Hacker News Reader

Comment by amazon_throw | Hacker News Reader

Current (long tenured, moderately senior) AWS engineer here. I've been at the company long enough it's pretty clear that I'm a "good culture fit", so take what I'm saying with that in mind.

While I absolutely believe that there are pockets of the company that work this way, more because of sheer scale than anything systemic, I have sat in the annual ratings meeting for engineers enough times, in enough organizations within the company, that I am pretty confident that this experience isn't universal.

It sucks that this author had this experience, and I wish they had said which team that was, so that I could use what social cachet I have to steer people clear of it from inside. Nobody should have that experience.

View on HN

It’s a thing. The author was not unlucky. It’s actually a thing (I worked in AWS, I have heard this from several managers, some which actually had trouble struggling with how stupid the system is).

You have a team of X engineers and you want to grow. You hire a couple more. The current engineers have 0 incentives to help the new ones. Most people don’t have the chops (technical or emotional) to go up against a whole team.

Come review time, what do you think is going to happen? As a boss will you let go someone who’s been there for 5 years and knows the service inside out or the new guy who seems to be struggling.

Not all people are jerks, and there are good pockets (but mostly the deck is stacked against you when you join).

Also, IMHO Amazon is going to have a really hard time hiring people with the reputation they created for themselves.

> Also, IMHO Amazon is going to have a really hard time hiring people with the reputation they created for themselves.

The majority cares about money and convenience. If people really cared about reputation then Riot Games, Microsoft, Tesla, Facebook, that big ride sharing company whose name slipped my mind, Shell, and lots of other companies, would be struggling to hire.

hmm. Do Microsoft or Tesla pay well? Last time I interviewed at M$ I had to turn down their offer because of how bad the comp was.

I don't know about Microsoft, but Tesla is well known for having terrible compensation.

Does Tesla give out heavily subsidized (or even free) cars to employees?

Had a friend who worked at Mercedes Benz corporate and he could pretty much pick any non-AMG car in rotating 6-month leases. The monthly lease payment for him to lease a SL550 (a six figure convertible) was about the same as leasing a Honda Civic.

Seems other car companies do similar programs for their employees.

Microsoft really only pays comparatively at each end of the spectrum, so for new grads out of college and people who have Wikipedia articles.

For the majority of people in their career (the Seniors and Principals/Staffs) MS pays significantly worse than other FAANG-type companies, often being well under half in terms of stock compensation for example.

The company is well aware of this as it's constantly brought up in all-hands (both within individual departments as well as at the all-company level), and they always respond with "we've done research and we believe we actually do pay comparatively in this market segment".

> "we've done research and we believe we actually do pay comparatively in this market segment".

Sounds like market fixing and likely illegal, however I can imagine poorly paid employee wouldn't be able to afford a lawsuit.

the 'poorly paid' employees can definitely afford a lawsuit. here's the thing though: if you know what the situation is and continue to work there who is to blame?

also, most stories I've heard is that the sub-optimal comp comes bundled with pretty good WLB. So maybe if you were to double the number of hours worked and double the comp M$ would blow other BigTech out of the water. Maybe this is the play (half the money for half the effort) and everyone knows it.

Do you base affordability on what? The type of lawyer average employee can afford will be easily crushed by a top law firm with virtually unlimited funds.

The fact that one can change job shouldn't enable companies to continue like this.

my point was that the people know the deal they are getting. if they still work there they are okay with it.

to play devil’s advocate (from a top lawyer firm): how can one force a private entity to pay a certain wage that is way over what the minimum wage is?

People have no choice if all companies are doing same thing.

The minimum wage should be tied to company revenue to reflect the value workers generate. I mean revenue, not profit, because those companies are masters at hiding profits to avoid tax.

if the compensation is artificially kept low yes, this should be (and is?) illegal. the fact that there are other places nearby that pay really well tells me that, at a minimum, people have options.

lol. “i actually did my reservations and your compensation is not competitive”

>The current engineers have 0 incentives to help the new ones. Most people don’t have the chops (technical or emotional) to go up against a whole team.

This is why companies want to hire rockstars who can be productive in a couple of months without being helped by colleagues. One can't get such rockstars just by leetcode. Maybe, these companies should pay $1M per annum for such rockstars.

you know. being a rockstar is not a solo thing. It’s a team thing. Usually rockstars teams are born out of high functioning teams where everyone is making everyone better.

I'll tell you mine, L7. Seen and experienced personally things the author describes.

Like I said, I don't doubt that they happen, but given that you've also left the company and seem to have hit one of these areas of toxicity yourself, I'm not surprised you'd think so. Who was your last manager? I'm curious if it's anybody I know?

This went from "weird, defensive throwaway" to "possible Amazon HR agent" in 5 seconds.

I think asking for the name of someone's former manager on a public forum without giving any details in return is pretty suspect.

For those who aren't already aware, Amazon has a history of covertly paying its employees to "represent" the company in social media: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26636021

> It sucks that this author had this experience, and I wish they had said which team that was, so that I could use what social cachet I have to steer people clear of it from inside. Nobody should have that experience.

"I have soft power". Suspicious indeed.

No, far from it; I'm not HR, nowhere close, but I am senior enough that people sometimes listen to me. I'd like to make things better for people if I can, and part of that is "knowing where the problems are". Believe me or don't, it's no skin off my ass, but that's the opposite of my goal.

> seem to have hit one of these areas of toxicity yourself

Have you considered that the original poster's experience is actually the norm and that your experience is the one that is the anomaly? I was 1 for 2 in organizations with shitty leadership, and the organization that was run properly had zero open headcount. Everywhere people are hiring into is not one of the "good ones".

Check out the old-fart tool, 85% of the company has been at Amazon for 3 years or less. Do you think that if the normal/average organization/team was a great place to be, that there would be so much attrition?

I have considered it. I don't see the pattern widely, and I'm watching for it. I've seen teams implode because of it, and other toxic patterns, so it's not that they're not there... they just seem to be in the minority. There are teams I won't send friends to work for, for sure.

I've been doing software development for nearly a decade now and I've seen 0 teams implode. Nothing I would call a "toxic pattern" springs to mind either. If you've seen multiple occurrences of both at Amazon and think it's an ok place to work then I think you've just normalized the dysfunction.

Have you visited teamblind.com?

But hasn't Amazon expanded massively in the last 3 years? I'm not sure how meaningful those numbers are unless the employee count is relatively static.

Not gonna dox other people, you can easy figure out my name and reach out with a "real name".

> Who was your last manager? I'm curious if it's anybody I know?

Would you truly ask that? And have someone's personal name be searchable forever? What is the impetus?

This isn't the first time I've read about Amazon's 30% mandatory turnover rate, how it effects new hires mentally when they can't help but think they might be fired at any moment, and how it effects the ones who actually did get fired. This sounds like the definition of a systemic problem.

> steer people clear of it from inside

What's really needed here is a way to maintain super-scale in a way that is, shall we say, "eventually morally consistent". Applying selection theory, if you create a pocket of badness wrapped in a function that reliably extracts all the good out of it... well all you'll be left with is a local maximum of even more suffering. Yeow.

Of course, designing and maintaining such social structures seems close to P=NP in complexity...

tell me about a time you delivered awesome results while operating out of a pocket of badness

>steer people clear of that org

Um, shouldn't we fix the org instead!!!

Very glad that I've been denied from Amazon final round twice now. It was great interview practice and nothing more

I didn't reveal my team to maintain some form of anonymity. If you're an L8 or above then you may have some power to do what you said. Otherwise I don't think it'll make a difference.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com