📖 Part of the Capgemini Investigation Series — 10 articles examining Capgemini Australia's operations, employee treatment, and business practices.
The Dossier · Deep Dive · The Exodus · Survivor Stories · Financial Analysis · vs Competition · The Vulture · Invisible Workforce · AI Gamble · Series Home
Capgemini Survivor Stories
⚠️ IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER — READ BEFORE PROCEEDING ⚠️
The following stories are COMPOSITE NARRATIVES BASED ON DOCUMENTED PATTERNS. They are fictionalized accounts constructed from patterns observed across publicly available employee reviews on Glassdoor (491 Australian reviews), Indeed, SEEK, TheLayoff.com, and public reporting from B&T, Mumbrella, Campaign Brief, BankingDay, and ITNews.
These are NOT accounts of specific, identifiable individuals. Names, roles, companies, and identifying details have been changed or invented. No single person's experience is represented.
The patterns they illustrate are real. Every scenario described here — acquisition integration trauma, offshore job transfers, bench pressure, client delivery gaps — is documented in multiple independent sources. The stories are composites; the underlying patterns are factual.
If you have a story to share, contact The MSP Playbook confidentially.
Story 1: The Empired Acquisition Survivor
"I went from being a senior consultant at a company I loved to a number on a spreadsheet at a company that didn't know my name."
I joined Empired in 2019. It was a great place to work — flat structure, genuinely collaborative, and people who cared about doing good work. We were Microsoft specialists based in Perth, and we had real relationships with our clients in mining, government, and financial services. When the Capgemini acquisition was announced in July 2021 for A$233 million, we were cautiously optimistic. Our MD Russell Baskerville said it would "provide outstanding career opportunities for our people." We thought it would mean more resources, bigger projects, access to Capgemini's global capabilities.
For the first year, things were okay. Capgemini kept the Empired branding and let our leadership team run things. But by mid-2022, the integration started in earnest. New reporting lines appeared overnight — suddenly we had layers of management between us and decisions, all reporting back to Sydney and then Paris. Our project managers were replaced by Capgemini people who didn't understand our clients or the WA market.
The first round of redundancies hit in early 2023 — not massive, but enough to send a message. The people who left were mostly the ones who'd been vocal about the integration challenges. By July 2024, the Empired brand was officially retired. That hurt more than I expected. It felt like the thing we'd built — the trust, the reputation, the culture — was being erased.
Then came another round of cuts. I watched colleagues who'd been there 10+ years get three weeks' notice. The severance was minimal — one former manager told me it was "the lowest in the IT outsourcing industry," and based on what I saw, I believe it.
I stayed until mid-2025. By then, my role had changed completely. I was doing less client-facing work and more internal Capgemini process compliance — filling in resource forecasting tools, attending global town halls at midnight because of time zones. The projects I'd been promised during the acquisition never materialised. I was on the bench twice — once for six weeks — despite being told there was "plenty of work."
When I finally left, I took a 15% pay cut to go to a smaller Perth consultancy, and it was the best decision I ever made. I'm working fewer hours, earning more in total (because Capgemini's super was below industry standard), and actually feel valued.
The thing that still gets me is the language. Capgemini talks about "leveraging the new scale and breadth of expertise." But what that actually meant was absorbing our clients, discarding our brand, and making our best people redundant when they didn't fit the new structure.
Story 2: The BOQ Offshoring Victim
"They didn't fire me. They just made it impossible to stay."
I was a team leader in BOQ's contact centre in Brisbane. The work was steady, the team was good, and I'd been there for four years. Then in September 2025, BOQ announced a "strategic partnership" with Capgemini for "agentic AI, IT and business processing services."
What that actually meant was revealed by the Financial Services Union: BOQ was cutting 200 Australian jobs, including 165 contact centre roles — more than half the Australian workforce in that division. The work was being offshored to a Capgemini-run centre in India.
I wasn't directly made redundant — my role was "restructured." But 15 of my 22 team members were cut. The ones who remained were expected to train their offshore replacements. I watched people who'd been with the bank for eight years spend their final weeks writing handover documents for consultants they'd never meet, in a time zone they'd never work in.
I was offered a "transition role" for three months — basically staying on to manage the offshoring process. I took it because I had a mortgage. During those three months, I saw the quality of service collapse. Customers were waiting hours instead of minutes. The offshore team didn't understand Australian banking regulations. Complaints skyrocketed.
The FSU's national secretary said it publicly: "You can't outsource customer service and still claim you care about customers or staff." She was right.
I left in December 2025. BOQ's contact centre, which had been a genuine Australian operation, was now a shadow of what it was. And Capgemini collected its management fees the whole time.
Story 3: The RXP/The Works Acquisition Casualty
"We went from an award-winning creative agency to redundant in three years."
I joined The Works in 2019 as a senior designer. We were a tight-knit creative agency in Sydney — 40-odd people doing genuinely good work for brands like Kia, Woolworths, and the AFL. We'd won Effies, we'd won One Show pencils, and we had a culture that was creative without being toxic.
Then Capgemini acquired RXP Services in November 2020 for A$86.8 million, and The Works came along as part of the package. At first, it was fine. We kept our name, our clients, our culture. Capgemini mostly left us alone.
By 2023, things started changing. We were being asked to "align" with Capgemini's global brand guidelines. Our pitches started including Capgemini slides about "end-to-end digital transformation" that had nothing to do with creative advertising. The clients we'd built relationships with — the ones who came to us for creativity — were being funneled toward Capgemini's broader consulting services.
In May 2024, the first round of redundancies hit. I survived that one. Then in August, Capgemini announced The Works was being "integrated" into Capgemini AUNZ. Our founding partners Douglas Nicol and Damian Pincus — who'd built the agency over 18 and 21 years respectively — both departed. Managing director Julie Dormand left too.
At least half the agency was made redundant. I was one of them. My redundancy package was the statutory minimum. No goodwill payment, no extended notice, no help finding a new role. Just an email, a Zoom call with HR, and a letter.
By April 2025, the remaining Works staff were folded into Capgemini's frog design division. The Works brand — which had taken 20 years to build — was gone.
I now work at a boutique agency in Surry Hills. We're 12 people. We do better work, we treat each other like humans, and nobody talks about "leveraging synergies" or "aligning with global brand architecture."
The Works wasn't "integrated." It was acquired for its client list, stripped of its talent, and discarded. That's not integration. That's asset stripping.
Story 4: The Melbourne Manager Who Couldn't Fix the Culture
"I tried to advocate for my team and got sidelined for it."
I joined Capgemini as a delivery manager in Melbourne in 2022, lured by the promise of leading a growing practice. The first six months were fine. I had a good team, decent clients, and enough autonomy to do things properly.
Then the financial pressure started. My team was asked to increase utilisation targets from 78% to 85%. That sounds reasonable until you understand what it means: no time for training, no time for bench activities, no time for the internal work that keeps a practice healthy. Every hour had to be billable.
I pushed back. I told my director that 85% utilisation on a team that was already stretched would mean quality would slip. He agreed with me — privately — but said the targets were coming from Paris and there was nothing he could do.
I started losing people. A senior architect left for Deloitte. Two mid-level consultants followed. Each time, I requested backfills. Each time, I was told to "make do" or "leverage the offshore team." The offshore team was fine for BAU support but couldn't do the complex, client-facing work that was our differentiator in the Melbourne market.
When I flagged that client satisfaction scores were dropping, I was moved to a less strategic account. My director said it was "to give me breathing room." It was a punishment, and we both knew it.
I left in early 2025. On my last day, three people on my team asked me to help them find roles elsewhere. That's the real metric of management failure — not the KPIs on a dashboard, but whether your people want to stay.
The culture at Capgemini isn't toxic everywhere. Some teams are genuinely good. But the system is designed to prioritise financial metrics over people, and if you're a manager who cares about your team, you'll eventually find yourself fighting a war you can't win — especially when the restructuring axe is hanging over everyone's heads.
Story 5: The Perth Grad Who Was Chewed Up
"They hired me with promises of graduate programs and mentoring. What I got was a spreadsheet and a Teams channel."
I graduated from UWA in 2023 with a computer science degree. Capgemini came to our career fair with slick presentations about their graduate program, global opportunities, and Microsoft certifications. I was excited. It felt like my first step into a real career in Perth's growing tech sector.
The reality was nothing like the sales pitch. My "graduate cohort" of 12 people was spread across five different projects, with no structured training program. The promised mentoring was a 30-minute monthly check-in with a senior consultant who was too busy to prepare. The certifications I was told I'd get required me to study in my own time and pay for the exams myself — Capgemini would "reimburse" them, but only if I passed, and only after six months of employment.
I was placed on a government project doing testing work. Not the "digital transformation" I'd been promised. My daily tasks were logging defects in Jira and running regression scripts. When I asked about moving to a development role, I was told there were no vacancies.
After eight months, I was "released" from the project due to "scope changes." I went to the bench. For three weeks, I sat at my desk with nothing to do, attending "bench workshops" that were really just resume-writing sessions disguised as professional development. Then I was assigned to another testing role on a different project.
I left after 14 months. The exit interview was five minutes long. The HR person asked if I'd recommend Capgemini to a friend. I said no. She looked at me like I'd said something unusual.
Looking back, I realise the graduate program is a recruitment funnel, not a development program. Capgemini hires large cohorts of cheap graduates to fill junior roles, keeps them for 12-18 months, and replaces them with the next cohort. The graduates who survive and progress are the exception, not the rule. And in Perth's smaller market, there aren't that many projects to rotate through.
Story 6: The Sydney Client Who Was Misled
"The team they proposed at bid stage bore no resemblance to the team that showed up."
We engaged Capgemini for a cloud migration project — a mid-sized financial services firm in Sydney moving critical workloads to Azure. The bid process was impressive. They flew in a senior architect from their Microsoft practice, presented a detailed technical roadmap, and proposed a team of five people with strong Azure certifications and relevant financial services experience.
We signed a 12-month contract for A$2.4 million. The senior architect from the bid was never seen again.
The team that arrived was two junior consultants, one offshore resource who worked from India, and a project manager who was simultaneously managing three other projects. The "strong Azure certifications" turned out to be basic associate-level certs, not the expert-level credentials we'd been shown.
Within three months, we were behind schedule. Requirements were being misunderstood. The offshore resource had limited knowledge of Australian financial services regulations — ASIC requirements, APRA standards, the things that actually matter when you're migrating banking systems. When we escalated to Capgemini's account director, we were told the original team members had "moved on to other opportunities" and that the current team was "fully qualified."
By month six, we were six weeks behind and 30% over budget on the hours consumed. We brought in an independent consultant to review the work. Their assessment: the architecture was sound but the implementation was sloppy, with multiple issues that would need to be remediated before production deployment.
We eventually completed the project — 14 months late and at a total cost of A$3.1 million. Capgemini offered no discount for the delay. When we raised it in the contract review, they pointed to force majeure clauses and "scope complexity."
The lesson we learned: the team in the proposal is marketing. The team on the ground is economics. If you're engaging Capgemini or any large MSP in Australia, require contractual guarantees about team composition and qualifications. And build milestone-based payment terms that protect you when reality diverges from the pitch.
Further Reading on Capgemini Australia
- Capgemini Australia: An Investigative Deep Dive — Full investigation into contracts, billing practices, and on-the-ground delivery.
- Capgemini Exposed: Unpacking the Practices — Analysis of the systemic issues behind the survivor stories.
- The Capgemini Investigation: Complete Index — All our Capgemini coverage in one place.
These stories are composite narratives based on documented patterns, created for editorial purposes. They are constructed from patterns documented in publicly available employee reviews (Glassdoor, Indeed, SEEK), media reports (B&T, Mumbrella, Campaign Brief, BankingDay, ITNews), and industry data (IBISWorld, PayScale). They do not represent the experiences of any specific individual. If you have a story to share, contact The MSP Playbook confidentially.
Was this helpful?