Taylor and Francis Sucks Customer Reviews and Feedback

From Everything.Sucks

Taylor & Francis Group is an international company originating in England that publishes books and academic journals. It is a division of Informa plc, a United Kingdom-based publisher and conference company. The company was founded in 1852 when William Francis joined Richard Taylor in his publishing business. Taylor had founded his company in 1798. Their subjects covered agriculture, chemistry, education, engineering, geography, law, mathematics, medicine, and social sciences.

Taylor and Francis don't value their employees, the updates to improve are poorly designed and there is no place to grow on the company unless having a connection, says ex-Editorial Assistant on indeed.com

"Where to begin? Taylor and Francis is a textbook example of one hand not talking to the other hand. Company decisions about procedures and systems updates are made and we are not made aware of them. Often these so called updates and changes are supposed to improve productivity but are poorly designed and slapped together so shoddily it is laughable. What is worse, we are expected to figure out ways on making these improvements work. Employees are not valued and respected and there is not any actual way to be promoted unless you happen to know the right person."


Tell the world why Taylor and Francis sucks!

I certify that this review is based on my own experiece and is my opinion of this person or business. I have not been offered any incentive or payment to write this review.


Enter Code

Former Employee - Anonymous Employee says

"Where do I start? You'll be lucky if [the majority of] management bothers to turn up to the office, and even when they do they don't tend to do any work, but instead pass it on to their overworked team members. Departments are run with a 'bull in a China shop' attitude, and they love wasting your time creating projects, only for them to cancel it a few months after. Time + money = wasted. Very difficult to progress into a higher role no matter how much they promote it in their job interviews. Favouritism is huge in the office environment, although I've only had experience working in the journals' department."

Former Employee - Editorial Assistant says

"In the four years that I worked here I did not attend one conference, training session or meet an author. I was considered bottom of the ladder and was treated accordingly. Working here hindered my career in many ways, it wrecked my confidence and I didn't gain any new skills to add to my CV. We were treated like naughty children and every other line from editors or management was 'if you don't do this, you'll never be an editor'. It bordered on bullying and was just another way to separate the editorial assistants and ensure that your work was never enough. Particularly as there are rarely editor jobs and when one is advertised it always managed to go to a friend of another editor. We all talked openly about leaving."

Former Employee - Marketing Specialist says

"The manager level people make your life hell, selfish people and fake people"

Former Employee - Editorial says

"Where to even start? Again, cannot stress enough how absolutely inept everyone in upper management is. They are very into trying to psychologically manipulate and gaslight employees. IDK if this is a British thing or just a corporate evil thing? They're also VERY into passing the buck - nothing is ever upper management's fault, but is instead a problem that their subordinates must fix on their own. All the systems break constantly, all the numbers and budgets are made up out of thin air, and the British love telling people to "sense check" budgets worth hundreds of millions of dollars - essentially you are told to just guess if these huge, involved budgets look correct. It's absolutely insane. Unless you are beginning at an entry-level position, you will get absolutely no training and must fend for yourself or ask around and hope someone somewhere knows the answer to your very simple question and will email you back within the month. Most importantly, the CEO is dangerous. As someone else mentioned, on her first attempt to "relate" to us common folk, she sent an introductory email detailing how she has to move 2 prized show horses across the ocean. I hope for Executive Pumpkin & Blind Date's sake that they didn't make it to bleak, horrible England. She has since made it her personal vendetta to attack libraries. It is literally so ridiculously cartoony there that they consider LIBRARIES to be their biggest enemies, when actually, libraries are literally this dying company's biggest customers. She's also given numerous talks with extremely alt-righty language and themes. She's absolutely ludicrous to have as the head of an academic publisher, and she should no longer be given a platform to spread her conservative, bizarre views that are completely disconnected from reality. She told the Women in Publishing group (hundreds of young women looking to her for inspiration) that they cannot ever be victims because they are not Holocaust victims or they have not been found murdered in the woods - the only two ways people can be victims in her eyes. Meanwhile, this company has employed, defended, and worked with countless sexual harassers. Also, she's obsessed with putting pictures of brown children into all of her presentations so that she looks woke and like she cares about diversity. She once showed us a stock image of a child model and said she looks at it every day for inspiration? This dumpster fire has 5 years left - tops. They're already a huge joke in the academic community and researchers are very hesitant to publish with them. They're firing people & outsourcing left & right. Every other publication is a year late to publish or has lost half the people working on it in the past year. It's a real shame because they've somehow convinced a few reputable societies to move their publications with the company, and then as soon as they get that revenue, they leave them high & dry to die alone with no marketing assistance. This company is literally only concerned with profit and could not care less about properly and ethically disseminating information. It's because of greedy companies like this that important knowledge and research is unobtainable. To be clear, don't work here."

Former Employee - Editorial Assistant says

"x Major restructure in journals and books editorial led to staff redundancies and jobs going to India office. Very poor, unprofessional execution of this whole transition with limited support for staff affected. x Remote international working means senior staff not present or involved in staff wellbeing x Stressful, toxic working environment and anxious editors working overtime is the norm to meet unrealistic company targets x Development and mentoring for editorial assistants depends on line manager. Opportunities not always fairly distributed depending on workload x Corporate culture - quantity over quality approach to work x Admin workload means limited time for career progression x Books editorial staff not valued for input"

Former Employee - Editorial Assistant says

"Routledge may once have been a prestige brand but in the current day the business model is simple: publish as many books as possible as quickly as possible. To say that the books are peer reviewed is a stretch--they'll just keep asking new reviewers until they get a few that are postive. Editorial Assistants are overworked and berated for things out of their control, not to mention the fact that the EA role is also that of Managing Editorial, Contracts, Marketing, Publicity, Royalties...the list goes on. I had weekly (at least) panic attacks over the number of manuscripts I had to work on the attitudes of other employees. If you ask for more support--good luck! You might get a website with some training materials that are written so poorly as to be nonsense. Upper Level Management is detached from reality and gaslights employees. They're dramatically downsizing in NY and now outsourcing assistant jobs to India. They act like they can't pay you a legitimate salary but then an executive will mention shipping their show horses intercontinentally an in email (literally). Assistant pay is so low that a director once admitted that 'it wasn't right to expect someone to live on it.' And yet... Restructures of entire departments happen with no warning and little explanation. Long time employees are let go with no announcement. New systems are rolled out with no instructions. The entire company is a mess."

Former Employee - Editorial Assistant says

"Routledge was my Life's Trap. YOU'LL LEARN HOW TO BE AN EDITOR, they said. THE BOOKS ARE GOOD, they said. YOU'LL HAVE A PROFESSIONAL JOB, they said. THE HOURS ARE FLEXIBLE, they said. YOU WONT WANT TO DRINK TO FORGET, they said. Well 'THEY' lied. If I got into the specifics here your ears would bleed. Frankly, the books are hot, steaming piles of garbage and everyone knows it. Editorial Assistants are berated publicly and privately daily, and pitted against each other to pump out more transmittals. To put it in perspective - most editorial assistants deal with 15-20 books a year. We had about 100 each and did the job of the editor/accountant/marketing manager/contracts specialist on top of it. It was so bad that I had to quit with no prospects. I will never forget the day I quit - my boss was reading my a list of my mistakes and one of the editors was on Skype. I had to stop her while she read and quit because I could not take it anymore and they were talking about how they 'weren't surprised' and my editor was grinning like a GD Cheshire Cat, it was absurd. My Editor told me I would never improve and never get better at things all the time. She also told me I would 'never be an editor.' Well fine, because I've since tripled my salary. And I thought I had it bad, but I overheard even worse. One editorial assistant was on her phone begging forgiveness from her boss nearly hyperventilating. And Christmas parties were a dark affair. People just got wasted to forget. I heard they moved offices, but you could also find Routledge victims at the Overlook on 3rd Ave. after work - clutching their two-for-one drinks like they were clutching water in a scorched apocalyptic hellscape."

Former Employee - Managing Editor says

"This office is stuck in 1995. There was zero HR until a couple years ago. The UK-US relationship is a joke. We're overtaxed and underpaid serfs while they "manage" from oversees. Poor management and zero vision. Love to throw around words like "innovation" that don't actually amount to any direct action. Editorial travel has been cut and unfairly allotted between teams. Some teams split titles by subject, others by seniority. Guess who gets zero upwards mobility in the teams run by seniority? Don't even think about being able to switch teams. You're trapped until you leave. Former office executive was quintessential "finance bro" with feet on the desk and gross comments abound. He was pushed out, but that culture went on far too long (like, several decades). The whole place feels antiquated and like it's slowly sinking. Every human for themselves. Little upward mobility. Everyone is unhappy."

Current Employee - Anonymous Employee says

"What it does to your mental health."

Former Employee - Editorial Assistant says

"Crushingly soulless experience - so much corporate language that it loses all meaning, focus on profit rather than creativity, too high workload and no help. Year on year the workload increased until all of us were working hours of unpaid overtime everyday just to keep the wheels spinning. No opportunity for advancement, no ring-fenced time given to personal development. An endless cycle of answering endless emails, being verbally abusef by authors, having to justify pointless cost-cutting initiatives to authors, being treated as robots by managers and the company as a whole. A nasty, soul-sucking, exhausting experience in which you felt required to give up both your integrity and your sleep."

Editorial Assistant (Current Employee) says

"Where to begin? Taylor and Francis is a textbook example of one hand not talking to the other hand. Company decisions about procedures and systems updates are made and we are not made aware of them. Often these so called updates and changes are supposed to improve productivity but are poorly designed and slapped together so shoddily it is laughable. What is worse, we are expected to figure out ways on making these improvements work. Employees are not valued and respected and there is not any actual way to be promoted unless you happen to know the right person."

Project Editor (Former Employee) says

"There is no compelling reason to work for Taylor & Francis. They pay is minimal, the changes for advancement slim to none, and the company culture is terrible. Cons: Everything (literlaly)"

Editor (Current Employee) says

"Horrible place to work. Cons: Everything from pay to environment and management style"

Human Resources Manager (Former Employee) says

"As a member of management, I was shocked to see the level of unprofessional behavior from other leaders, specifically when attending trainings or working sessions. Also, there was an unwillingness to identify or explore process improvements due to laziness and feeling that broken processes keep their jobs secure. Often, corporate leadership and Philadelphia leadership would have major conflict in their directives and objectives and leave employees standing in the middle of the conflict, forced to choose one side or the other. Most of the employees are great, but the environment is subdued and interaction is not encouraged. You could hear a pin drop. No collaboration, discussions, etc. even in the lunch area. Very awkward culture that is excused away as “just how our industry is.” Cons: Slow paced, so plenty of time to phone interview for my next job."

Rights Assistant (Former Employee) says

"I worked for Routledge for a year at their Milton Park HQ. It was a profoundly depressing experience. I worked for a chaotic failing department with horribly bad management (the head of the department was the sweetest person but they depended too much on the Publisher who should have never been given a management position). Cons: Bad management, depressing atmosphere, impossible to grow, exclusionary"

Shipping Lead Specialist (Current Employee) says

"WMS system knowledge"

Production Editor, Journals Division (Current Employee) says

"The people in the Philadelphia office are great to work with, but after recent changes in management and a push to align practices with the UK headquarters, the work environment has become a disorganized mess. This used to be a good place to work with people's workloads kept balanced, but the transition has been rough and with the number of people leaving, balanced workloads have become impossible. Cons: Low pay, poor management"

N/A (Current Employee) says

"I love the position I’ve held and have enjoyed the fast paced, ever changing needs of what I do. The balance of work was often mismanaged and when busy, work was shifted to the faster/harder workers, in order to make up for those that underperformed. Some people in upper level roles felt that they didn’t have to pitch in and contribute. While others rolled up their sleeves and worked along side their direct reports. Work ethics varied and perceptions were very different. Not everyone had the same “vision”."

Returns Processor (Former Employee) says

"The only thing that made me last 5 years was the pay and the amazing people I worked with daily. We created a wonderful work family. I worked in the office in Kentucky."

Senior Editorial Assistant (Current Employee) says

"This is a great place to work if you love books and want to learn about publishing. If you work in editorial, expect to have your hands in many diff. departments. Assistants do most of the work for very little pay and recognition throughout the company and low compensation but you do build relationships with authors."

Senior Exhibits Manager (Former Employee) says

"Good place to work, particularly for entry level applicants. Good opportunity for advancement. Very nice people. Relaxed, friendly atmosphere. Summer hours. Cons: Numerous reorganizations left staff a bit uneasy"

Production Editor (Former Employee) says

"Much of the editing work has been outsourced but the people you work with are fantastic. There is little room for advancement but management is friendly and helpful. The pay is awful."

Production Editor (Former Employee) says

"T&F is a good company, co-workers are great, and so are the benefits and vacation time that is above the average. In my experience at the local office, your satisfaction is very much dependent on your supervisors. Some are great, others are not. Cons: at times, unreasonable workload expectations"

Jonathan Stone Coppe says

"I don't entirely understand why Routledge has the policies it has, but I had quite a bad experience. I am a Master's student, and I was looking for a book that Routledge publishes. No need to get into the details, but I thought it would be necessary to purchase a copy from Routledge, so I ordered one. (It was expensive, too!) Come just a few hours later, I learn I can get online access to the material. I email Routledge the very day I placed my order so I can cancel it before it ships. I try to call their customer service hotline. No one picks up. After I send the email it is radio silence for days. Finally, someone emails me back to tell me (1) they cannot cancel my order because it has already shipped, (2) shipped orders cannot be returned. And indeed, I question the truth of (1), since I did not receive a shipping confirmation email until many hours after I received my customer service email. Frankly, why even operate a customer service department, if this is how you are going to treat customers? I am trying to say something constructive but honestly I feel I'm being swindled out of my money. I gave this organization ample time to deal with the situation. I can only say this: If you need to order a Routledge book, first, try not to, and second, use Amazon."