a way that required shifting priorities at the last minute, with an implicit expectation that employees would simply absorb the extra load to avoid criticism from upper management rather than acknowledge that accounts were being submitted late accounting hours were not being optimized. Another key issue was the imbalance between departments, particularly the strong prioritization of sales outcomes over operational accuracy and accountability. Sales submissions were often incomplete or inaccurate, which created avoidable downstream issues for accounting, collections, and customer service. Despite repeated efforts to improve processes such as suggesting clearer communication standards and structured scripts, there was little consistent enforcement or follow through. This resulted in recurring inefficiencies and preventable rework across multiple teams. Communication was also a persistent challenge. Internal messaging and expectations were often unclear or repeated across different channels, leading to confusion and unnecessary repetition of work. In addition, management actively monitored internal communication channels, which made open and honest feedback more difficult. Concerns could feel risky to express, as they risked being taken out of context or perceived negatively, which discouraged transparency and made day to day communication more stressful. Operational infrastructure further contributed to frustration. The VPN and company issued systems frequently slowed productivity, particularly during time sensitive work. Combined with high workload expectations, these technical limitations made routine tasks more difficult than necessary and added to overall stress. There were also gaps in training and onboarding, especially for newer employees, which left many people underprepared for the demands of their roles. This increased reliance on experienced staff to constantly step in and correct or clarify work, reinforcing a reactive rather than structured environment with actual training for new employees. Additionally, the company operated alongside another business under the same ownership structure called Ultimate Water. Although I did not work for that company directly, I regularly received a large volume of customer calls related to it. These calls often involved customers who were unable to reach support or reported that their issues were not being addressed. I did not have visibility into internal operations there, but from the customer perspective there appeared to be frustration with responsiveness. Because I did not have access or authority to assist those customers, I was frequently unable to help, which created frustration both for them and for me. A few times these customers would show up at our physical office to scream at us and find a real person. It was little scary but I never blamed those customers who felt that level of frustration. It gave the impression that the volume of customer demand was not matched with real support resources, although that is my interpretation based on those interactions rather than confirmed internal knowledge. Overall, the environment had a significant impact on my well being, and I recognize that my mental health suffered during my time there due to sustained stress, lack of support, and ongoing operational inefficiencies. Since leaving, I have been in a much healthier work environment where I feel valued, heard, and supported. I can genuinely say I feel like myself again, with a noticeable reduction in burnout. While I appreciated my team at PartsBase, even if I were offered a higher salary now, I would not return, because the overall culture and structure were not sustainable for me long term. In my current role, communication and support are handled very differently. I have a reliable support system, I am encouraged to ask questions, and both employee well being and customer service are treated as equally important alongside profitability. That balance has made a significant difference in my experience and reinforces for me that the issues I experienced at PartsBase were not unavoidable, they were cultural and structural choices. The only consistently positive aspect I experienced was some flexibility in taking time off or stepping away when something personal or urgent came up, but even that seemed dependent on the manager at the time and was not consistently applied, so I am not sure it remained a stable benefit over time.

Viewing 1 - 3 of 212 Reviews

Glassdoor has 217 PartsBase reviews submitted anonymously by PartsBase employees. Read employee reviews and ratings on Glassdoor to decide if PartsBase is right for you.