employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

International Rescue Committee

Is this your company?

Disabled and ignored - Intern International Rescue Committee Employee Review

2.0
Jul 9, 2020
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

You’re working to create change

Cons

The job posting was much different than the actual job—so much so that I felt lied to. I would HIGHLY caution anyone with a disability to work here—I had a disability and was asked to resign because they were unwilling to accommodate. (Not unable, unwilling). I would’ve looked into my legal rights if I could but my disability made it incredibly difficult to pursue any legal action and they knew that. I felt totally taken advantage of. They claim to be a great work environment but that’s only for their able-bodied employees. If you’re disabled they’ll leave you in the dust. This is a clear, systemic problem in the organization.

Explore other reviews about International Rescue Committee

5.0
Dec 25, 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
Apr 22, 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