3 ms·

"I felt like it didn’t matter what I said or what I did. He was going to get me out. I can’t tell if it was because of taking family leave. He basically had dec

"I felt like it didn’t matter what I said or what I did. He was going to get me out. I can’t tell if it was because of taking family leave. He basically had decided that he was going to let me go, regardless." Amazon managers often have target URAs (unregretted attrition) to hit, around 6% per year in an organization. They are incentivized to fire people who don't perform, regardless of the reason. If they don't do it, someone else on their team might have to go. If they cannot hit URA targets, those managers could become targets to let go as URA. This is a well-known tradeoff within most tech circles on the risk of working for Amazon. Unlike Netflix, who are clear about a similar policy (though without targets) Amazon does not advertise that they have internal URA targets externally. I'll also add that from the outside, this setup has worked surprisingly well for Amazon for well over a decade - based on business results and how they became one of the most valuable companies in the world. However, as this policy is more known and stories like the author's surface, it's starting to hurt their brand in ways that hurts their hiring and is forcing them to have to pay more to hire ("would you take job A or job B that pay the same, knowing that 6% of people per year are fired at job A being Amazon?")

devoutsalsa 5y ago
Is that similar to stack ranking, where the “bottom” X% is culled each year? Or is it exactly that? I recall that process being deemed ultimately shortsighted.
- Areading314 5y ago
  It is exactly that
- saiya-jin 5y ago
  Saw this in my company few years ago when "agile" management was at the helm. But it was more in "cut X % workforce immediately", repeated few times even when financials were OK. It stressed people to no end, even well above average ones. Quite a few better ones left on their own. The company definitely lost overall. The next CEO guy came targeted especially this - something along the lines of "we let leavers/retirees go and just don't hire for now". It worked wonders, people were more focused on actual work and job hunting.
Jansen333 5y ago
Amazon will have to pay a premium for workers that have 6% culling risk. If pay the same, zero chance picking Amazon assuming other factors are same too.
- alasdair_ 5y ago
  With the $160k salary cap (now lifted a week or two ago) and the super unfriendly vesting schedule (where you get almost nothing after year one) and a “signing bonus” that takes two full years to be paid out[0] it’s unlikely they are in the same caliber overall. This is notably obvious when you apply for an internal transfer and need to go through a full interview loop again because the new team doesn’t trust that the old team were competent at screening out poor performers. [0] imagine getting an offer with a million dollar signing bonus listed, only to see in the fine print that this bonus is paid in $10k increments over the next centry.
Tainnor 5y ago
> If they don't do it, someone else on their team might have to go. Then fire someone else. Somebody who is not going through a family health crisis will have an easier time finding a new job. Yes, Amazon's policies are shitty, but the manager still deserves to be blamed. Of course, the whole situation sounds completely ridiculous when you live in a country where it's simply illegal to fire workers without cause, especially on such a mass scale as Amazon is doing it.
- lasereyes136 5y ago
  It is not illegal to fire workers without a cause. All layoffs are letting people go for no cause (with their work or behavior). Many states are "right to work" states where you and or your employer can decide to part ways at anytime for no reason. It is illegal to let people go for some reasons but in most cases letting people go for no reason at all is just fine.
  - foldr 5y ago
    I think you missed the “when you live in a country where” part of the grandparent’s comment.

devoutsalsa 5y ago

Is that similar to stack ranking, where the “bottom” X% is culled each year? Or is it exactly that? I recall that process being deemed ultimately shortsighted.

Areading314 5y ago
It is exactly that
saiya-jin 5y ago
Saw this in my company few years ago when "agile" management was at the helm. But it was more in "cut X % workforce immediately", repeated few times even when financials were OK. It stressed people to no end, even well above average ones. Quite a few better ones left on their own. The company definitely lost overall. The next CEO guy came targeted especially this - something along the lines of "we let leavers/retirees go and just don't hire for now". It worked wonders, people were more focused on actual work and job hunting.

Jansen333 5y ago

Amazon will have to pay a premium for workers that have 6% culling risk. If pay the same, zero chance picking Amazon assuming other factors are same too.

alasdair_ 5y ago
With the $160k salary cap (now lifted a week or two ago) and the super unfriendly vesting schedule (where you get almost nothing after year one) and a “signing bonus” that takes two full years to be paid out[0] it’s unlikely they are in the same caliber overall. This is notably obvious when you apply for an internal transfer and need to go through a full interview loop again because the new team doesn’t trust that the old team were competent at screening out poor performers. [0] imagine getting an offer with a million dollar signing bonus listed, only to see in the fine print that this bonus is paid in $10k increments over the next centry.

Tainnor 5y ago

> If they don't do it, someone else on their team might have to go. Then fire someone else. Somebody who is not going through a family health crisis will have an easier time finding a new job. Yes, Amazon's policies are shitty, but the manager still deserves to be blamed. Of course, the whole situation sounds completely ridiculous when you live in a country where it's simply illegal to fire workers without cause, especially on such a mass scale as Amazon is doing it.

lasereyes136 5y ago
It is not illegal to fire workers without a cause. All layoffs are letting people go for no cause (with their work or behavior). Many states are "right to work" states where you and or your employer can decide to part ways at anytime for no reason. It is illegal to let people go for some reasons but in most cases letting people go for no reason at all is just fine.
- foldr 5y ago
  I think you missed the “when you live in a country where” part of the grandparent’s comment.