Pros
You get to invest some time into learning AI on the job.. you're basically being forced into AI usage and told to triple your output as the key metric.
Cons
I’m really concerned about the direction Rex has taken over the last six months. It used to feel like a genuinely good place to work, but the culture has noticeably shifted, and not for the better. A big part of that seems to be coming from the way decisions are being made at the top. There’s a growing reliance on AI-generated output, particularly from the CPTO, without enough scrutiny, context, or fact-checking before those outputs are turned into direction for the business. That creates confusion, poor decisions, and a real sense that judgement is being outsourced rather than owned. Between the CEO and CPTO, it feels like the culture that made Rex strong is being stripped away. The company no longer feels like the place it once was, and I think that needs to be said plainly. I also think this is starting to show in the engineering team. A number of engineers, myself included, are beginning to look around for other opportunities. That is not because people stopped caring about Rex, it is because it increasingly feels like the executive team has stopped caring enough about the people who have built and supported the business. There seems to be far more focus on the dollar figure than on the health of the team, the quality of the platform, or the long-term culture of the company. The contractor situation is a good example of this. Contractors have been brought in to help develop AI features, but there are real concerns from engineers about the quality of the work being produced. From what we are seeing, a lot of the output appears to be driven by prompting tools like Claude rather than strong engineering fundamentals, product understanding, or platform knowledge. The concerning part is that engineers are raising these quality issues, but it does not feel like those concerns are being properly heard or acted on. Instead, the work is being pushed forward because it appears commercially attractive or aligns with the current AI agenda. I understand that commercial outcomes matter. Businesses should absolutely care about cost, speed, and opportunity. But there has to be a balance. Right now, it feels like that balance has swung too far. We are prioritising speed and perceived savings over engineering quality, platform stability, and the judgement of the people who understand the system best. That concern is made worse when developers are being criticised by the CPTO based on what Claude has told him, rather than through genuine engagement with the work, the technical context, or the engineers involved. The issue is not just the use of AI. It is that AI-generated feedback is being treated as authoritative, then passed on to developers without enough understanding, scrutiny, or care. That is deeply frustrating for engineers who are trying to do thoughtful, high-quality work and are instead being challenged based on second-hand AI output. What makes this even more disappointing is that the CPO used to come across as someone who genuinely cared about the people at Rex. That feels much harder to see now. At a time when morale is clearly being damaged, and engineers are raising real concerns, it feels like those concerns are being ignored or softened in service of the executive position. Instead of people leadership acting as a genuine voice for the team, it feels like it has become another layer protecting executive decisions from the impact they are having on people.