• The company shows some entry-level access through roles and team structures that include research assistants and lab technician support in R&D contexts.
• Enginzyme’s publicly visible hiring examples lean heavily toward experienced profiles (PhD graduate and multi-year post-degree requirements in multiple listings), which reduces true 0–3 year accessibility.
• The company currently showing no open roles on its main job boards makes it harder to see consistent, repeat junior hiring in the present moment.

‍

• The company describes an in-person, “come to the office early” approach intended to check mutual fit, alongside stated zero-tolerance values for discriminatory behaviour.
• Enginzyme has at least one publicly shared candidate account describing a lengthy process (panel, presentation, multiple rounds) followed by no response after follow-up, which is a concrete transparency and respect risk.
• The company has a publicly posted interview-related complaint that includes an inappropriate, gendered question, which is negative evidence for fair assessment conditions.

‍

• The company explicitly frames day-to-day work as continuous learning with exposure to experienced scientists, which is relevant for early-career development in a deep-tech lab setting.
• Enginzyme’s own hiring content describes people “starting their careers” working alongside colleagues with decades of experience, which is a strong startup-equivalent signal when real.
• The company’s role write-ups include coaching and mentorship language (especially in team-lead and director-level postings), but early-career-specific onboarding, feedback cadence, and training structure are not spelled out.

‍

• The company lists concrete benefits in postings (paid leave, insurance coverage, and pension) and also references equity alongside salary, which supports pay fairness fundamentals.
• Enginzyme does not consistently publish salary ranges on roles, which limits pay transparency for juniors and caps this pillar.
• The company has employee feedback citing financial instability, which raises a stability concern even though the company positions roles as full-time with standard benefits.

‍

• The company has a small set of employee reviews indicating at least some early-career retention beyond 12 months (for example, a research assistant tenure), but the sample is limited.
• Enginzyme has employee feedback pointing to limited growth and repetitive work, which weakens the visible progression story for juniors.
• The company shows some career-step progression signals on LinkedIn profiles (movement from research scientist to lead-level titles), but Enginzyme does not publish promotion rates, progression frameworks, or structured outcomes data, so the evidence remains thin.

‍