employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

Connecticut Science Center

Is this your company?

Positive experience - Coordinator Connecticut Science Center Employee Review

5.0
8 May 2024
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Good boss, reasonable workload and work life balance

Cons

None that I can think of.

Explore other reviews about Connecticut Science Center

5.0
18 Nov 2024
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Great Company Environment and Networking Oppurtunities

Cons

A lot of downtime between tasks

2.0
13 Jan 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

The mission and concept of the museum are genuinely interesting Early on, the workplace culture was fun, collaborative, and engaging Some roles initially offered meaningful, hands-on responsibilities

Cons

Over time, the culture and working conditions deteriorated significantly. Compensation and advancement were extremely poor. Over a seven-year tenure, total pay increases were abysmal and did not keep pace with inflation. This was especially frustrating as responsibilities and emotional labor increased. Meanwhile, the organization invested millions of dollars into new and refurbished exhibits, reinforcing the sense that institutional growth did not include frontline staff. Frontline employees were routinely expected to absorb abusive behavior from guests and chaperones, particularly during field trips, which are treated as untouchable due to their importance as a revenue source. Rather than enforcing clear behavioral boundaries, staff were often expected to placate entitled or hostile adults to avoid complaints. Employee protection consistently came second to preserving bookings. This dynamic was especially severe during the COVID-19 pandemic. Staff were instructed to enforce safety policies, only to be undermined when guests escalated or engaged in malicious compliance. For example, an adult guest was allowed entry wearing a lace face mask because it technically qualified as a “mask,” despite clearly undermining the intent of the policy. These situations left employees exposed and unsupported. Decision-making from upper management often felt completely disconnected from frontline reality. One example was requiring staff to run live, audience-participation presentations in the loudest gallery in the entire museum—an environment fundamentally incompatible with that kind of programming. Over time, engaging and skilled responsibilities were stripped away. Tasks like operating the movie theater projector were reassigned to other departments, while frontline staff increasingly absorbed custodial duties despite the presence of a dedicated custodial team. The role steadily shifted downward in both status and satisfaction. Communication from leadership reinforced this disconnect. Mandatory all-staff budget meetings were scheduled very early in the morning and presented in highly technical terms that were largely inaccessible to non-office staff. While framed as transparency, these meetings did little to help frontline employees understand decisions directly affecting pay, workload, and working conditions. The workplace culture that existed around 2017 eroded dramatically after the 2020 reopening. Venting about disrespectful guest behavior was increasingly treated as hostility rather than burnout, and long-tenured employees were scrutinized rather than supported.

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