Good - Software Engineer Gatehouse Bank Employee Review

Work from home and benefits

I agree with the previous comments. Management capability felt inconsistent, with some roles appearing to be filled based on connections to Aldermore rather than relevant experience. This led to a lack of confidence in leadership and decision-making. Advisor feedback, despite coming from those dealing directly with customers, was often dismissed or met with resistance. The “open door” policy did not feel genuine in practice, as concerns were frequently met with pushback rather than action. The feedback response felt like it was turned to make it sound it wasn't the issue. There were also concerns around fairness and accountability, particularly where underperformance among certain staff did not appear to be addressed, potentially due to personal relationships. Overall, it felt like management lacked both the necessary expertise and a clear understanding of the product’s value and importance. While the management team was predominantly non-Muslim, the issue was not background, but rather a perceived lack of appreciation for the product’s purpose. They didn't truly understand the customer base, the faith and values. As a result, it did not feel like a supportive or well-managed environment to work in.

Remote working and modern office facilities

**My previous review was removed after being approved by GD, I can only assume the review was challenged by the employer despite being factual and in line with protocols** The CEO is arrogant and self serving and strategically employs members less experienced and less qualified, overpaying them in exchange for their loyalty to his practices (examples Chief People Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Chief Customer Officer) . Bias and preference awarded to ex-aldermore CEO hires, examples include an ex-aldermore direct report, operating a full-time private business whilst employed as a full time employee of the bank. Other examples are the Marketing and Comms Team and HR teams excessive headcount, whilst other areas operate with limited staff. Racism, nepotism and biased practices prevelent within the organisation and well documented here, yet no action taken. The Chief People Officer responds to every negative review implying she is unaware of these issues, which are known bank wide, documenting her complicity, providing lipservice in an attempt to appease her leader at the expense of ensuring fair practices within the organisation.