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

Ask HN: Has anyone successfully renegotiated an AWS non-compete?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 206 posts

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone successfully renegotiated an AWS non-compete?

#181

Post by gastroturf »

ozzythecat wrote: post #71

I can’t answer your specific question, but I would really encourage you to think more about the AWS offer. Having spent a decade at Amazon, across several organizations, I don’t recommend it as a place to work. There was a NYTimes article about the company in 2015. Everything there still reflects the day to day culture of the company. For me Amazon took an unprecedented toll on my mental and physical health. I did ea…

I’m a recently joined SDM in AWS. I do not mean to negate your years of experience. I expect to find exactly your experience as my time progresses and I see more teams.

I find that a lot of Amazon’s management systems appear to be built as safeguards against the pitfalls less experienced leaders might not know how to handle. Unfortunately it is optimized for the “least common denominator” of human collaboration, which is basically coercing individuals to behave like machines. I agree with your characterization of the problem.

I would go so far as to say that I disagree with the system in a philosophical manner. It is opposite of good leadership, in motivating humans to grow, innovate, and create success, in my understanding. Yet I cannot ignore Amazon’s market success; it may have succeeded in spite of these flaws.

I do not know how long I will stay. I anticipate a deep enough philosophical conflict to motivate my eventual exit.

Until then, my team will benefit from stronger cohesion, shared knowledge, clearer prioritization, growth, work life balance, and ultimately happiness. Some of them have taken their first vacations in the last few years, in the few months of my tenure so far, because of the changes we’ve embraced.

I will create a healthy environment of leadership for my team, and we will succeed. We will show Amazon what is required, as long as I can.

If past experience is any indication, I will carry my team’s allegiance because I look out for their interests, individually and collectively.

And when we deliver strategic advancements, we will gain autonomy. If not, I know that my talents can be impactful elsewhere.

I hope that I can quell the tide of dynamics of which you warn.

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone successfully renegotiated an AWS non-compete?

#182

Post by onionisafruit »

systemvoltage wrote: post #160
kyleplum wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, it's generally discouraged to speak ill about a previous workplace when interviewing/working at a new job as it may reflect more poorly on you as an individual than the company you are disparaging.

Yes, but the same people had no problem talking about their previous employer prior to AWS. One guy was ex-Siemens employee from their Swiss office in Zurich.

That explains why Amazon seemed great to them.

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone successfully renegotiated an AWS non-compete?

#183

Post by brazzledazzle »

geoduck14 wrote: post #176
locusofself wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for this. I'm currently (today) trying to negotiate an offer with AWS and while the brand/tech is making it really tempting, Work/life balance is really important to me right now as a father of a 3 year old (the only child I am planning to have).

From one dad to another - cherish this time with your child. It goes SO fast.

Yes, please believe us. It sounds so cliche but it goes too fast.

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone successfully renegotiated an AWS non-compete?

#184

Post by locusofself »

danpalmer wrote: post #177
locusofself wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for this. I'm currently (today) trying to negotiate an offer with AWS and while the brand/tech is making it really tempting, Work/life balance is really important to me right now as a father of a 3 year old (the only child I am planning to have).

> The brand/tech is making it really tempting Really? I’ve always felt that the Amazon brand is relatively low quality. I’ve also heard that tech-wise it’s less interesting than you might assume from the outside, and they just burn out engineers on problems rather than solving them well. I’m relatively uninformed so don’t make a decision based on this, but maybe something to consider.

What I really mean to say is that most startups are using AWS. While you don't have to work at AWS to get AWS skills obviously, having worked there would potentially signal that you really know AWS well and can bring that knowledge into the cooler/smaller company. The interview process is fairly difficult, not google/meta level, but not a walk in the park.

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone successfully renegotiated an AWS non-compete?

#185

Post by mateo1 »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #98
d4mi3n wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is probably one of the biggest reasons I'm unlikely to leave the state until other parts of the US make similar determinations. It boggles me that we allow employers to have so much control over an employees life after they have left said organization .

We almost had the same in Washington state until the big tech companies lobbied (i.e. bribed) corrupt politicians for the law to only apply to those earning under $100k. https://lni.wa.gov/workers-rights/workplace-policies/Non-Com...

The reasoning obviously is to protect low earners from employers who abuse non-competes. Non-competes are not a complete insanity, as long as the workforce they apply to has (pragmatically, not just theoretically) the ability to chose where to work. And of course they have to acquire some transferable skills or knowledge thanks to their employment.

These things are generally very unlikely to happen when the employee is a low earner.

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone successfully renegotiated an AWS non-compete?

#186

Post by bradknowles »

gastroturf wrote: post #181
ozzythecat wrote: post #71

I can’t answer your specific question, but I would really encourage you to think more about the AWS offer. Having spent a decade at Amazon, across several organizations, I don’t recommend it as a place to work. There was a NYTimes article about the company in 2015. Everything there still reflects the day to day culture of the company. For me Amazon took an unprecedented toll on my mental and physical health. I did ea…

I’m a recently joined SDM in AWS. I do not mean to negate your years of experience. I expect to find exactly your experience as my time progresses and I see more teams. I find that a lot of Amazon’s management systems appear to be built as safeguards against the pitfalls less experienced leaders might not know how to handle. Unfortunately it is optimized for the “least common denominator” of human collaboration, whic…

I joined AWS in September. I've heard about problems that some other teams have had, but in the six months I've been on my current team, I haven't seen any such issues.

I keep waiting for that shoe to drop, and so far it hasn't.

We recently had an off-site meeting for everyone in the organization under our L10, and I now feel so much better about where we are going and how we are going to get there. I didn't realize how much pent up angst I had until the end of the first day of the off-site, and I felt like a huge weight had been taken off my shoulders, and that I had finally seen the light.

That said, my history with employers is that everything can be perfect and great up to a certain point, and then there is a sudden change. In the past, that change has usually been because of a change in leadership somewhere, possibly just down at the level of the new manager hired right above me.

After that change, what was one of the best places I've ever worked suddenly becomes one of the worst. I've seen this happen time after time at virtually every single employer I've had since 1989. I can count on one hand the number of times where this didn't happen.

So, I will continue to keep an eye out for that dropping shoe. But I will also continue to enjoy working on this team, with these people, and this leadership.

And with any luck, we will be able to successfully change the world for the better.

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone successfully renegotiated an AWS non-compete?

#187

Post by bradknowles »

danpalmer wrote: post #177
locusofself wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for this. I'm currently (today) trying to negotiate an offer with AWS and while the brand/tech is making it really tempting, Work/life balance is really important to me right now as a father of a 3 year old (the only child I am planning to have).

> The brand/tech is making it really tempting Really? I’ve always felt that the Amazon brand is relatively low quality. I’ve also heard that tech-wise it’s less interesting than you might assume from the outside, and they just burn out engineers on problems rather than solving them well. I’m relatively uninformed so don’t make a decision based on this, but maybe something to consider.

We've had guys on our team recently get some patents issued in their name, because what we are working on is a hard problem at a massive scale, and we are solving things that have never been solved before.

I will agree that Amazon has some weird stuff around their internal development environment, which I think is well documented elsewhere. OTOH, when you're building services to handle billions of customers all around the world, there are some things you have to do a little differently.

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone successfully renegotiated an AWS non-compete?

#188

Post by BrandoElFollito »

infogulch wrote: post #30
forty wrote: post #15

You should better consult a lawyer than a bunch of random people if this is important for you. Or better yet: not work for a company that tries to make you sign such agreements. And especially not this one :) I don't know where you live. In my country (France) overly broad non compete are not enforceable, and also you need to be paid during the non compete period (at least 1/3 of your compensation or something like t…

> [in France] you need to be paid during the non compete period (at least 1/3 of your compensation or something like this) Oh that's interesting. That is the first time I've seen a justifiable contractual consideration on the employer's side for a non-compete.

I am French and discovered a few years ago that a non-compete could be one-sided.

I saw that on an offer and asked about the compensation, ready to negotiate at least 50% pay for that part.

The person on the other side was surprised, also when I asked if anyone actually signs this.

I do not understand how a non-compete compete for key people can be one sided.

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone successfully renegotiated an AWS non-compete?

#189

Post by nickjj »

ozzythecat wrote: post #178
nickjj wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I did earn enough money, but I immensely regret all the time I didn’t spend with my family over the years How many hours a week did you average at work? A lot of tech jobs will expect working 9-6. If it was over 40-45, did the money scale linearly to the hours you put in? If it was 40-45 then it's equal to most other jobs except with higher compensation?

Money does not scale linearly. It’s more of a function of the amazon stock growth. I was able to build wealth because I did the less orthodox path and held on to every share that ever vested for me starting from 2012. But even here, the company is not generous at all. Your stock grants vest 1-2 years out. If the stock climbs during that time, then in next year, you get no additional compensation. My initial years at…

> So if the stock does good, you get screwed. If the stock performs poorly, you get screwed too.

Did something else bad happen at the company?

I guess our definitions of screwed are slightly different. It sounds like they are giving you extra compensation in case your options happen to do poorly one year. They could have chosen to say "we can't control the market, you received 10 shares and whether they go up or down is out of our control". This way you win some and lose some based on the market. Even with having to wait for 2 years that's not too bad (it's basically free money).

Holding for a year also means your stock compensation is taxed at long term capital gains instead of income. If I were working at a stable and successful public company I'd prefer stock options if you were comparing $1 in cash vs $1 in options. After taxes, etc. your options are going to be likely 20-25% more valuable due to less taxes (no risk) and it has the chance to potentially to go higher (risk involved). The only time it's worse is if the stock tanks hard (the 20-25% tax difference) but that's not going to be a common event in a company like Amazon.

Combine that with you entering in 2012 when they were trading for 215 a share, that's a 15x return vs today. I guess I'm just having trouble seeing how that outcome isn't good. If you worked let's say 45 hours a week, combined with 10 years of a competitive tech salary + having options in a company that has had massive growth that's a combo where you end up being pretty much set for life (multiple millions of post-tax money available).

Were you working something like 80 hours a week for 10 years straight? That would make the decision much harder but at the same time you're trading 10 years to never have to worry about money again so even then it's not a hard no, 80 probably is a hard no because but 60 hours brings it closer to "maybe, it depends".

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone successfully renegotiated an AWS non-compete?

#190

Post by lotsofpulp »

mateo1 wrote: post #185
lotsofpulp wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We almost had the same in Washington state until the big tech companies lobbied (i.e. bribed) corrupt politicians for the law to only apply to those earning under $100k. https://lni.wa.gov/workers-rights/workplace-policies/Non-Com...

The reasoning obviously is to protect low earners from employers who abuse non-competes. Non-competes are not a complete insanity, as long as the workforce they apply to has (pragmatically, not just theoretically) the ability to chose where to work. And of course they have to acquire some transferable skills or knowledge thanks to their employment. These things are generally very unlikely to happen when the employee…

The fact that California has no problem with pumping out innovation and globally important companies even with a total non compete ban shows that there is zero reason for any employer to have that additional power over an employee. I would even say the non compete ban contributes to CA’s success.

To really drive home how much of an advantage employers have, even with a non compete ban, employers in California were found to be colluding to suppress employees’ wages.

https://www.latimes.com/80014970-132.html

Post reply on HN