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 and maintenance industry (3.7 stars).

Reviews by job title

15 reviews
1.0
13 Jan 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
7 Jul 2025
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Some colleagues are genuinely great people, stuck in a bad situation, just like you'd be.

Cons

Chronic Financial Instability & Deceptive Promises: This company is a financial mess. Expect constant delays for paychecks and expenses, and forget about those promised bonuses – they rarely, if ever, show up. Management seems way more concerned with showing off their fancy company cars and even company houses than making sure staff get paid on time or keeping clients happy. Dysfunctional Leadership & Self-Serving Focus: The executive team appears profoundly disconnected from operational realities and employee well-being. Strategic decisions often seem arbitrary and short-sighted, frequently prioritizing individual interests or external appearances over genuine, sustainable business growth. This consistent lack of coherent direction fuels pervasive internal chaos and severely undermines employee confidence. High Attrition & Client Instability: The organization experiences notably high employee turnover, especially among skilled professionals. This internal instability is mirrored by observable challenges in retaining key clients, indicating significant operational distress and raising serious questions about the company's long-term viability and industry standing. Culture of Blame, Absent Accountability & Entrenched Favoritism: This is a deeply ingrained blame-driven culture where accountability for systemic failures was consistently elusive from leadership. The company exhibits a notable degree of favoritism, where opportunities and decisions frequently appear channeled to a select few, suggesting a preference for personal connections over merit or company-wide success. The Human Resources function often seems ineffective in addressing legitimate grievances, perpetuating a culture that undermines fairness and morale. Unsustainable Workload & Demanding Management Tactics: Employees are subjected to an utterly unsustainable workload, frequently pressured into working excessive, unpaid hours – including evenings and weekends – with little regard for personal boundaries or well-being. Management often employs aggressive, confrontational, and unprofessional tactics, creating a consistently high-stress and unsupportive environment. Insufficient Response to Inclusivity & Harassment Concerns: Despite stated commitments to diversity, the company exhibits a concerning inability to effectively address issues of equitable treatment and workplace conduct. Concerns regarding discriminatory behavior, including those related to gender and race, along with instances of harassment, are often raised but are rarely, if ever, adequately addressed or taken seriously by management, leaving affected individuals feeling unsupported and exposed to an often dismissive environment Bottom Line: EECO2 is a prime example of a company prioritizing short-term, self-serving interests over ethical management, employee well-being, and sustainable business practices. The chronic financial instability, chaotic leadership, and deeply problematic workplace culture create an environment that is not merely challenging, but actively detrimental to professional growth and mental health. Prospective employees should approach with extreme caution, as the risks to personal well-being and career stability are substantial.

avatar
EECO2 Response
2w
This review raises some serious points, and we'd rather respond to them honestly than defensively. We will note at the outset, though, that while this is posted as a current employee of five to seven years, the account bears little resemblance to the experience of anyone currently with the business. We mention that not to dismiss the review, but because readers are entitled to weigh it accordingly. Some points we can address with evidence. Others — particularly those concerning how individuals are treated — matter too much to wave away, so our response is to be clear about how they can properly be looked into. On discrimination, harassment and HR. This is the most serious part of the review and deserves a straight answer. Concerns of this kind — relating to gender, race or anything else — are ones we take extremely seriously, and we have formal procedures precisely so they can be documented, investigated and acted upon. What we honestly can't do is look into an anonymous, unspecified account with no individual or incident attached. If the writer, or anyone reading this, has experienced something of this nature, we'd sincerely ask them to raise it formally — with HR or a director. It will be taken seriously, and we'd far rather be told and act than see it left where no one can be helped. On pay and bonuses. We're not aware of any late salary payment to employed staff, and none has been raised internally. Salaries are benchmarked annually against CIBSE and Hays and held at mid-market as a minimum. Contractors sit on separate terms with different payment cycles. Bonuses, where offered, are tied to clear criteria rather than guaranteed. On the mention of company cars and houses. The structure and remuneration of the business are ordinary features of a company of our type. Linking them to staff pay makes for a pointed line, but the two simply aren't connected. On workload and hours. This is among the less accurate parts of the review. Evening work is genuinely the exception rather than the rule. Where client deadlines press, our instinct is to protect our people rather than push them — in practice we are more likely to renegotiate timelines than to ask anyone to work late, which is the reverse of the pressure described here. The expectations around weekend work and travel are set out plainly at interview, factored into salary, and — unusually for our sector — accompanied by reimbursement for the time given up. We regard that as a deliberate point of difference, not a grievance. On leadership and culture. We haven't got everything right, and where structures stopped working — including a project management function since reshaped — we changed them. The broader points on blame and favouritism are hard to engage with constructively without specifics. On clients. Whatever the review suggests, the sustained trust of a portfolio of global blue chip clients, with their exacting due diligence, isn't the mark of a business in distress. We can hear the frustration behind this, and we don't dismiss it. The most serious concerns, though, can only really be resolved through the proper channels — and that door remains open to current and former colleagues alike
1.0
21 Nov 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
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.