4 ms·

This only suggests that Amazon's practice is not sustainable. They are paying a premium yet getting perpetually inexperienced people who won't stay as they gain

by tensor 13y ago

This only suggests that Amazon's practice is not sustainable. They are paying a premium yet getting perpetually inexperienced people who won't stay as they gain experience. Surely there is more going on here? This doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

ryguytilidie 13y ago
I don't necessarily agree that some of the best college students graduating each year are inexperienced. A lot of them have been working for 10+ years on their own stuff and have interned 3 times or so.
eshvk 13y ago
I don't think it is deliberate.From my friends who joined over the past three years, I think the problem is that burnout as well as incredibly dysfunctional teams is the reason people quit after two years or so. They have been trying to retain people by throwing more money at them (both those who join and might be aware through their friend network of the stigma) and those who are already working there.
nandemo 13y ago
I guess it is sustainable, in the sense that there are far more new grads each year than new Amazon hires, and Amazon can afford to pay extra (as evidenced by their financials). It's just far from optimal.
barry-cotter 13y ago
Sixty hour work weeks are sustainable for most twenty somethings, not healthy but sustainable. If you pay twenty per cent more than MS for fresh grads but get fifty per cent more work out of them you'll come out ahead. This does require real standards in hiring to ensure your perpetually mildly sleep deprived workers can do glue code in their sleep because a lot of the time they will be. This model also requires a constant stream of fresh grads but at market + 20% that won't be a problem. The turnover does suggest that Amazon's reputation as a hellish place to work is well earner but it could easily be as profitable long term as Google's much more humane one.

4 ms·

This only suggests that Amazon's practice is not sustainable. They are paying a premium yet getting perpetually inexperienced people who won't stay as they gain

by tensor 13y ago

ryguytilidie 13y ago
I don't necessarily agree that some of the best college students graduating each year are inexperienced. A lot of them have been working for 10+ years on their own stuff and have interned 3 times or so.
eshvk 13y ago
I don't think it is deliberate.From my friends who joined over the past three years, I think the problem is that burnout as well as incredibly dysfunctional teams is the reason people quit after two years or so. They have been trying to retain people by throwing more money at them (both those who join and might be aware through their friend network of the stigma) and those who are already working there.
nandemo 13y ago
I guess it is sustainable, in the sense that there are far more new grads each year than new Amazon hires, and Amazon can afford to pay extra (as evidenced by their financials). It's just far from optimal.
barry-cotter 13y ago
Sixty hour work weeks are sustainable for most twenty somethings, not healthy but sustainable. If you pay twenty per cent more than MS for fresh grads but get fifty per cent more work out of them you'll come out ahead. This does require real standards in hiring to ensure your perpetually mildly sleep deprived workers can do glue code in their sleep because a lot of the time they will be. This model also requires a constant stream of fresh grads but at market + 20% that won't be a problem. The turnover does suggest that Amazon's reputation as a hellish place to work is well earner but it could easily be as profitable long term as Google's much more humane one.