C40 Reviews

3.7

65% would recommend to a friend

(62 total reviews)
avatar

Mark Watts

65% approve of CEO

52% positive business outlook

C40 has an employee rating of 3.7 out of 5 stars, based on 62 company reviews on Glassdoor which indicates that most employees have a good working experience there. The C40 employee rating is in line with the average (within 1 standard deviation) for employers within the Non-profit and NGO industry (3.7 stars).

Reviews by job title

62 reviews
1.0
5 Dec 2021
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Amazing colleagues committed to put meaning and care into their work, especially on the ground with city staff

Cons

It was recently uncovered by new HR director that the Management Team (MT, ie. C-level management) had been receiving private health insurance for a number of years. While not uncommon for high-ranking staff to receive additional benefits (eg. private health coverage on top of NHS, compared to UK staff), this is in stark comparison to staff based outside the UK/US/EU. For staff - especially those in "Global South" locations - it took an average of 2 years of internal lobbying for health insurance. (The acquiescence to look into providing health insurance also occurred at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.) For some countries where NHS-equivalents are not available, C40's lack of health insurance provision was in actual violation of local labour laws. When the insurance policies were finally delivered, most policies were not appropriate or sensible for the local health system, and insufficient in coverage values. For example, some policies read in a way that it would be better to be ill enough for A&E hospitalisation, instead of going to the local clinic/GP. Credit to the new HR director for calling out the unfairness and hypocrisy of the MT, and demanding that the policies be cancelled. However, in response to the cancellation, the MT requested (successfully) for salary increases in lieu of losing the policy coverage. An unemotional response to this is not possible. Other considerations to contrast this response with what is happening with ordinary staff: - Proposed cancellation of this year's annual increment of GBP 500 (which ultimately did not go through due to employee response) - Numerous accounts of gaslighting and/or burnout, with long-term mental and physical health consequences - When employees are awarded and recognised, the common reaction is "thank goodness, they have been pulling insane hours to make things work" - The fire and re-hire of over 50 staff, mostly based in the "Global South" Efforts have been made to improve across the past months. It is probable that defences and counterclaims to this post will be made, internal and external to the organisation. However, even if reparations are made on the many issues, one still has to question that this is the same MT which continues to: - Direct the strategic planning, governance and outputs of the organisation - Represent to the global audience the values, objectives and outcomes of the organisation (eg. climate justice, COVID-19 response, racial equality, inclusion, diversity, youth advocacy, etc.) The MT's attitudes, choices and communications create the organisational culture and standards for the collaboration with cities. It is within this "every-day normal" that passionate and qualified employees do their best to work together, deliver climate justice, and develop professionally. Many amazing staff have left in the past year, which not only affects the continuity of expertise, but the workloads and motivation of remaining colleagues. One hopes that there is a urgent, authentic and transparent reflection in the organisation about what this means, and how the "every-day normal" can be improved.

3.0
29 Jun 2021
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Working on climate change in cities. Salaries are competitive for a nonprofit, most staff really care about what they do and want to collaborate. There’s a relatively horizontal working structure and good support for remote working.

Cons

The leadership team doesn’t seem to have done much to address big issues related to funding and staffing over the past year and everything is left to the last minute. Lots of staff on temp contracts (6-12 months), with inconsistent professional development opportunities and no movement within the pay band even though there's a large gap between bands. Difficulty retaining talent and there’s an attitude that it's easy to just find someone else. Slow progress on diversity and wellbeing asks from staff. Unfortunately problematic behaviour is often ignored. Many people are overworked and experience burnout.

3.0
20 Jun 2021
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

- Fantastic colleagues and thrilling work environment. Everyone is passionate about climate change and this reflects in the work. Great collaborative workplace. - Great opportunity to work with cities across the world with exciting new projects - Very well meaning management team, trying to diversify the workforce - Possibility of fast upward mobility depending on the teams - Great flexibility in terms of working conditions and remote working

Cons

- Most of the staff is non-technical and technical abilities in general are not well valued - Poor leadership, the way the organisation is managed has not changed in the last 3 years despite a huge growth in the number of employees - The organisation is mostly oriented towards comms and political support and does not have a lot of experience in actually implementing programmes that have tangible impacts - Culture of overwork, worse than in similar NGOs in the climate sphere in London - Abysmal HR service - Salaries are advertised as non-negotiable but a significant portion of the employees did negotiate them - No salary progression possible outside of promotions

Viewing 1 - 3 of 62 Reviews

Glassdoor has 81 C40 reviews submitted anonymously by C40 employees. Read employee reviews and ratings on Glassdoor to decide if C40 is right for you.