Avoid, if possible - Avis employé Claims Selective Insurance

2,0
28 juill. 2023
Recommande
Approbation du PDG
Perspective commerciale

Avantages

Normal health benefits, great PTO (if you stay for more than 5 years), 401K (matched), very good bonus program (especially for supervisors and above), normal raises (about 3%) a year. Promotional opportunities for those willing to prioritize work over all other areas of life. However, if you did not come in a VP, there’s a 95% chance you will not make VP. But at this place, believe me, you don’t want to be a VP.

Inconvénients

The workload is not sustainable. The people in their home office are over-rated and over-indulged (formally - in the salary structure) and would never make it at any of the large carriers. The computer systems are not well managed and antiquated (especially in claims). The EVP level of management are clearly not being psych tested. Diversity at the management level is questionable. They routinely terminate VPs creating a circus of instability. I was once told by someone in senior management that the company knowingly understaffs certain parts of the company. This company is quick to fire and lay off large departments and transfer the work to other parts of the country that are more economically favorable to their bottom line. And that is the point, if you choose to work here, remember to get what you need from them before it is the other way around. When I look back at my years at this company, I wished I had left sooner. Sometimes the grass really is greener.

Découvrez plus d’avis sur Selective Insurance

5,0
17 avr. 2026
Employé (anonyme)
Recommande
Approbation du PDG
Perspective commerciale

Avantages

Strong but difficult leadership during transformation.

Inconvénients

Relocation causing some some concern

2
1,0
26 mai 2026
Recommande
Approbation du PDG
Perspective commerciale

Avantages

Decent benefits and decent coworkers

Inconvénients

Working at Selective was a toxic work environment shaped by favoritism, excessive workload expectations, and poor boundaries around employee availability. Management often applied expectations unevenly, which created a lack of fairness and accountability. High performance did not always seem to be the primary factor in decision-making, which undermined trust in leadership. There was also a strong “big fish, small pond” dynamic, where internal status and informal influence often carried more weight than actual performance or collaboration. This contributed to a highly political environment where trust between colleagues was limited and information did not always feel safe to share openly. Employees were expected to be available far beyond normal working hours, creating an unsustainable “always on” culture with no real work-life balance. The workload was consistently too high for the compensation provided. Internal politics further interfered with day-to-day work and made collaboration more difficult than it needed to be. In practice, this environment often encouraged self-preservation over teamwork, which made it difficult to build trust or rely on others consistently. Overall, the environment was not structured in a way that supported long-term employee wellbeing or retention. This is not a workplace that supports a healthy work-life balance. For me, the experience felt unsustainable, and over time it became clear that the environment was not conducive to long-term growth or wellbeing.

2
Voir les avis par: Utile|Évaluation|Date|Tout