Lots of false promises and not a good career choice - Senior Consultant CGI Employee Review

1.0
Jun 4, 2025
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Employee benefits package is okay, and compensation is reasonable but still under the market rate

Cons

CGI UK hires people in anticipation of contracts they haven’t secured yet. If those deals fall through, you’ll be let go with little support. Their touted “flexible” and “remote” working policies are mostly superficial, your work location is dictated entirely by client demands, especially if you have a high-level clearance. Promises made during recruitment about development, support, or inclusivity often don’t materialize. Adjustments for disability or neurodiversity are dismissed by middle management because they’re seen as a cost liability to the client. Career progression is non-existent; you’re a resource to be billed, not a professional to be developed. Turnover is high most people leave within 1–2 years. If you’re mid-career and looking for a place to grow, this place will likely stall your development. CGI is focused on contract wins and billing hours, not on investing in its people.

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