Westinghouse Employee Reviews about "leadership"

Cons

IT infrastructure seems antiquated and cumbersome Selection processes are behind the times Corrective action program is complicated Change resistance is still to prevalent Some leaders don’t accept and reinforce accountability More diverse leadership and workforce is desirable

Cons

There are a great deal of horrible managers and nearly all the senior leadership who could care less about the right things. Selfish, ignorant decision makers who make things worse. Now there appears to be a new owner who values the potential Westinghouse offers, but it is yet to be determined if they have the wherewithal and courage to fire the senior managers who made the mess we are all too real.

Cons

My colleagues and I continue to read that the executives continue to further enrich themselves with huge bonuses -- it's fair to say that the sentiment here is both strong and unified in disgust for this move. This is especially bad when we read that the original recommendation to the judge was focused on the Sr VPs. Why are they a flight risk? They are either lifers that would never leave or incompetent executives with no where to go -- or in case of the COO have already burned bridges from past (including girl/expense report trouble at competitor). Therefore this is nothing but a glorified hand out to the exact group that is responsible for getting us here. This is truly disheartening!! To make the above matters even worse the existing executive team continues to cover up the reasons all this happened. At the beginning of 2017 -- at the insistence of Toshiba -- an independent root cause team was commissioned. This team was comprised of recognized industry experts and they were chartered to find out how the company got here. The current CEO told us about this in an all hands meeting in March and he promised to communicate the conclusions of this review once complete. That never happened!! What did happen is of great concern to me and my colleagues. Apparently when the first drafts were reviewed the company didn't like the answers. The first drafts highlighted the flaws in the process used to buy CB&I and was clearly not to the liking of the CEO. Apparently this version of the story didn't match the conclusions reached by the outside lawyers that others in the company had hired (same outside lawyers were allowed to review the draft root cause -- how is that independent??). As a result of this the root cause was suspended and ultimately cancelled. In addition, the executive who was managing this effort was removed from the senior leadership team and sent home. How is any of this consistent with the values we hear about? What happens to 'walking the talk'? At a recent company leadership team meeting the CEO was asked again about this root cause. He said it was cancelled because it contained 'factual errors'. Errors according to whom?? Do you think the independent experts would agree with that? Why not address these 'errors' directly with them and fix the report. This really seems to be a case of not liking the answer and going to extreme measures to not allow these conclusions see the light of day. It's certainly not ethical. Do these guys really think this report will stay buried forever?? Separate issue -- in addition to the executive bonuses mentioned above about 200 employees recently received bonuses as well. These ranged between $50-100k. First half paid now with second half paid in April. Why can't we see that list? So the company is laying off people left and right -- but somehow believe it's appropriate to send 9 people to a conference in India (all flying business class). Great sightseeing trip if you can get it. How many jobs would the bill for this trip pay for? Does the company think India will really buy all these reactors? It's also hard to believe that Saudi Arabia will buy this still unproven and expensive technology. I wonder how many executives will travel there? Why hasn't China loaded fuel??

Cons

Offices not aware and supportive of field activities during construction. Tendency to hold on to unproductive people.

Cons

The Company treats employees like property, and it was doing this even before it filed for bankruptcy. Long-time employees have lost benefits, lost pensions, and even been 'laid off' after relocating to a project site...stranded in a different location than what was once home. The leadership team that caused the Company to go bankrupt remains in place; there is no helping this Company.

Cons

Lacking leadership and accountability at most levels of the company; limited industry growth for the foreseeable future.

Cons

Deceit. Heavy handed upper management - ego do as I say not as I do. Global market changes, not changing with it. Senior management reorganizations still use the same senior management (no new ideas or leadership). Same leaders and same ideas. Just different formats. Huge salary and bonuses for directors and above - came clear with bankruptcy. Yet the majority of company stuck with poor future prospects, no raises, no bonuses. Just lectures of being focused and in his together. Many managers and senior engineers and project managers have just as much commitment. Plugged in 24 - 7 and have given as much for much less. Current restructuring indicate no new leadership or meaningful organization changes forthcoming - while a major course correction is needed as well as a heathy understanding of the changing market conditions and increasing competitive nature of all our businesses. Cannot expect our typically good product lines to still deliver as always - it's a false assumption or worse, a near term lie to make your numbers before you jump ship.

Cons

Dishonest and manipulative senior leadership hyper focused on short term goals and meeting financial forecasts at all costs Terrible compensation/raise potential, minimal bonuses No overall strategy or consistency to ensure long term business prospects Complete misalignment of incentives - really ensures product areas fighting against one another to the detriment of the whole Non-existent boundaries - employees are expected to work unsustainable hours with no regard for evenings/weekends/vacation Almost no diversity Leadership positions are filled externally instead of promoting from within

Cons

The leadership has changed significantly over the past years bringing in executives from competitive companies. This has changed the culture.

Cons

Lost position due to transfer of production to Puerto Rico and I had to select the VIP early retirement package. .