New Work SE

Unfortunately, XING is extremely unclear about its billing. After years of standard membership, a premium annual fee is suddenly charged.

It’s worth mentioning that the coworking space has closed and is no longer there 🤞

Xing has developed a reputation for subpar customer support and inconsistent billing practices that many users find questionable

Kununu, Xing, and New Work ignore my multiple responses to emails, and I have also been blocked on Instagram. It is clear that many other users are experiencing the same situation as me, yet nothing is being done about it. Kununu is basically on the side of employers, and in my opinion, the entire "Top Company" seal is based on fake reviews. Apparently, data protection is not being given sufficient consideration. In my opinion, Kununu is not trustworthy. Positive comments with five stars remain (cool), while my honest reviews—even if they are factual and only critical ("uncool")—are removed. I consider this approach to be unfair and non-transparent. I cannot accept that what I consider to be a manipulative review portal is harming other people financially, physically, or in their careers. The evidence is there.

XING ignores all GDPR deletion requests and ignores unsubscribe requests on newsletters. Very bad practice for a German company.

Ignorance also meets legal incompetence. If you as an employer try to have a review removed, you are asked to provide evidence that you logically cannot provide, as you do not know who has left an "anonymous" review. They hide behind incompetent statements and consistently ignore applicable law. This also reflects the fact that lawsuits are constantly being lost and employers are being helped to do right. See OLG Hamburg (Az. 7 W 11/24) or interim injunction (Az.: 324 O 305/24) OLG Hamburg. It does not help the CEO that she continues to try to make money at the expense of others just because the train has left the station. Even if you submit the relevant policy and provide evidence (which is generally possible), you continue to hide behind your own incompetence. Instead of confronting the assessor. Which should also be difficult, because there is no verification. You can rate with any address, it doesn't even have to exist. Here too, the operator has no legal knowledge. At the very least, an email should be sent out to confirm that it is correct. As the owner of the company, it would therefore be possible to use any internal email address to create a rating. So much for the "credibility" of the reviews. We will now call in a lawyer to put a stop to such companies. As the previous reviewers have already mentioned, the platform is only used to generate money at the expense of the companies. If you pay, you are portrayed positively, if not then you are out of luck. The required anonymized evidence (which must be provided according to the BGH) is of course not provided. Here you are enriching yourself with something that should not actually exist. Reviews are only allowed after verification with appropriate evidence (if there is an objection) There is no reference to the use of the company name. Which I find very special, especially with registered trademarks. We will therefore first send the operator a cease-and-desist letter and then, of course, issue a warning due to the unlawful use of the brand name. But this company speaks for itself. And so do the reviews. Continue to have fun. Nobody takes you seriously. It's hard to believe that this company also owns XING. So you know why everyone is switching to the nice new provider with L.

I can only agree with the previous critical speakers. Absolutely subterranean and non-transparent behavior towards users AND customers.