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

I worked in Amazon HR and was disgusted at what I was seeing with PIP plans

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 618 posts

Re: I worked in Amazon HR and was disgusted at what I was seeing with PIP plans

#261

Post by bluecheese452 »

rubyissimo wrote: post #209

The problem isn't so much the actual culling. The problem is the tax it puts on everyone for the rest of the year to self-promote and make sure they don't get caught accidentally. If you put your head down and do great work, you just run the risk of getting out-politic'd, so you've got to do that too. But that makes the political players spend more time on it to make sure they're still ahead of the part time politici…

The problem is this is on purpose. Those at the top are good at the political game so they make the game all about politics.

Re: I worked in Amazon HR and was disgusted at what I was seeing with PIP plans

#262

Post by [deleted] »

iLoveOncall wrote: post #87
capableweb wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the person interviewed is lying then, you claim? Inflating the number? > I got to the point where they offered me a job, and I was going to quit. But I had a huge stock investment coming up. So there was no way I was going to rock the boat in any way, shape, or form just trying to get to this date. > If you walked away during the Pivot or anytime before you had your investment before it was there for you, you woul…

No, she isn't necessarily lying but just making it seem as if she would have received $200K over a single vest while it would have likely happened over at least 2 years and 4 vests. I have £110K coming up if I look on the stock portal, but it's over the next two years, so 25K at a time, and I don't consider it as money I already have.

[deleted]

Re: I worked in Amazon HR and was disgusted at what I was seeing with PIP plans

#263

Post by paganel »

> You had visa-sponsored employees who, once we Pivoted them and moved them out, no longer were authorized to work in the United States.

One of the main reasons I staid out of working in the US, maybe it's just sour grapes at this point (as I'm already in my early 40s that train has long passed) but seeing as how I would have basically been considered just a modern work slave it makes me think that I made the right choice. Also, all the best to the poor people affected by this insanity, I'm sure that they deserved much better.

Re: I worked in Amazon HR and was disgusted at what I was seeing with PIP plans

#264

Post by steveBK123 »

zhdc1 wrote: post #254
steveBK123 wrote: post #204

One underlying problem with these PIP type programs at FAANG seems to be that they have very high barriers to entry in the interview process, and then act like 30% of the company is underperforming and subject to an annual 6% cull. There are industries & companies that have grown fat & lazy and could use a few annual 6% culls, but you eventually run out of fat. If you have a very competitive interview process and hig…

> There are industries & companies that have grown fat & lazy and could use a few annual 6% culls, but you eventually run out of fat. Agreed, but there's also an unaddressed issue of whether many (most?) positions at large tech companies provide an actual economic benefit to the company or whether they exist simply because of organizational inefficiencies (Parkinson's Law). To put it another way, a hire may have been…

Forced ranking in your use case doesn't work because it's generally firm wide cascade. Is 6% of every team in every department in every org unnecessary?

No, in fact.. there's teams that should be 2x as big and teams that should be completely let go.

Management actually needs to do what they get the big bucks for and make strategic decisions about what business lines do/don't need to be staffed rather than culling arbitrary %s everywhere.

Think - Google Bard vs Search vs Ads vs Youtube vs their 27 different chat/video apps vs .. etc.

Re: I worked in Amazon HR and was disgusted at what I was seeing with PIP plans

#265

Post by [deleted] »

steveBK123 wrote: post #204

One underlying problem with these PIP type programs at FAANG seems to be that they have very high barriers to entry in the interview process, and then act like 30% of the company is underperforming and subject to an annual 6% cull. There are industries & companies that have grown fat & lazy and could use a few annual 6% culls, but you eventually run out of fat. If you have a very competitive interview process and hig…

[deleted]

Re: I worked in Amazon HR and was disgusted at what I was seeing with PIP plans

#266

Post by 1000100_1000101 »

ballenf wrote: post #116
kudokatz wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if this is the case, it doesn't feel like they tried very hard? I don't think you get it. The way this stuff is done is just as described - totally blindsiding, and potentially flat-out gaslighting. There's no actual metrics or data until they fabricate a paper trail and force you out. You don't win these things. Rather, you take your money and go elsewhere. Then turn down the subsequent job offers you get from the…

But it sounds like he won? He got his $200k and found a new job before any PIP was implemented? Why would his manager have been upset if they were actually trying to force him out? Surely HR knows how long it takes to exit someone and if they wanted to keep the $200k they would have started the process earlier?

> Why would his manager have been upset if they were actually trying to force him out?

The manager made up reasons to place this person in the lowest rating, threatening w/ a PIP. Why? Perhaps to have a warning on file. Perhaps to try to persuade an even higher level of performance than what they'd previously considered excellent... who knows.

The manager being upset shows the PIP threat wasn't justified, as you noted. You don't get upset when a non-performer chooses to leave. Why would anyone continue to work under a manager that unjustly threatens them, or tries to motivate performance w/ fear? No, leaving was the right choice, even if they "won".

To me, it sounds like the manager is the one who really needs to go. Perhaps this really isn't Amazon policy at all, and this manager is being overly tyrannical and training his staff to be the same. We'll never know. On the other hand, Amazon never said what the "number of inaccuracies" were. It could very well be this tale is actually very close to policy too. Heck, it could be the actual policy exactly... zero IS a number after all.

Re: I worked in Amazon HR and was disgusted at what I was seeing with PIP plans

#267

Post by giantg2 »

no_wizard wrote: post #248
giantg2 wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing about fat that I think is overlooked is how fat today might be muscle tomorrow, and how little companies try to convert it. Maybe a person is in a bad role, on a bad team, or simply doesn't have experience or skills fitting the specific requirements of that single point in time. I've been a high performer in the past. Now I'm a low performer (I'm slow) after the company has changed the way it treats teams/w…

You should file for disability accommodations. That is completely legal to ask. Sometimes you need to back it up with documentation, but i suspect that won't be a problem. They can't discriminate against you for this.

I have documentation. They don't care. HR said to just work with my manager on accommodations. My main problem is dealing with ambiguity and context switching. That's something they can't change given their chosen work model.

The old model of working was that you supported 1 main app and maybe a smaller 1 or 2 that were related. These were usually in 1 stack and well documented. The new model is that teams are typical supporting 6-10 apps in multiple stacks. I'm slow when switching between apps and stacks, and without consistent exposure to a single app/stack, I won't get faster.

It's funny though - they talk a big game and even hire in Auticon contractors, but then refuse to do anything for existing employees. I assume a least some of those contractors have similar difficulties as me.

Re: I worked in Amazon HR and was disgusted at what I was seeing with PIP plans

#268

Post by underdeserver »

djha-skin wrote: post #189
pixelmonkey wrote: post #156

Many years ago, when I worked in high finance, it was common knowledge that 3-5% of the staff would be fired every 1-2 years, all at once. This created a lot of tension every time rumours swirled that the "culling" was coming up. But, when you were fired, you were simply given a phone call, out of the blue one day, told to come to an office, and then offered a severance package based on your years of service, and esc…

It's about liability management I think. The company can show a judge that "they did all they can" while like the same time gathering a paper trail on the employee.

In the US, at least, you don't have to show a judge anything.

Re: I worked in Amazon HR and was disgusted at what I was seeing with PIP plans

#270

Post by steveBK123 »

astura wrote: post #251
steveBK123 wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, some people interview better than they work, and vice versa. But do a huge flood of bad employees really make it through these very difficult gates and merit 30% of employees being marked underperformers every year?

Sure, I've seen plenty of very capable people put very little to no effort into their work.

If Amazon's only management stick is to mark 30% underperforms & cull 6% every year, then they need to send their managers to manager school.
Post reply on HN