Southern California Edison reviews

Senior Management that lacks integrity, truthfulness, and full of greed. Used to be led by a great group of leadership until 2010ish, then it all went to hell. Constant staff cut (not the senior management), outsourcing (which never goes well), and influx of "family and friends" appointment from now-bankrupted and sold-off EMG instead of actual competent and loyal employees to SCE. Very deep and widespread resentment and disengagement by employees, now spreading to mid-management as well.

Rapid change sufficient to reduce costs quickly enough to avoid significant market share loss is not likely. Solar is advancing far too quickly and projected to provide much lower costs. When I was there even at SCE, Management was publicly lamenting about the inevitability of this. I understand that rates (cost/kWHr) are still increasing and no significant kWHr savings have been announced. It is a tough situation and something remarkable needs to happen soon. Solar technology is currently accelerating in its development increasing the challenge for SCE to reduce costs further than expected. A significant portion of SCE technical expertise had to retire in 2014 to avoid substantial, financial impacts to their legacy retirement plans. This needed expertise is virtually impossible to replace so quickly without restructuring services. This will be a monumental challenge. I have even been approached regarding how this gap might get filled. The Universities are simply not graduating enough engineers and those coming on the market are getting snatched by more dynamic companies not threaten my market share loss challenges. It is understandably difficult to attract new and needed talent given the projected near future (< 5 years) cost driven market. Once SCE restructures itself, the situation may change. But again, this will be a significant challenge. SCE is presently too siloed and this needs to change. Managers must be held accountable to demonstrate how they have effectively used OpX approaches to achieve verifiable cost savings and eliminate silo-related inefficiencies. There seems to be too many management levels and inconsistencies in practice. A more consolidated and dynamic management structure is needed and levels of management reduced. More direct goals need to be established, published directly from the CEO. He should also demand his program goals' progress be reported and demonstrated throughout the year, holding all management levels accountable.