Ask HN: Do you also get frequent Amazon recruitment emails?

Post by mcv » Thu, Jul 07, 2022, 5:11 PM UTC

Gustomaximus wrote: post #43

HWR_14 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no idea why they're so hesitant to tell you the compensation. That has to come up sometime, and early filters are better at not wasting everyone's time.

I would expect; 1) Because the pay is low and they want to either i) show the employer they can bring possible candidates (if recruiter) or ii) try and talk you in via other benefits. 2) They dont want to publicise the pay to other staff especially if staff are under market rate. 3) They have a big range and they dont want to show their hand if they bring someone in more aligned to the bottom end. Generally I think i…

Post by nunez » Sat, Jul 09, 2022, 6:00 AM UTC

__derek__ wrote: post #49

nunez wrote: post #39

Yup, and I can't seem to stop them. I did go through the interview loop once but stopped right before the final because of comp. They basically pay everyone a cap of ~$150k/year USD, but they'll make up whatever you're losing in base with a tiered sign-on attached to a clawback clause and their famously-high RSU package with their infamous four-year vesting schedule. Not for me. (I make $215k base and am eyeing for m…

I don't expect this will change your mind, but the base-pay cap was increased significantly last year. Also, a few years ago the sign-on bonus changed from being paid lump-sum to pro-rated, so there's no more claw-back. The RSU vesting schedule is still the same, although that might be a boon for anyone accepting offers in the last year (cash push, stock down).

Post by Gustomaximus » Mon, Jul 18, 2022, 4:19 AM UTC

HWR_14 wrote: post #48

Gustomaximus wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would expect; 1) Because the pay is low and they want to either i) show the employer they can bring possible candidates (if recruiter) or ii) try and talk you in via other benefits. 2) They dont want to publicise the pay to other staff especially if staff are under market rate. 3) They have a big range and they dont want to show their hand if they bring someone in more aligned to the bottom end. Generally I think i…

I thought recruiters weee judged (and compensated) based solely on if they filled the position, not the number of candidates? But it seems companies would also want recruiters to test the acceptability of the position to the candidate (to avoid wasting their time).