How are they retaining staff?
Sounds like they want a round of layoffs but don’t want to pay severance.
Submitted 1 month ago by sabreW4K3@lazysoci.al to technology@beehaw.org
https://www.theregister.com/2024/09/16/hybrid_amazon_return_to_work/
How are they retaining staff?
Sounds like they want a round of layoffs but don’t want to pay severance.
How are they retaining staff?
They retain them for the 4-5 years it takes for signing cash and signing stock units to all run out, at which point many people start to get itchy feet.
My brother is high up in AWS. The options don’t run out. They keep coming so that you’re pretty much handcuffed.
He has a really nice house and all that but he’s been stressed out a lot the past few years and he’s normally as calm as a Hindu cow.
Well, that’s probably because he’s hit the cap on base salary. After a certain point in Amazon, the majority of your income at Amazon is derived from shares.
That said, after the signing shares are yours after the first 4-5 years, you’re down to the yearly grants they hand out, which come the year after they were granted, in quarterly amounts.
Also, if your brother is high up, he probably got more shares this year than usual, as Amazon announced that only certain levels and below were getting salary increases. Higher up only got shares.
They won’t. They’ll just substitute them. The idea is trying to force every company do the same thing, as making people work locally makes them more dependent on their local company and less likely to jump to a better job.
Amazon is kinda known for burn and churn. They like have the appearance of a good place to work by not having a dress code, letting people bring dogs in, and being the kind of place that has beer on tap. None of it is worth the burnout though
You know, at some point, you gotta assume they’ll eventually hire and fire/lose all the usable talent they have access to, and shit like this will prevent them finding new talent. Until some exec “invents” WFH as a perk…
This is just another layoff in disguise. Make it miserable, so people leave without severance.
I thought it was for real estate value
Both of these things can be true. You can’t discount the rich and their ability to do evil in multiple dimensions with one choice.
They are retaining staff by paying more than most other companies, but they also have a reputation for running their workers into the ground by overworking them. Many burn out pretty quickly.
When I was there actual salaries were lower, but they gave out a lot of RSUs. Good ole golden handcuffs
Fuck Andy Jassy.
What a bell end
Asshole.
thisnameisnottolong@aussie.zone 1 month ago
I bet he isn’t in the office 5 days a week…
sunbeam60@lemmy.one 1 month ago
I’ve been fully remote since COVID and have successfully argued for my team staying fully remote. I don’t for a second buy that a team works better in person, provided you make the right changes to your culture to ensure remote works.
I’m a fan of remote.
But come on, thats false equivalence and you know it. Of course a CEO isn’t in his office 5 days a week; mostly likely he is travelling 3 weeks out of 4 and the last week he is actually in his nearest office. You would expect a CEO to move around their business. If they sat in an office every day they wouldn’t be doing their job.
Look at the job description and then decide if a role can be non-office-based.
thisnameisnottolong@aussie.zone 1 month ago
So your saying it’s not appropriate to have a blanket rule for everyone demanding everyone work in the office 5 days a week… False equivalency my arse. His job description is “make number go up”. He could do his job from a small office next to the sales guy. On what planet do you think defending the CEO will make a difference when your employer decides they need more control over your life?