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

Amazon confirms 14,000 job losses in corporate division

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 537 posts

Re: Amazon confirms 14,000 job losses in corporate division

#231

Post by ericmay »

martin-t wrote: post #184
ericmay wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also doesn’t Amazon and many other tech companies give out RSUs as part of compensation for corporate employees? Obviously not all, but the OP’s complaint is, in my view, not entirely fair to levy at Amazon specifically.

What does the R stand for? This is not the same. It is similar, it gives the veneer of meritocracy and ownership but it's not the same. Compare how much ownership per unit of work each person has. In fact, only one side knows the company's financial status so it cannot even be a fair negotiation, let alone fair outcome. --- In a society which claims that everyone is equal and in which everyone lives roughly the same…

> What does the R stand for?

Restricted, but your point isn’t a good one. You don’t hire someone then hand them, idk $50,000 in stock or options so they can leave the next day. CEOs even get paid in stock grants based on performance or other such restrictions options, etc., (obviously there’s a lot of variation here) with lots of strings attached (maybe not enough but that’s beside the point).

> In a society which claims that everyone is equal

No, you are making this up. Society doesn’t claim that everyone is equal. We claim you should be treated equally under the eyes of the law, which by the way our poor performance here is a criticism that I think is very valid.

Re: Amazon confirms 14,000 job losses in corporate division

#232

Post by deaux »

markus_zhang wrote: post #71
actionfromafar wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's almost like a merger of Capital and State.

It has been and it is. Both US and China have successfully created a Leviathan albeit if different form. EU is way behind and that’s why it’s losing.

It's "losing" compared to the US? Haha. I guess from a true VC startup bro perspective. It's not "the EU is way behind the US and China", it's "the EU and US are way behind China". Because the latter is the only one who has been taking long-term decision on decision over the last decades, whereas for the other two, 95% is for the short-term, the next quarter, the next election a year from now. The US is even worse in this regard, hence why it's deteriorating even more rapidly.

Re: Amazon confirms 14,000 job losses in corporate division

#233

Post by lotsofpulp »

dgs_sgd wrote: post #211
andsoitis wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> These aren't "job losses", these are "firings". While both terms mean someone no longer has a job, they differ in cause and implication. Firing is when employer terminates someone for cause, i.e. employee did something wrong or didn't meet expectations. Job loss is a broader term, simply means the person no longer has a job, for any reason, but typically layoffs, downsizing, restructuring, plant closure, or being f…

Why is downsizing and an employee’s role no longer being cost effective for the business not considered “cause” for firing?

In the US, if your employment is terminated for cause, i.e. due to your underperformance at work, then you are not eligible to receive unemployment benefits from the government.

There could be other conditions too depending on whatever employment agreement exists, but the point is to determine if an employee’s lack of performance caused their employment to be terminated or something external to the employee caused their employment to be terminated.

Re: Amazon confirms 14,000 job losses in corporate division

#234

Post by piva00 »

array_key_first wrote: post #51
nemomarx wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

are stocks even going up outside of tech stocks that can benefit from AI investment? everything else seems stagnant

No. And even in tech, its highly concentrated in AI. The S&P 500 is almost 10% Nvidia. Just Nvidia. Y'all that's scary.

The Nifty Fifty concept from the 70s sound almost sensible compared to the bullshit of Magnificent Seven of now.

The same cycle just goes around and around...

Re: Amazon confirms 14,000 job losses in corporate division

#235

Post by josefritzishere »

The unemployment rate in the US is climbing. If you look at a 5-year curve, it looks like nothing. But if you look at a 3-year window it's devastating. Seeing the highs of 2003 and 2009 it seems likely that it will continue to climb. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNRATE

Re: Amazon confirms 14,000 job losses in corporate division

#236

Post by reaperducer »

01HNNWZ0MV43FF wrote: post #95
cheschire wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was not aware of this term before. For others: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/jeff-bezos-day-1-versus-2-com...

Non-LinkedIn version: https://ourdinnertable.wordpress.com/2025/05/06/jeff-bezos-d... > “Day 2 is stasis. Followed by irrelevance. Followed by death. And that’s why it’s always Day 1.” Sharks don't look back, cause they don't have necks. Necks are for sheep

Sharks don't look back, cause they don't have necks. Necks are for sheep

Sharks eat sheep?

Re: Amazon confirms 14,000 job losses in corporate division

#237

Post by torginus »

Esophagus4 wrote: post #183
torginus wrote: post #152

My personal question is aren't managers in AWS technical people? Can't you offer them IC positions?

Google tried this and gave up, as it didn’t work out[1]. For now, there’s a lot of focus on automating software dev jobs, but I think companies are just starting to realize automation will thin the management layers as well. [1] https://bpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/sites.psu.edu/dist/3/50375/fil...

Yuck, what even is that website? Someone pays for this?

Re: Amazon confirms 14,000 job losses in corporate division

#238

Post by ericmay »

humanrebar wrote: post #215
ericmay wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US kind of does in that at least in spirit if the government violates the constitution we have this 2nd Amendment and plenty of moral precedent from the founders. It’s in the Declaration of Independence too which, in my view, is just the first page of the Constitution. The 0th Amendment if you will. Related to your second point about autocracy - I mean the good thing is you can, today, go start a company with the…

Also the U.S. Constitution allows for a full rewrite by a constitutional convention process. This hasn't been attempted, of course.

Yea good point. I always forget about that.

Re: Amazon confirms 14,000 job losses in corporate division

#239

Post by reaperhulk »

conception wrote: post #206
01HNNWZ0MV43FF wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Non-LinkedIn version: https://ourdinnertable.wordpress.com/2025/05/06/jeff-bezos-d... > “Day 2 is stasis. Followed by irrelevance. Followed by death. And that’s why it’s always Day 1.” Sharks don't look back, cause they don't have necks. Necks are for sheep

I hope the shark thing isn’t said in earnest ever by anyone. It is the height of parody of a hustle culture bro. On second thought would you want $1 million now or $5000 a day and the guy says neither because that’s not how you build wealth or something. It’s probably number one.

The shark line is a quote from Futurama in an episode where an 80s corporate raider takes over Planet Express.

Re: Amazon confirms 14,000 job losses in corporate division

#240

Post by monooso »

dgs_sgd wrote: post #211
andsoitis wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> These aren't "job losses", these are "firings". While both terms mean someone no longer has a job, they differ in cause and implication. Firing is when employer terminates someone for cause, i.e. employee did something wrong or didn't meet expectations. Job loss is a broader term, simply means the person no longer has a job, for any reason, but typically layoffs, downsizing, restructuring, plant closure, or being f…

Why is downsizing and an employee’s role no longer being cost effective for the business not considered “cause” for firing?

IANAL, but I believe "cause" means "the employee gave the company cause to fire them". Poor performance, bad conduct, etc.
Post reply on HN