Live data from Hacker News

Amazon Pip Horror Story

linkedin.com

221–230 of 771 posts

Re: Amazon Pip Horror Story

#221
post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's possible (although maybe not likely) that this guy really _did_ deserve to be put on PIP, and the team transfer request is completely incidental. Unless we can know for sure, or at least from a less biased source, we probably shouldn't doxx the manager?

Yeah that's true. We really need some service like blind where people can anonymously review and score managers. We need votes to prove that a manager is an ass hole. One anecdotal story isn't enough. Maybe the service leaves the manager anonymous until the review amount crosses a certain threshold... 3 to 4 guys calling him out? Submit this to ycombinator!

Honest question: how to prevent abusing this system?

Re: Amazon Pip Horror Story

#222
post #8

Is it really so dysfunctional there that if this happens to you (manager puts you on PIP upon being notified you're doing an internal transfer) there's no one to talk to to make this right? Maybe his manager is a piece of shit, but I can't believe there's no one to report to above him that can see this for what it is and make it right?

One piece of advice I always offer to younger software engineers about corporate politics is to ALWAYS try your best to make sure you have a relationship with your manager's manager. Cutting out links in the corporate telephone game is invaluable sometimes.

Re: Amazon Pip Horror Story

#223
post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A side effect of working for asshole companies like that for years is I’ve slowly developed a zero fucks attitude and an immunity to threats and carrots dangled in front of me. I can sit there as a project is falling over the edge of a cliff with total inner peace. My interest stops at the pay cheque and by the clock.

I was lucky enough to experience a 2 year long project in which everything that went wrong was blamed on the developers. Project managers breathing down your neck, feeling so pressured you barely dare take a bathroom break, the whole shebang. Quit working for them and now I'm a freelance dev. They asked me to get back on the project and I said fine, that'll be €700/day. After some grumbling they realized they had no…

700 a day???

Why did you undercharge by so much.

I know the EU dev market isn't great but those are rookie numbers for "danger money."

Three of the "retired, then handed enough money to unretire" COBAL guys at my old place were doing 2500 a day.

Re: Amazon Pip Horror Story

#224
post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then senior management should be wondering why so many low performers are ending up with certain managers...

It’s difficult to not feel empathy for people you have a relationship with. Even if a manager is incompetent, they will get the benefit of the doubt from vs a lowly engineer whom the Senior Manager does not have a personal relationship with. There are very few Senior Managers who take the time to look beyond what’s immediately presented to them.

So M2s+ are expected to have empathy for M1s, but M1s are not expected to have empathy for engineers. And, M2s+ having been M1s prior to being promoted, have to develop empathy when becoming M2s+.

Have I described correctly the situation?

Legend:

M2 - senior management, has other managers reporting to them

M1 - first layer of management, has workers / engineers as direct reports

Re: Amazon Pip Horror Story

#225
post #202
post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A side effect of working for asshole companies like that for years is I’ve slowly developed a zero fucks attitude and an immunity to threats and carrots dangled in front of me. I can sit there as a project is falling over the edge of a cliff with total inner peace. My interest stops at the pay cheque and by the clock.

This is exactly why I think contract work is the most honest form of employment in the software industry. "Mission statements" and "customer zeal" are meaningless when you're having to do endless weekend and evening hours. If it means so much to you, pay me by the hour first, then we can talk about devotion to the customer.

During log4j, I was a contractor embedded in a team that was 2/3rds fulltimers.

Guess who got called in on the weekend for log4j?

Guess who only heard about the problems on Monday at 9am?

You guessed it, the call was made to not pay the (documented) day rate for contractor call outs on weekends. Full-timers got "days in lieu."

Re: Amazon Pip Horror Story

#226
post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Shitty managers like you That's rude and against HN guidelines. Don't make this personal. I'm not attacking you. You think I'm taking an extreme position ("Managers should measure developers by their LOC"), which I am not. Are you actually taking the opposite extreme position, that a developer's LOC tells you absolutely nothing about their productivity? That there's not even a correlation or a hint of a connection,…

A manager can keep track of job performance by looking at how many tasks are being completed. If someones LOC is very low, but they complete all their tasks on time, not only is there no problem, it is even beneficial as the work is being done without creating too much burden for future development. If someone commits a large amount of code without completing any tasks, that's clearly not useful. If you think LOC is…

> A hospital manager that measures staff performance by incisions per day is clearly misguided.

Wrong analogy. I have two physicians on my staff. They both have the same years of experience, the same role, get paid the same. One sees 20 patients a day. The other sees 2 a day. That's not a red flag? I should ignore that and assume that somehow every single one of their patients is 10x more difficult, and not even bother to look into it? Because if you would agree I should look into it, then the number-of-patients was a useful metric.

A metric is just data point, no more, and not a complete picture.

> If someones LOC is very low, but they complete all their tasks on time, not only is there no problem, it is even beneficial as the work is being done without creating too much burden for future development. If someone commits a large amount of code without completing any tasks, that's clearly not useful.

I must not have been clear. I'm not arguing for bloated code. Lean code is good, of course.

I'm talking about the all-too-common developer who has some number of tasks to complete, and tells his teammates (and me, their manager) that the work is very complex, and so they land (let's say) one bug-fix a week, giving the impression that each bug-fix (or feature, whatever) was challenging. But on inspecting their code, the code itself is fine --nothing necessary wrong with it-- but the changes are all trivial and really shouldn't take a $180K/year developer two weeks or even one to crank out. LOC isn't the full picture but it's often correlated and if nothing else, it's an obvious red flag for me to investigate.

To put it simply: If you're a high-paid engineer, you can deliver big features slowly or big tough bug-fixes slowly (and the LOC doesn't matter if the problem was actually difficult), or you can crank out lots of small features and small easy fixes quickly. But if you're barely outputting any code, and trickle out a meager amount of code, and the few lines of code you merge into the repo are all trivially simple, that's not acceptable. That engineer can't cling to "Don't judge me by my LOC!" I'm not -- I'm judging by the small amount of actual value they're delivering.

Re: Amazon Pip Horror Story

#227
post #21

How it started - https://i.imgur.com/7Cyia1U.jpeg How it is going - https://archive.fo/pdYHy#selection-525.105-525.423

The second post in your second link is shocking too: > One night, when I was a dev manager at Amazon, another dev manager in Seattle sent me a 20-page design document at 11:30 pm and told me that he wanted me to get him feedback by 5:30 am the next day. How fucking rude is that? It’s indicative of an absolutely staggering level of toxicity. Honestly, what a waste. Imagine how much better Amazon could be if they didn’…

Why not just ignoring the email -- you're not supposed to be awake at 11:30pm at all.

Re: Amazon Pip Horror Story

#228
post #101
post #48

Quoted post unavailable.

As an Indian, I am starting to notice a pattern of terrible Indian managers from all the stories I hear from my friends. I really hope that these stories make up a biased sample.

Or maybe because they are immigrants the stakes are higher for them? If they lose the job they may lose visa, so they higher tolerance for BS from management.

Or maybe grow up in a culture that value respect more, so you are biased against questioning the authority.

Or maybe this story is inaccurate/made up. He was put on PIP and requested a transfer at the same time.

Or maybe it's a peter principle at play.

Anyway, I don't think it's fair to post someone's linkedin like that.

Re: Amazon Pip Horror Story

#229
post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was lucky enough to experience a 2 year long project in which everything that went wrong was blamed on the developers. Project managers breathing down your neck, feeling so pressured you barely dare take a bathroom break, the whole shebang. Quit working for them and now I'm a freelance dev. They asked me to get back on the project and I said fine, that'll be €700/day. After some grumbling they realized they had no…

700 a day??? Why did you undercharge by so much. I know the EU dev market isn't great but those are rookie numbers for "danger money." Three of the "retired, then handed enough money to unretire" COBAL guys at my old place were doing 2500 a day.

Well, cobol is special of course. The more specialized you are... But for a generic c++, java or c# or web dev I would say you can't charge specialist money at all in the EU.

Re: Amazon Pip Horror Story

#230
I have a question for other former/current employees of Amazon.

I worked there for 4 years on the AIV / Prime Video platform across a few teams (2012-2016). Obviously we had performance reviews every year, and I did ok. I transferred 3 or 4 times (within AIV), never a problem. I never heard of mandatory quotas to fit in the under-performing category, I didn't hear my colleagues talk about it either, "under-performing" laid off employees were rare (and unsurprising). Was I ignorant of what was going on around me?

From my perspective, the 'bar raising' in Amazon worked through the hiring process, of which I did many interviews. You only hired someone if you thought they were better than average either technically or on leadership principals.

Did this PIP quota thing always go on? Does this go on now to the same effect as people are talking about, or is this an echo chamber magnification of something that happened within a subset of one org?

Post reply on HN