Disappointed after 20 years of loyal service. - Anonymous employee Atrium Health Employee Review

2.0
Mar 21, 2013
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Thankful to have been a part of what seemed to appreciate employee loyalty for so long. The amount of Paid Time Off I was up to was definitely a pro. Being able to transfer within the system was also a great service available. As far as the family friendly employer, that all depended on which management you were under at the time.

Cons

With CHS being the 2nd largest healthcare system in the nation, the rates for their employees' insurance premiums were outrageous. The pay raises were minimal to nonexistent. The employees are rarely rewarded for going above and beyond. And when we're seen within one of CHS facilities as patients....they won't hesitate to turn us over to a collection agency. And lastly, if you have a string of bad luck life events happen, and you're a long-timer with the company, the willingness to be understanding and family friendly no longer exists.

Explore other reviews about Atrium Health

5.0
May 27, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Good benefits, work life balance

Cons

have to use PTO for holidays

1
2.0
Jun 21, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

I spent many years in outpatient rehabilitation and saw firsthand how much meaningful patient care can happen when clinicians are empowered. Earlier in my tenure, there were real opportunities for growth, mentorship and professional development. The team was collaborative and deeply committed to patients, and support staff worked hard under challenging circumstances. Those are strengths worth acknowledging.

Cons

As leadership changed, the culture around performance and advancement shifted. Over time I felt that institutional memory, specialty expertise and long‑term contributions were not valued consistently. Promotion practices seemed opaque, and I saw clinicians with substantially less experience and questionable communication acumen move into roles without clear explanations. Most importantly, I experienced increasing friction between high performers and leaders whose roles felt more performative than grounded in clinical or operational expertise. That tension appeared to be tolerated by the institution. Questions about decisions were discouraged, and requests for discussion went unanswered—even when they came from people with decades of service and a record of strong outcomes. After years of above‑average performance reviews, the feedback I received near the end of my tenure seemed inconsistent with my record and, in my view, hypocritical. This sudden shift in narrative felt like a mechanism to justify decisions already made rather than an honest assessment. For clinicians who invest deeply in their programs and relationships, contradictory or last‑minute feedback is demoralizing and undermines trust in the review process. Although department leaders appear to view themselves as emotionally intelligent, my experience was quite different: they delivered polished, stoic performances but did not exhibit the empathy, listening, or unbiased 360 assessment skills that clinicians need from leadership. That disconnect was another source of friction between high performers and management.

1
See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All