I had a few team members laid off yesterday. Based on the standing of my team members and a few other colleagues I know, it doesn’t seem like performance was the criteria. Does anyone know or have an idea on what was the criteria used for layoffs at AWS? TC 160k
Ask Blinders
Yesterday
956
Why is our country owned by Israel? I don't want my tax dollars fund genocide. How can we stop this nonsense?
Personal Finance
7h
1413
Should I marry a lazy girl?
India
Yesterday
675
What cash flow per month will set you financially free
Tech Industry
Yesterday
525
Bitcoin is the only possible future
Cars
8h
927
Electric cars depreciate 10 times faster than gasoline cars
Judging by people affected in my org, I strongly suspect the impact was part of evaluation. All people affected didn't contribute significantly to the delivery past year and new hires (L4/L5 SDEs, SDMs) were not affected.
I can’t say the same for my org. While there were new hires impacted, we had a lot of senior engineers impacted as well. It felt like it was at random since we had people who started 4 months ago stay on, but engineers who have been here 7 years laid off
maybe cost is also a factor?
Seems like it
I am a manager at Amazon and had no idea on criteria or even who was impacted
I’m in sales. Our L8 was laid off, looks like our majority of layoffs were role elimination or because they’re planning to completely reorg, not performance based
Also add it seems like remote employees might have been selected first in some cases but just speculation
Which team?
If the role is still required today
I think one of the biggest criteria is how expensive you are compared to the rest of your team and what they bring. It might’ve been the case that at your hiring, all the stars aligned: you got an advanced degree at a prestigious university, it was an employee’s job market, you had multiple competing offers to leverage, etc… so they gave you TC at the very top of your band. Nobody cared back then because times were good and stocks were at ATH. Now, they got the chop mandate. They’re not gonna remember what competing offers you had originally or what great university you got a degree from. They’re gonna line you up against your colleagues and if the value you bring is not enough to justify your TC compared to your coworkers, you’re getting chopped. You might be a great worker with high performance but maybe your coworker is just as good or better but they cost the company less for whatever reason. It’s all relative.
it does seem that remote workers that had no plans of relocating were given the boot in some cases
Criteria is very simple- to save the bootlickers!
This is not at all true. In most cases, L5/L6/L7 we’re not involved
Everyone who is safe, says that only!
If anyone can prove a layoff was based on performance, the company opens itself up to the biggest lawsuit. Companies randomize just enough to make you question the criteria; they've done their job well
L5/L6/L7 mgrs had no say.
Was definitely not performance based. Managers had no input into the decision
Okay but then was it completely random? I know a few people laid off in proserv were on leave (family/maternity)
Damn that’s cold