Overall, good place to work. - Consultant CGI Employee Review

4.0
Jul 10, 2010
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

The best thing about working here, was the collaborative atmosphere. Some of the other consulting firms have internal power struggles and overflow with 'Type A' personalities because of the way compensation and reviews work. At CGI-AMS, everything was a team effort. It was high quality work that was being done, by very intelligent people. There is a lot to learn about the places CGI-AMS is located (a lot of Government work), and it's a great opportunity to go head-first into the way our local, state and federal governments operate.

Cons

The biggest issue I had with the company was the work-life balance. Of course, like most companies, flexibility is touted as a key benefit. However, like most consulting firms, it's not about getting your work done right away. The (occasionally) more important thing is to make sure you're billing the right amount of time. In most consulting firms, your true value is everything past 40 hours. Get all of your work done in 40? Find some more work to do. That's not the right way to do things, but it is common in consulting when you're billing a client with deep pockets.

Explore other reviews about CGI

5.0
Jun 18, 2026
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Work life balance, growth, quality

Cons

Less pay compared to market

1.0
Jun 16, 2026
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

no specific positives to highlight from my perspective

Cons

I worked at CGI in both India and the USA and observed similar workplace culture concerns across both locations. The only real difference was HR—India HR felt more supportive, while my experience with USA HR was disappointing. My employment ended shortly after maternity leave due to an alleged “lack of projects,” which I experienced as a layoff. I also observed what appeared to be misuse of position by some leaders, including blurred professional boundaries, preferential treatment, and expectations that went beyond normal workplace roles—at times resembling personal-assistant-style demands rather than professional conduct. Surprisingly, I also noticed inconsistent “policies” applied differently to different individuals. In some cases, it felt like the rules changed depending on who you were. When leadership became aware that someone was related to another employee in the organization, it sometimes felt like that person was singled out or targeted rather than treated objectively. Overall, these practices—whether through inconsistent treatment, perceived power misuse, or favoritism—undermine trust, damage workplace culture, and raise serious concerns about fairness and professionalism.

See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All