Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon tells bosses to conceal when employees are on performance management plan

seattletimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 300 posts

Re: Amazon tells bosses to conceal when employees are on performance management plan

#91

Post by stornetn »

eigen wrote: post #86
quickthrower2 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For 500k? Yeah I’d do it even for a year, working on the most dullard shit then have 3 years off.

doesnt Amazon cap base salary around $180k and only 5% of RSUs vest the first year? my understanding is that, barring a massive RSU package, you cant get to $500k in the first year.

This isn’t the complete picture. It’s true that the vesting schedule gives you only 5% of RSUs in your first year, but employees’ cash signing bonus is increased to offset that. So if the total compensation target for a role is generally $500k (say, a principal engineer or a director, maybe?) and your salary is capped at $160k, you’d be given a signing bonus of $500k-$160k-(total stock vest x 5%) in cash. It’s not as though you’re paid significantly less when you start, it’s just that how you are paid is different.

Re: Amazon tells bosses to conceal when employees are on performance management plan

#92

Post by stevepotter »

eigen wrote: post #86
quickthrower2 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For 500k? Yeah I’d do it even for a year, working on the most dullard shit then have 3 years off.

doesnt Amazon cap base salary around $180k and only 5% of RSUs vest the first year? my understanding is that, barring a massive RSU package, you cant get to $500k in the first year.

they give you a signing bonus, paid out over time, to make up for the difference in total comp in the first two years

Re: Amazon tells bosses to conceal when employees are on performance management plan

#93

Post by [deleted] »

eigen wrote: post #86
quickthrower2 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For 500k? Yeah I’d do it even for a year, working on the most dullard shit then have 3 years off.

doesnt Amazon cap base salary around $180k and only 5% of RSUs vest the first year? my understanding is that, barring a massive RSU package, you cant get to $500k in the first year.

[deleted]

Re: Amazon tells bosses to conceal when employees are on performance management plan

#94

Post by decafninja »

stornetn wrote: post #91
eigen wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

doesnt Amazon cap base salary around $180k and only 5% of RSUs vest the first year? my understanding is that, barring a massive RSU package, you cant get to $500k in the first year.

This isn’t the complete picture. It’s true that the vesting schedule gives you only 5% of RSUs in your first year, but employees’ cash signing bonus is increased to offset that. So if the total compensation target for a role is generally $500k (say, a principal engineer or a director, maybe?) and your salary is capped at $160k, you’d be given a signing bonus of $500k-$160k-(total stock vest x 5%) in cash. It’s not as…

I keep hearing all the letters of FAANG have more or less similarly competitive total compensation if you factor in RSUs, appreciation, etc. But then I hear things about "cliffs" and how extremely high TCs are possible only because of stock appreciation.

In that sense, is Netflix basically untouchable in terms of compensation, if F/A/A/G (and other companies like Uber, Lyft, Airbnb, Microsoft, etc.) can only be competitive via unexpected or non-guaranteed stock appreciation?

Plus if you reach a "cliff", you end up with just your base salary - which seems like it's not too much better than a non-tech Fortune500 company?

Is my understanding wrong?

Re: Amazon tells bosses to conceal when employees are on performance management plan

#95

Post by kleinsch »

aaomidi wrote: post #18

Meanwhile Amazon recruiters keep spamming me to join their cult. No one *wants* to work for you anymore. You don't need to recruit. If someone is desperate enough they'll let you know.

HN isn’t the world. Amazon recruiters get tons of positive responses to their reachouts.

Re: Amazon tells bosses to conceal when employees are on performance management plan

#96

Post by wellthisisgreat »

What are the effects of this list/Focus on employee? The article mentions performance hell but at the same time says people don’t know they are on the list so they probably don’t really feel the effects?

Or is it slower promotion less bonuses that are somehow not obvious?

Re: Amazon tells bosses to conceal when employees are on performance management plan

#97

Post by UnpossibleJim »

mataug wrote: post #31
qqtt wrote: post #13

I never understood the secretive nature of these Amazon "devplan" / "FOCUS" lists. If an employee has a performance issue, they should know. Period. If they are on a formal list, they should know that too. The only "positive" here is that it can affect the individual's moral to know you are not meeting expectations - but that has to be communicated regardless. If it's understood it has to be communicated and there is…

A toxic culture of fear is the intended effect here. People at amazon love to discuss the flywheel effect[1]. The flywheel here is the culture of fear that keeps employees on their toes. Bezos believes that employees are inherently lazy[2], and it seems like fear is tool the S-team have chosen to solve the problem of lazy employees. This has a lot of unintended consequences[3], but the executives with the power to ch…

Do you think that this culture will shift with his retirement, or do you think that this culture is so embedded within the fabric of Amazon itself, that there is no separating this kind of behavior from the company without a dismantling of the corporate structure itself?

Re: Amazon tells bosses to conceal when employees are on performance management plan

#98

Post by sharken »

commandlinefan wrote: post #58
ozzythecat wrote: post #25

> “Should I tell an employee that I entered them into Focus?” the question reads. The response: “Do not discuss Focus with employees. Instead, tell the employee that their performance is not meeting expectations, the specific areas where they need to improve, and offer feedback and support to help them improve.” The headline is editorialized. IMO whether you’re told you’re in Focus or not is irrelevant. If your manag…

"I am totally unappreciated in my time. You can run this whole park from this room with minimal staff for up to 3 days. You think that kind of automation is easy? Or cheap? You know anybody who can network 8 connection machines and debug 2 million lines of code for what I bid for this job? Because if he can I'd like to see him try."

Was reading this at face value heh. Anyway, nice try Dennis, now get back to work!

Re: Amazon tells bosses to conceal when employees are on performance management plan

#99

Post by bostonsre »

qqtt wrote: post #13

I never understood the secretive nature of these Amazon "devplan" / "FOCUS" lists. If an employee has a performance issue, they should know. Period. If they are on a formal list, they should know that too. The only "positive" here is that it can affect the individual's moral to know you are not meeting expectations - but that has to be communicated regardless. If it's understood it has to be communicated and there is…

Maybe they are just trying to hide their unspoken requirement of firing a given proportion of their workplace for managers to be considered good. It should help give them plausible deniability when they need to fire someone that wasn't on the list as well.

Re: Amazon tells bosses to conceal when employees are on performance management plan

#100

Post by chris11 »

phendrenad2 wrote: post #49

There are many types of PIPs, and Amazon seems to be trying a new flavor. This one seems to be about managers focusing (hence the name) on floundering employees, giving them the attention they need to get back ok track. And maybe telling the employee "you're getting extra attention" could make them pessimistic and less able to be improved. It's a good theory, anyway. We'll see if it works out. Of course the other, da…

> Keep the "build a case against the employee so we can fire them without a lawsuit", ditch the "actually trying to improve their performance"

I'm less optimistic. I see two main uses for PIPS.

1) 3rd parties usually get involved in communicating the performance issues and expectations.

2) It explicitly documents failures if an employee doesn't improve.

I'm assuming employees usually only pass the PIP if communication is the major issue. But a manager should communicate performance concerns before starting an official PIP process. I'm not confident that a well intentioned PIP process will lead to a large minority of employees passing it.

Documenting failures only helps in firing someone. It isn't a benefit to the individual engineer.

Post reply on HN