My experience working at Ledson was overwhelmingly negative due to poor leadership, a toxic work environment, and misleading employment practices. From the very beginning, there was no formal orientation or structured training—new employees were essentially thrown into their roles without proper guidance or introduction. While my co-workers and middle managers were kind, supportive, and genuinely tried to help, they lacked the resources and authority to create meaningful change, as they themselves were never properly trained.
Upper management was a major source of dysfunction. Two senior managers, in particular, were entirely unfit for leadership roles. One of them—while knowledgeable and hardworking—consistently created a hostile environment by regularly criticizing the team without offering constructive feedback or practical tools for improvement. While many of us sympathized with the pressure this manager faced from ownership, much of the tension could have been avoided if they had invested even a modest amount of time in properly training their middle managers and staff. Their presence made the workplace feel tense and unpredictable, and nearly every employee could likely recall multiple instances where this manager lost their temper and behaved in ways that many found genuinely alarming.
Another senior manager was, without a doubt, the rudest individual I’ve encountered in a professional setting and demonstrated little to no work ethic. This person often arrived late, micromanaged without offering any meaningful support, and spent the end of the day drinking wine while speaking negatively about the staff. I’d also like to note that the previous person in this role was outstanding, yet ownership was openly dissatisfied with them despite overwhelming approval by staff and customers. This contrast makes me question the owners’ priorities and criteria when it comes to choosing and evaluating their senior management.
The only option for support was through peers or middle managers, who had no power to do anything, as raising concerns with ownership often resulted in retaliation. Complaints were not kept anonymous, and any attempt to provide feedback was met with defensiveness or disregard.
Another significant issue was the misleading way compensation and benefits were presented. The advertised pay did not reflect actual earnings. Base pay was minimal, and while management emphasized the potential to earn more through commissions and tips, that potential rarely materialized. In my role, an annual bonus was promised; however, when I followed up, I received conflicting information from different owners, and ultimately, I never received it. I know of others in various roles who had the same experience, despite their hard work and dedication.
In full transparency, I earned approximately $50,000 per year—including base pay, tips, and commissions—despite the role being advertised as offering $65,000 or more. When concerns were raised, the response was often to shift blame onto employees, suggesting they simply weren’t working hard enough to earn higher tips or close more sales. In reality, the winery wasn't consistently busy, and employees were not given the tools or environment needed to succeed.
The day-to-day work was also frustrating. Weekdays were extremely slow, leaving employees with little to do beyond repetitive busy work, under constant pressure not to appear idle. This type of work felt unfulfilling and disconnected from the customer-focused nature of the role. On weekends, the pace flipped entirely—especially during busy season. The winery was chronically understaffed due to high turnover, and employees were stretched thin, pulled in multiple directions with little support. Although weekends brought more opportunities for commissions and tips, the environment was so chaotic that it was nearly impossible to give guests the attention required to drive meaningful sales. Since the owners and senior mangers were not present on weekends (besides the lazy one who worked Saturday but would often be MIA), they lacked firsthand understanding of what the team faced and were unwilling to listen to suggestions that could have improved operations.
There is also a troubling lack of attention to safety and compliance across multiple areas. Emergency preparedness is virtually nonexistent—employees receive no training on how to respond to situations like fires or active threats, and there is no formal sexual harassment training or clearly communicated policies in place. During an earthquake alert, the owner chaotically evacuated the whole building and mentioned that the numerous brick chimney columns on the property could easily kill someone in a major quake—something I was unaware of despite working there for over a year. This kind of critical safety information should be shared during onboarding so that all staff know how to keep themselves and customers safe.
In addition PPE is not provided despite the presence of real hazards. For example, runners were expected to handle rattlesnake sightings (which were common) by killing them with hedge trimmers. First aid supplies are difficult to access and often expired, even though injuries are not uncommon. Alarmingly, many injuries go unreported due to fear of retaliation or harsh treatment from upper management and ownership. These are serious issues that reflect a lack of basic duty of care and need to be urgently addressed.
In the end, this role left me feeling undervalued, unsupported, and burned out. While I was fortunate to work alongside some truly wonderful colleagues, the lack of leadership, transparency, and respect from upper management and owners ultimately made this an unhealthy and unsustainable workplace. I hope future changes are made to improve the work environment for those who remain, but based on my experience, I would not recommend this as a place of employment to any one in any role.