Glassdoor deleted my honest workplace review after I tried to update it — and sent me this condescending email
I worked at a Chinese AI CRO in the US. When I first wrote my Glassdoor review, I downplayed a lot of issues because I was new to the industry and scared of retaliation. Classic imposter syndrome + not knowing my rights.
Fast forward 6 months — I’m at a large company now, got proper training on US employee rights, and realized a lot of what happened to me was genuinely not okay. NLRA violations, backdated stock option vesting, months-long reimbursement delays. I wanted to update my review to warn others.
My update got rejected. When I asked why, I got this:
Thank you for contacting Glassdoor.
As stated in our Community Guidelines , we allow each individual to submit only one review, per employer, per year, per review type (e.g. company review, interview review, salary review, benefits review, etc.). We want to host only authentic content, and have little tolerance for individuals who may be seeking to manipulate the conversation and unfairly use our platform in an effort to make their own voice more heavily weighted.
We have removed your review due to a violation of this guideline. However, in recognition that this may have been an inadvertent or one-time lapse on your part, we will provide you with the opportunity to submit new content for possible publication on our site again after six months.
While we understand this can be frustrating, we do not discuss our methods for detecting abuse or gaming. Nor do we provide any additional information about reviews that have been submitted or rejected.
If you have any questions regarding this email, please see the additional information available in our Fraudulent Reviews article that may help in understanding our stance in regard to the violation of this guideline on our site. I would also encourage you to check out our quick video:
The part that got me: “we have little tolerance for individuals who may be seeking to manipulate the conversation.” I tried to update a review I already wrote, disclosing I was the same author. That’s manipulation?
And the kicker — my original 6-month-old review is now gone too. That one was never flagged while it was live.
Here’s exactly what I wrote. Tell me what’s wrong with it:
Pros
• Company with great technologies. If you are proactive, you can pick them up and build your resume.
• Smart and friendly coworkers.
• If you are a technology enabler and would like to work with implementing new technology into the industry, you will be satisfied.
• Great job for fresh graduates. You can learn and grow in the early years.
• Complimentary medical and dental insurance with great coverage.
Cons
• Headquartered in China, the company’s compensation benchmarks and HR decisions may not fully align with US market standards. Key decisions are made by HR in China and conducted in Chinese, making performance rating procedures and reward workflows difficult to understand for non-Chinese speaking US employees.
• Performance rating and promotion systems lack transparency, presumably due to cultural differences between US and Chinese HQ. Notably, HR decisions carry more weight than those of direct line managers, which is quite different from typical US workplace structures.
• Short average tenure of US employees reflects significant cultural and communication gaps between US teams and Chinese HQ. A telling example: business travel reimbursements, approved in advance, experienced months-long delays and required repeated disputes to resolve.
• Equity compensation lacks transparency and timely execution. Stock option agreements were significantly delayed after the employment start date, with vesting terms backdated to the contract signing date rather than the actual start date — considerably reducing eligible vesting amounts. Employees were also discouraged from discussing equity with colleagues, which conflicts with rights protected under the U.S. National Labor Relations Act. If negotiating RSUs, ensure all terms are clearly documented before joining.
• Bonus structure is opaque. While a default percentage of base salary is stated, company and department multipliers combined with individual performance ratings can significantly reduce the actual payout. Negotiate for a higher base salary rather than relying on bonus expectations.
• While the technical caliber of employees is genuinely high, experience gained at Chinese AI CROs tends to be discounted in the US biopharma job market. This likely reflects broader Western preconceptions rather than actual work quality, but is a critical consideration for long-term career planning in the US.
Is Glassdoor actually useful anymore, or does it just protect companies that pay them?