If you do the maths, the average manager receives 250k a year in benefits.
That's surprisingly low for Amazon.
"in benefits" - to me reads like "in addition to base pay." - is this not right?
Amazon plans to lay off 14,000 managerial positions to save $3.5B yearly
101–110 of 285 posts
Re: Amazon plans to lay off 14,000 managerial positions to save $3.5B yearly
#102I'm going to make the observation that politics in a company is caused by management. The more "politics" you have at a company, the more you pay in a "political tax". Effort which should benefit the company is delayed or made harder as employees have to bob and weave to get through the politics. I do believe if you want real culture change in a company, the best way to do it is to show managers the door, because tha…
(Context: I’m an IC and told my Manager multiple times that I’d quit if they ever make me a manager) If you truly believe that, please do yourself a favor and read “The tyranny of structurelessness” to understand what a managerless place becomes. everyone and no one becomes a manager, and there’s no explicit avenue of recourse. There’s a good reason management arises. We can discuss good management vs bad management,…
I'm not entirely sure why when one person quits, the company becomes managerless?
Re: Amazon plans to lay off 14,000 managerial positions to save $3.5B yearly
#103I don't understand the shit 'managers' get on here. I've been in this industry for 15+ years and with one or two rare exceptions every manager has been great. They respect my time, when I need something they're incredibly helpful, and they care about my career development. IMO the culling over managers over the past few years is really a way to make sure you don't have someone you can discuss career development, prom…
Genuinely unique experience for you probably.
I think career wise in 20 years I'd break down my experience as - 25% benign, 25% malign, 50% good.
This is across 6+ companies, 15-20 managers.
Re: Amazon plans to lay off 14,000 managerial positions to save $3.5B yearly
#104Interesting that the math tells us AMZN average manager compensation is $250k?
Seems.. low?
Re: Amazon plans to lay off 14,000 managerial positions to save $3.5B yearly
#105For context: Total # Employee: 1,556,000 Planned # Layoff: 14,000 (or 0.9%) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_(company)
This isn't the whole story though. While Amazon might have 1.5m employees, many of those are going to be in the fulfilment and distribution process, which is a very different place to being in engineering/product/finance/business/marketing working in an office.
I think it would be more useful to split the company down that line, in which case Amazon probably have ~300k(?) on the office side, and this represents more like a 4-5% layoff, a level at which people will really notice it.
Re: Amazon plans to lay off 14,000 managerial positions to save $3.5B yearly
#106I don't understand the shit 'managers' get on here. I've been in this industry for 15+ years and with one or two rare exceptions every manager has been great. They respect my time, when I need something they're incredibly helpful, and they care about my career development. IMO the culling over managers over the past few years is really a way to make sure you don't have someone you can discuss career development, prom…
Unique experience. I've had mostly useless managers in my 15y career, downright toxic ones in my 3y AWS stint.
Re: Amazon plans to lay off 14,000 managerial positions to save $3.5B yearly
#107I don't understand the shit 'managers' get on here. I've been in this industry for 15+ years and with one or two rare exceptions every manager has been great. They respect my time, when I need something they're incredibly helpful, and they care about my career development. IMO the culling over managers over the past few years is really a way to make sure you don't have someone you can discuss career development, prom…
Genuinely unique experience for you probably. I think career wise in 20 years I'd break down my experience as - 25% benign, 25% malign, 50% good. This is across 6+ companies, 15-20 managers.
The way people on HN sometimes talk about "management," you'd think the universal experience is 1% good, 9% benign, 90% actively seeking the downfall of civilization
Managers seem like a good example of the "toupee problem" -- the ones you notice, and really remember, are the bad ones; the best, you might never see at all.
Re: Amazon plans to lay off 14,000 managerial positions to save $3.5B yearly
#108I don't understand the shit 'managers' get on here. I've been in this industry for 15+ years and with one or two rare exceptions every manager has been great. They respect my time, when I need something they're incredibly helpful, and they care about my career development. IMO the culling over managers over the past few years is really a way to make sure you don't have someone you can discuss career development, prom…
I've also had all good managers who helped me move up levels, etc. across 3 companies for about 5 years. I think you're right about the side effects, and it's sad to see. It reflects, in my mind, an acknowledgment from these companies that they won't grow as much in the future as people right now think they will
Re: Amazon plans to lay off 14,000 managerial positions to save $3.5B yearly
#109Amazon (the online retailer nowadays mostly hawking Chinese alphabet-salad-named brands) and/or AWS the cloud service behemoth? I continue to find it so bizarre that they are the same company.
It seems weird but realizing one supports the other it kinda makes sense.
For example, Discover spun out from Sears attempts at having an in house credit card. Ally started as a financing division of GM. In both cases, you'd think similarly how it's weird one company runs both a bank and builds cars or sells houses.
It doesn't seem that different, in that Amazon started AWS to support its primary business, then realized they could sell it to others.
Re: Amazon plans to lay off 14,000 managerial positions to save $3.5B yearly
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
Incredibly hard. If there were some formula and it was really easy to just keep "the good ones", then every company would only have great managers. It's simply not that easy at scale.
Listen to yourself. It's management's job to manage people. Some of those people are going to be managers. So management can't police themselves apparently? I don't buy it.
Correct. It's fundamentally a problem that cannot be completely solved. People are too messy.