Laying myself off from Amazon

Post by dimmke » Thu, Nov 17, 2022, 4:47 AM UTC

latchkey wrote: post #219

dimmke wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

everybody on my team. Are you seriously implying I was put on some kind of special "extra testing required" probation system where the unit test coverage requirement was upped from 95% to 100%? Are you trolling?

It sounds kind of absurd really. I've never once been asked to sign a contract that required me to do 100% code coverage. As others have noted in the thread, it is like some mythical number any way. It sounds to me like this wasn't going to end well since the expectations were wonky from the start.

Post by p0rkbelly » Thu, Nov 17, 2022, 4:48 AM UTC

innocentoldguy wrote: post #200

p0rkbelly wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's all about the RSUs. That all kicks in after year 2. If you're a lower level maybe you don't feel it as much. But for a high performing L6+ RSUs typically are -- or at least were designed to be -- the majority of your income compared to base pay.

I was an L6 and my RSUs were worth sticking around for a year ago. Not so much today.

Post by TheRealPomax » Thu, Nov 17, 2022, 4:58 AM UTC

dilyevsky wrote: post #131

TheRealPomax wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While it's not just you, and there are lots of folks who think that's just fine: if someone hires a dev and then make them spend only 10% doing the job they applied for, whoever hired them lied about the job, and the product they're hiring for has fundamental problems that you can either commit to solve, or burn bodies over in the hopes that you get transferred out to a different position and it's not your problem an…

So 20% spent on tests and another 20% on meetings where presumably you decide what to build is not part of the job they applied for? Nonsense! If we’re doing hot takes here there’s no way everyone else on his team is spending 40% of their time on tooling without management doing anything about it

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Nov 17, 2022, 5:09 AM UTC

dimmke wrote: post #167

latchkey wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just what I thought, thanks for the confirmation. HN loves to take a number and just run with it, without verifying anything.

No, my requirement was actually 100%. I have no reason to lie about this. It’s set at a package level.

Post by Aeolun » Thu, Nov 17, 2022, 5:17 AM UTC

gruffle wrote: post #68

nyarlathotep_ wrote: post #3

Worked for AWS for just under a year and a half; this mirrors my experience exactly. Poorly designed, failure-prone, brittle internal tooling was a time and energy sink to the point where even the most trivial deployment change was a nail-biter. Automated tooling and tests that were ostensibly created to make life easier were the number one pain point and constantly failed in obscure ways that required cutting ticket…

Completely agree. Interesting how the internal dev satisfaction polling always shows that the vast majority of devs just absolutely love the internal tooling and processes. Might have something to do with the polls not actually being anonymous. When hr/polling teams are asked about anonymity they generally skirt or ignore the question, but I've learned that enough metadata is collected to identify any responder in pr…