Live data from Hacker News

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

news.ycombinator.com

191–200 of 206 posts

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

#191

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.

There is a limited period of time where you (the parents) will be the sun rising and setting for your child. (A few years.) That was special for me; there's no love like the love of a young child.

After that, your kids will start to turn towards friends, teachers, and other relatives. As they should--it's an important part of becoming a full fledged human.

But it's still a bit bittersweet to see the end of being able to do no wrong in your kiddo's eyes.

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

#192
post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that as we heard from many here, they might very well be binding and enforceable in many states.

>it wasn't an issue of enforceability

You literally said a "non-binding, unenforceable" so yes this post was about enforceability. You made a false statement with possible serious repercussions for a person following your advise. Now you backtrack that it wasn't about enforceability?

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

#193
post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>it wasn't an issue of enforceability

You literally said a "non-binding, unenforceable" so yes this post was about enforceability. You made a false statement with possible serious repercussions for a person following your advise. Now you backtrack that it wasn't about enforceability?

What? I replied to a comment saying:

>it wasn't an issue of enforceability

I’m not backtracking on anything. Are you ok? If it wasn’t an issue of enforceability, I think we can reasonably assume that the noncompete was not enforceable. Unenforceability was the premise of this conversation, and that wasn’t introduced by me.

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

#194
post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

>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).

I will try to explain again. Let me offer an example that captures one part of the problem.

Let's say you join Amazon today (Day 1). In a year from now, let's say I promote you and give you increasing scope and responsibility. Now if the value of your previous stock grant (from Day 1) has appreciated, I will give you no additional compensation. As your manager, I can get you through multiple promotions without providing you any meaningful compensation increase since Day 1.

Now because your compensation weighs heavily on stock vests, let's say Amazon's stock performs poorly, falling behind even the SP500. So, your total compensation this year will drop significantly. I will offer you additional stock grants that vest in a year from now and two years from now. So if you stay with me for at least two more years, you can "earn" the compensation that you did not receive THIS year. If the stock continues going side ways or drops next year, you can make next's years losses by staying another 2 years (3 years total).

To put it bluntly, if you perform well and the company's stock increases, thank you very much. You previous stock grants have brought your compensation this year to its maximum. We won't have give you another dime.

If you perform well and the company's stock doesn't increase or drops – that's too bad for you. This year, that's YOUR loss to deal with. If you stick with us two years, we'll "try" to give you back the money we "hoped" to pay you this year.

>Were you working something like 80 hours a week for 10 years straight?

There are few people in Amazon engineering that work 40 hours a week, and any organization that normalizes that will get either re-org'd or have their products/services completely canned. 55-60 hours is a baseline. 80 hour weeks is not unheard of, for even 6 months at a time. There is NEVER a down time. You do A and then you move on to B and then C. If you fail to do A or if you decide to take a break between B and C. We do stack ranking and drop whoever falls at the bottom of the stack, even if they're pretty dang good. Somebody HAS to be let go. No way around it.

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

#195

Not a lawyer, but I have seen this exact thing in the past and discussed it with our lawyer. He advised to say that the scope was overly broad, point out as you have that AMZN does absolutely everything, suggest that you either see what they say in response, or you suggest you would be happy to agree to a reasonable narrowly scoped provision (e.g. not to work on products directly competitive to the products you worke…

My wife is a lawyer. She checks all contracts that either of us sign. And we realize that there's a lot of stuff we can't change with regards to a contract we sign with large companies, like Amazon.

Nevertheless, we do push back on those things that are most important to us, like my ability to support existing open source projects like NTP.org, which I have been involved with since 2003.

I'm personally not too worried about the non-compete, because I'm so low on the totem pole that I really don't think the company will care about me if/when I leave. I strongly suspect they won't even notice -- there's at least six or seven layers of management between Andy Jassy and me.

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

#196
post #32

I can't give you legal advice, but I can ask you to consider if you really want to work for AWS. It may be a generic clause, but they are basically saying they don't trust you. Also telling recruiters of other FAANG / big corp / etc. you got an AWS offer should increase your leverage.

Non-competes are commonly used in most employment contracts.

If that's your measure of "are you really sure you want to work for this company", then I think I would ask if you're really sure that you want to work for ANY company. Or even just work at all.

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

#197
post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I appreciate honest people, especially when they're honest even though it isn't in their best interest.

Easy to say, but I doubt most people would actually let that appreciation affect hiring decisions. A potential hire might also open up about their casual drug use. Would that be points in their favor vs. the other candidate who might very well also take drugs but chooses to not advertise this irrelevant detail to potential employers?

When being hired by the DoD, and interviewed for your security clearance, you damn well better tell them about your drug use. If you don't, then you're hiding something from them that could be used as a lever against you in the future by spies from another country.

And lying to your employer about things like drug use will get you fired faster than just about anything else.

Yes, I did start work in the basement of the Pentagon in 1989 for what was then the Defense Communications Agency. I will let you ascertain for yourself what I may have told them during that interview.

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

#198
post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Easy to say, but I doubt most people would actually let that appreciation affect hiring decisions. A potential hire might also open up about their casual drug use. Would that be points in their favor vs. the other candidate who might very well also take drugs but chooses to not advertise this irrelevant detail to potential employers?

When being hired by the DoD, and interviewed for your security clearance, you damn well better tell them about your drug use. If you don't, then you're hiding something from them that could be used as a lever against you in the future by spies from another country. And lying to your employer about things like drug use will get you fired faster than just about anything else. Yes, I did start work in the basement of th…

Yes, obviously. Although admitting to casual drug use will pretty much ensure that you won’t get hired.

I think you know damn well that jobs requiring a security clearance are a special case. It really doesn’t make sense to bring this up in a general conversation about jobs.

> And lying to your employer about things like drug use will get you fired faster than just about anything else.

If your employer is the DoD, sure. If you work for a normal company, they’ll never find out unless you have a real problem (or are stupid enough to advertise it).

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

#199
post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You literally said a "non-binding, unenforceable" so yes this post was about enforceability. You made a false statement with possible serious repercussions for a person following your advise. Now you backtrack that it wasn't about enforceability?

What? I replied to a comment saying: >it wasn't an issue of enforceability I’m not backtracking on anything. Are you ok? If it wasn’t an issue of enforceability, I think we can reasonably assume that the noncompete was not enforceable. Unenforceability was the premise of this conversation, and that wasn’t introduced by me.

I think you should go back and read over the thread and how your replies can be understood. You replied to someone saying that lying by omission is terrible advice, by saying omitting signing a non-binding unenforceable nocompete is not lying. Yes two levels up someone said the main issue is not enforceability but the uncertainty that it gives potential future employers.

So I unterstand you made the leap that the nocompete is unenforceable and therefore no binding. That's a pretty big leap and also ignores the point. Enforceability is typically a grey area and decided by the courts, and therefore there is a risk associated with violating the nocompete (for employee and new employer), and many employers might want to avoid it. If you were referring to the case where the nocompete is clearly illegal (e.g. you're in california), yes there is no uncertainty, but then there is also no issue about disclosing it, because there is no associated risk. In that case I don't understand what you were trying to add to the discussion?

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

#200
post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been asked to reword my peer reviews to be a function of leadership principles only. And my promotion is justified as a function of them as well. They run very deep. I cite them on a weekly basis. The two new principles are less than a year old. They aren't taken as serious as the other originals. The culture is already established.

> And missing from this set of principles? Any mention of the humanity of those you are leading. If you want to argue that the culture doesn't match them, whatever, but you can't say nothing's mentioned .

I think "only added to the principles this year" for a company as mature as Amazon is pretty telling. Going to take another 20 years to reset the culture to those last two principles.
Post reply on HN