Lawrence Berkeley Lab reviews

I have been at the lab for about a decade and have worked for four different supervisors (when I moved groups when my research focus changed, through no fault of my own) and I am frustrated by the lack of advancement opportunities and raise potential. The reviews roll around once a year and there's a perverse incentive to rate you as average so they can minimize the raises (which comes out of their own project funds), even if your work had been stellar and you got along great with the supervisor. Twice I was rated outstanding (5/5 scale) which was more in the beginning of my career, when my pay was low relative to others in my position. Then the longer I worked, the less glowing my reviews became, and I don't feel like it's a fair characterization but rather a way to keep my salary low. Another way to look at it is, if I'm outstanding or exceeding expectations five years in a row, by year six this performance becomes expected so naturally I will merely be "meeting expectations". Anyway, I am ranting.

Bias and unequal treatment of marginalized employees (including women, disabled employees, and people of color) are systemic and persistent. Reports of discrimination or retaliation are routinely dismissed or deflected by HR and management. Accountability for abusive or unethical conduct is virtually nonexistent. Employees who raise concerns or seek support often face subtle retaliation or increased scrutiny. Supervision practices include manipulative behavior, double standards, and deliberately withholding resources or information needed for success. Opportunities for growth, recognition, and fair treatment are not distributed equitably.