Live data from Hacker News

Internal Amazon documents shed light on how company pressures out office workers

seattletimes.com

131–140 of 385 posts

Re: Internal Amazon documents shed light on how company pressures out office workers

#131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So a manager might make a bad hire because so they don't have to fire any of the people they like. This is well documented behavior, even in Jack Welch’s book. He was the one famous for cutting 5% every year at GE.

At Amazon*, the "bar raiser" has to approve the hire though, so there's a pretty mechanistic control against the worst form of this. * - as I understand it; never worked there.

You can still have bad hires. It happens rarely that the bar raising process outright fails, but it still happens, since the data you get out of an interview is very limited. For example, we had a team member that not only was doing a bad job on his own stuff, he was a drain on morale and resources for the whole team, since he constantly complained about everything, he never tried to learn anything, he posted big commit dumps every few months - hundreds of commits at once - and the code quality on those was abysmal. Luckily we got rid of him pretty fast, but not fast enough.

Re: Internal Amazon documents shed light on how company pressures out office workers

#132
post #43

The problem with stack ranking at places like microsoft was twofold. First small team managers were forced to rank their reports, and each manager had to get rid of the bottom 10% each year. If you had 20 employees you had to fire 2 employees each year. But statistics doesn't work like that, there were many microsoft teams with all productive employees. And there were probably teams where 30% of the group should have…

Companies implement stack ranking because the management does not have necessarily visibility to valuate each employee. Those who can't stand stack ranking should either join a small startup, where visibility is not issue by nature, or join a team with explosive growth, so each person's productivity and impact can easily be gauged.

Re: Internal Amazon documents shed light on how company pressures out office workers

#133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems pretty well-optimized, right? The employees value the money more than they value well-being, and the company values the money more than it values their well-being. That is pretty good alignment. Also, why wouldn't you just work elsewhere and buy AMZN stock if that's all you want. Work at GOOG, sell your stock, buy AMZN stock.

The reason you wouldn’t work elsewhere and invest is the following: you get hired at Amazon with a total comp of 500k (180 base + 320k in RSUs). You have been in role for 2 years and are completely burnt out. However the stock has doubled, and your total comp (without any raises) is now 820k. That is too much money for people to walk away from. If you leave for GOOG you will get in at the current stock price with no…

[deleted]

Re: Internal Amazon documents shed light on how company pressures out office workers

#134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems pretty well-optimized, right? The employees value the money more than they value well-being, and the company values the money more than it values their well-being. That is pretty good alignment. Also, why wouldn't you just work elsewhere and buy AMZN stock if that's all you want. Work at GOOG, sell your stock, buy AMZN stock.

The reason you wouldn’t work elsewhere and invest is the following: you get hired at Amazon with a total comp of 500k (180 base + 320k in RSUs). You have been in role for 2 years and are completely burnt out. However the stock has doubled, and your total comp (without any raises) is now 820k. That is too much money for people to walk away from. If you leave for GOOG you will get in at the current stock price with no…

You're also on a 4 year 5/15/40/40 vest

Re: Internal Amazon documents shed light on how company pressures out office workers

#135

When the stock goes from 200 to 3500 in 10 years, and consistently goes up and to the right, you won’t find too many of the workers complaining no matter how bad the job conditions are. I have a friend up in Seattle who is suffering, to the point of being hospitalized for mental health issues, but refuses to leave. So HR and leadership believe that their system “works” but it’s really that their employees are willing…

That seems pretty well-optimized, right? The employees value the money more than they value well-being, and the company values the money more than it values their well-being. That is pretty good alignment. Also, why wouldn't you just work elsewhere and buy AMZN stock if that's all you want. Work at GOOG, sell your stock, buy AMZN stock.

> The employees value the money more than they value well-being

yeah, if it's that then Amazon is not to blame.

Re: Internal Amazon documents shed light on how company pressures out office workers

#136

I had joined Amazon as my first job out of school. I was super excited and would not mind working the long hours as the project was interesting. I enjoyed working with my team and manager. Just near the end of the year, my manager quit. The new manager ran my performance review and assessed that my performance didn’t meet expectations. I was not put on PIP. Instead, there would be a development plan that I had to com…

I still can't believe that Amazon measures performance by "numbers of commits" and "SLOC". Pure insanity.

I wonder if people who are hired are being told about that before signing their contract.

Re: Internal Amazon documents shed light on how company pressures out office workers

#137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When the stock goes from 200 to 3500 in 10 years, and consistently goes up and to the right, you won’t find too many of the workers complaining no matter how bad the job conditions are. Tell that to the guys in logistics who don't get any options and bear the brunt of Amazon's bad management.

So, elaborate on your model of the world. Shouldn't the logistic employees already be leaving in droves since they're not getting stock? Why aren't they?

> Why aren't they?

Do you have evidence they aren’t? I was under the impression Amazon warehouse logistics employees had extremely high turnover (averaging less than 1 year).

I suspect I agree with you that logistics workers realize they are on a lower rung of the ladder and are willing to work for less compensation. I suspect much of janitorial and security staff in Amazon HQ probably have no access to stock options either.

Re: Internal Amazon documents shed light on how company pressures out office workers

#138
post #43

The problem with stack ranking at places like microsoft was twofold. First small team managers were forced to rank their reports, and each manager had to get rid of the bottom 10% each year. If you had 20 employees you had to fire 2 employees each year. But statistics doesn't work like that, there were many microsoft teams with all productive employees. And there were probably teams where 30% of the group should have…

Companies implement stack ranking because the management does not have necessarily visibility to valuate each employee. Those who can't stand stack ranking should either join a small startup, where visibility is not issue by nature, or join a team with explosive growth, so each person's productivity and impact can easily be gauged.

> Those who can't stand stack ranking

Do you imply that standing stack ranking is a quality needed to work at big tech ?

Re: Internal Amazon documents shed light on how company pressures out office workers

#139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"the kind of rockstar ninja wizard that can glean multiple offers from all sorts of top tech companies" I don't think this is a helpful stereotype. I know lots of these people and they're quite normal. "Rockstar ninja wizard" makes these jobs sound a lot more unattainable than they really are.

I mean, as someone who has yet to crack one FAANG (or similar level company) offer, a FAANG engineer is someone that I look up to. But my friends and ex-colleagues who did crack FAANG did so with difficulty, and they got rejected from all but the one company that did extend an offer. They all say if they were to re-interview at their companies (or another FAANG), odds are they'd be rejected. So someone who can get of…

I'd argue FAANG offers are like college admissions, probably a good 40% of the applicant pool likely qualifies for the role and can succeed in it, but only 3-4% of the pool gets the offer

Re: Internal Amazon documents shed light on how company pressures out office workers

#140
post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Generally, compensation is pretty closely tied to revenue per employee. Not always, but it’s a pretty good rule of thumb. I don't know of any theoretical reason that would be true nor see any evidence of that in practice.

In microeconomics, it’s a pretty foundational tenet that wages normalize to marginal worker productivity.

I don't remember that from any of my microeconomic courses. I mean, maybe you mean society wide (aka macro), but that's only as average worker productivity rises, and has nothing to do with particularly efficient single firms.
Post reply on HN