4 ms·

Idk if it’s Bezo’s roots in finance, but Amazon seems a brutal workplace for all levels of employment (I don’t know anything about the lives of senior managers)

Idk if it’s Bezo’s roots in finance, but Amazon seems a brutal workplace for all levels of employment (I don’t know anything about the lives of senior managers). The company outright abuses its blue collar employees, and routinely mistreats its engineering staff. Stories of its toxic practices have been spread for at least a decade now. What’s especially baffling to me, and I admit this is merely rumor, is that they’ll actually adjust your raise schedule to take into account the price of the stock, so it’s hard to imagine it being highly lucrative. Of all the big tech companies, I think Amazon is most likely to unionize.

s5300 5y ago
For what it's worth though... To my knowledge, they give damn good benefits. I don't think there's any other company in the U.S. where the lowest tier laborers get the same medical benefits as their best SWE's. Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong, I haven't looked into it as much as I should have to make this statement. Just going off what a friend who worked there most recently told me.
- cratermoon 5y ago
  Starbucks Coffee, perhaps? But really, having good health care shouldn't be tied to having a job. That's a peculiarity of the US that's done long-term damage over decades.
boulos 5y ago
> Idk if it’s Bezo’s roots in finance Bezos graduated from Princeton in the mid-80s, and while he did do a stint at some networking company (but for Finance), he ended up in finance directly. He was at D.E. Shaw when the web exploded, and he left to start Amazon.
mytailorisrich 5y ago
The most successful companies are always brutal in at least two aspects: (1) they are demanding and (2) they do not tolerate mediocrity. Go to any of the top players in a given industry and it will be the same. That actually makes sense because competition in the marketplace is brutal. You won't succeed (or not for long) if you don't aim high and let people take it easy.
- grumple 5y ago
  If 2) were true, these top companies wouldn't have regular, public failures, mediocre products outside of their core competencies, and they wouldn't progress primarily through acquisitions (many of which also fail).
  - mytailorisrich 5y ago
    This is a false equivalence. Not tolerating mediocrity does not guarantee success or even great, successful products. But tolerating mediocrity is sure to lead to even more mediocre products. Acquisitions are neither here nor there. People like Bezos, Jobs, Musk are not easy to work with because they are driven and do not tolerate mediocrity (but that still does not guarantee success) and that's why the result stands out.
    - grumple 5y ago
      How else can mediocrity or excellence be measured but by results? There is no other measure that matters in business. Are we to take the stories of hiring to fire, constant infighting, favoritism, bigotry, and other inefficiencies and derive from that information that these companies are wise and excellent, instead of at least a little incompetent and mediocre, perhaps not overall but at least in part and by design?

s5300 5y ago

For what it's worth though... To my knowledge, they give damn good benefits. I don't think there's any other company in the U.S. where the lowest tier laborers get the same medical benefits as their best SWE's. Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong, I haven't looked into it as much as I should have to make this statement. Just going off what a friend who worked there most recently told me.

cratermoon 5y ago
Starbucks Coffee, perhaps? But really, having good health care shouldn't be tied to having a job. That's a peculiarity of the US that's done long-term damage over decades.

boulos 5y ago

> Idk if it’s Bezo’s roots in finance Bezos graduated from Princeton in the mid-80s, and while he did do a stint at some networking company (but for Finance), he ended up in finance directly. He was at D.E. Shaw when the web exploded, and he left to start Amazon.

mytailorisrich 5y ago

The most successful companies are always brutal in at least two aspects: (1) they are demanding and (2) they do not tolerate mediocrity. Go to any of the top players in a given industry and it will be the same. That actually makes sense because competition in the marketplace is brutal. You won't succeed (or not for long) if you don't aim high and let people take it easy.

grumple 5y ago
If 2) were true, these top companies wouldn't have regular, public failures, mediocre products outside of their core competencies, and they wouldn't progress primarily through acquisitions (many of which also fail).
- mytailorisrich 5y ago
  This is a false equivalence. Not tolerating mediocrity does not guarantee success or even great, successful products. But tolerating mediocrity is sure to lead to even more mediocre products. Acquisitions are neither here nor there. People like Bezos, Jobs, Musk are not easy to work with because they are driven and do not tolerate mediocrity (but that still does not guarantee success) and that's why the result stands out.
  - grumple 5y ago
    How else can mediocrity or excellence be measured but by results? There is no other measure that matters in business. Are we to take the stories of hiring to fire, constant infighting, favoritism, bigotry, and other inefficiencies and derive from that information that these companies are wise and excellent, instead of at least a little incompetent and mediocre, perhaps not overall but at least in part and by design?