employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

International Rescue Committee

Is this your company?

HR Officer - Human Resources International Rescue Committee Employee Review

1.0
9 Apr 2023
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

The wages is good and If you work hard and have an honest supervisor who appreciates your effort, you will grow well and fast.

Cons

Recruitment should not be left to the HRs at the Nigerian Office, but recruitment should be organised from the headquarters and the best candidate picked so as to prevent the locals from choosing applicants based on personal ties.This is because they only employ their cousins, family member related with different surname, friends and well wishers. They don't give employment to people outside their circle. Some senior level HRs even give the hires condition like taking a percentage of their income and they must not express themselves to avoid Office gangup made up of employees from same village and social club, which might include setting you up etc.Its a toxic work environment.

Explore other reviews about International Rescue Committee

5.0
25 Dec 2025
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Everyone is so nice here.

Cons

we have a lot of time to collaborate one project

2.0
22 Apr 2026
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

You will meet some amazing and passionate people here who are truly there for the mission. Many came to this country as refugees and immigrants themselves and continue to devote their lives to helping others going through similar experiences. If you end up on the right team, it's an extremely rewarding job.

Cons

Unfortunately, the HQ upper management makes it a toxic place to work. VPs regularly undercut each other publicly (including at all-team meetings and gossiping negatively with staff), especially when potential job cuts were on the horizon. C-Suite didn't listen to staff concerns about upper management and didn't investigate major departures by dedicated staff who left due to poor management despite their dedication to the mission. Leaders picked favorites, ignoring work performance (excusing mediocre performance in some, having high standards for others), and preferred yes-men over staff who wanted to think more critically about the work. Projects were pushed too quickly, despite concerns that it could be detrimental to clients. Positions given to unqualified internal staff who wouldn't be interviewed for the role as external candidates. Senior leaders (director and above) are more focused on keeping their jobs than the mission and will use lower staff work for their own career growth/safety. DEI didn't seem to apply for senior leader roles, where there was little, if any, diversity.

4
See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All