• Trailblazing Braille Taser@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      13 days ago

      Do not give Bezos ideas about uploading brains to the cloud. He would make AWS CloudEmployee, an employee-as-a-service product that lets you scale your business up or down, without expensive layoffs and bad PR.

  • Mystech@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    13 days ago

    Yet another thinly veiled stealth lay-off by a technology company. Amazon’s cloud boss Matt “The Prat” Garman will indeed see some departures, as intended and desired. However, that first wave will be of their most talented, who feel confident they will land on their feet elsewhere, leaving those that simply cannot leave (yet) or those that will cozily under perform. When Amazon applies the inevitable followup reductions (subjectively based on their internal review process) to remove the latter, and the former buckle under the load or also leave, Amazon will be left with lower-middle talent at best.

    The more I see of business “strategy” among this layer of “leadership”, the more I’m convinced it is just a game of Jenga with talent, resources, infrastructure, security, quality, etc; pulling out as many pieces as possible in the drive for short term/sighted gains until a company collapses under its own dysfunctional “efficiency” and “success”.

    • Shard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      13 days ago

      This is absolutely it. The C-suite and senior management are made up of sharp people. They absolutely know this will trigger an exodus and a large bag of fire-able workers. They don’t care that they’re likely to lose a bunch of talented, hardworking staff. Its all been accounted for. At worst the results of a mass exodus will only impact their bottom line in a few years. They just need this years numbers to look good and line to go up.

    • dufkm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      13 days ago

      Depending on your country, that is the norm. Engineers here have at least 2 national unions to choose from, finance have a couple of unions, same with teachers, admin staff, etc. etc.

      As usual, this is probably just US being victim of 'merican exceptionlism.

    • Lexam@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      14 days ago

      And they are smart enough to put us at the very bottom of the management ladder, even though we’re not actually management. That way we can’t legally unionize. In the U.S. at least.

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        13 days ago

        That way we can’t legally unionize. In the U.S. at least.

        This must vary state-by-state, or have exceptions, because I could name examples of them (but I would rather not dox myself).

        • Lexam@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          13 days ago

          It’s not every company, but that is what mine did. We’re “management” but we don’t manage anyone.

          • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            13 days ago

            Given how “business-friendly” the US has become, I imagine there are all sorts of loopholes that only work in favor of the corporation.

            • nforminvasion@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              13 days ago

              There doesn’t need to be loopholes anymore. The SC will just blatantly rule in favor of companies.

              In case anyone has missed it, they’re done with loopholes, done with being sly and coy. They are saying the quiet parts, they are marching proudly, they are confident and unafraid. We need to make them afraid again.

              The right wing and its corporate masters are done hiding in shadow. Loopholes and subterfuge are for chumps when you can just change the rules without consequence.

          • Vandals_handle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            13 days ago

            Classifying employees as management without having actual management duties is a violation of federal labor law. You might be owed back wages/overtime. Could be worth looking into. A class action lawsuit against a previous employer I had led to hundreds of employees getting checks for thousands of dollars, even after lawyers took their fee.

            Some technical jobs can be legally classified exempt from overtime. That is different than being classified as management.

    • kyle@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      14 days ago

      I agree. I’m in pre-sales working at an AWS partner and honestly our whole team is treated as dispensable.

      • roofuskit@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        13 days ago

        At Amazon literally every employee is dispensable. They have a firing quota.

        Edit: to be clear I’m talking about the Amazon divisions outside the warehouse. They make managers fire a certain percentage of people on a regular basis.

      • the_radness@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        14 days ago

        I have been laid off from every job (5 in total) since the pandemic. We are a subhuman commodity. Companies that are hiring now are exploiting the market by offering lower salaries.

        Meta and Amazon are in their hiring season and they’ll start their layoffs again next spring or summer. And somehow, everyone forgets this fucked up cycle keeps happening in perpetuum.

        We need to stop being afraid of mentioning the U word. We need better protection and rights as employees.

  • sunbeam60@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    14 days ago

    I’m 47. I’m not a boomer (although I’m probably hella-old compared to most here) and I’d just like to say: What a bloody bunch of boomer-bosses.

    “Have you tried disagreeing on a call! It’s hard!”

    Grow up man, use the hand up feature and state your case. I work in a fully remote business and we have better meetings here than any office based meeting I’ve ever been in. Calendars are public, confluence is prevalent, slack is the lifeline (thankfully very little email) for everything; with a bunch of “banter”, hobby channels etc. We start every large meeting with a “one personal and one professional highlight” before we commence. I know the people here better than I’ve ever done my office based colleagues.

    They are going to regret this. I do not know any developer who would prefer 5 days in the office. None. It’s not like Amazon’s compensation was that high. I really genuinely don’t understand how they expect to recruit.

    • Sentient Loom@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      14 days ago

      They are going to regret this.

      I really hope they do. But now is a good time to put the squeeze on devs. Lots of people are having a hard time finding a software job and they’ll be extra reluctant to do a mass exodus.

    • billwashere@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      14 days ago

      I think you might be surprised. There’s literally dozens of us gen-x’ers on here. (I’m 53).

      Luckily I work for a university and the hybrid thing is still going strong. Honestly I tend to get more done when I’m at home because the social aspect of being at work is very distracting for someone with ADHD like me.

      And I hope they do regret it. The only managers I’ve seen that push for the RTO thing are the micromanagers who think they are necessary for productivity. News flash, they aren’t. The best managers set expectations, shield their employees from the bullshit above them, give them the appropriate tools and work environments to be successful, and trust them to do what is necessary.

      And yes I’d never work for a Google or an Amazon. You’re a cog, a disposable piece of machinery.

    • Eiri@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      13 days ago

      I do know a few devs who prefer 5 days in the office. But they’re absolutely the minority.

      Personally, I try to go once a week, but I usually don’t because I dread having a day with 50% my normal productivity.

      It’s just so noisy all the time in there. Open space and really high ceilings for “collaboration”…

    • MattTheProgrammer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      14 days ago

      These people aren’t interested in hearing dissenting opinions. I’m sure they’ve already heard arguments for it. They just don’t care. They’d rather cut costs by doing something many people won’t tolerate so that they leave and then figuring it out after the fact.

    • Ilflish@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      14 days ago

      Ironically I’ve found it’s harder for people to run away in remote, people don’t disappear from their desks and you don’t have to chase them down. If they don’t message back and it’s urgent, you call and if they don’t pick up a call and haven’t marked themselves as such something’s up. People are extremely dilligent about making sure they use status’ due to the knowledge that people will assume that way.

      • sunbeam60@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        14 days ago

        An office is also a great place to hide away as “busy”; shuffling around, a bit of time at desk, join a meeting and say nothing, coffee, lunch, shuffling, another meeting with low contribution and you’re gone. Doing nothing is just as easy, and less assailable, in an office.

        • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          13 days ago

          Almost as if there’s a reason that C-suite level people are so adamant about returning to office…

  • MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    14 days ago

    Another company that lays off it’s talented people first, due to the meddling of a CEO where he has no business to.

  • Dayroom7485@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    14 days ago

    At the all-hands meeting, Garman said he’s been speaking with employees and “nine out of 10 people are actually quite excited by this change.”

    Just imagine the conversation between the CEO of AWS and some random employee.

    „What do you think about the return-to-office policy I propose, Cog #18574?“ „Great idea Mr. Garman sir, really smart move from your team. Incredible thinking and leadership from you Mr. Garman.“

    continues to tell people that 9/10 employees he talks to are excited to return to office.

    • billwashere@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      13 days ago

      9 out of the 10 he talked to are brown nosers and tell him what he wants to hear.

      Unless they were preselected micromanagers who like to bully their employees.

      Nobody I’ve EVER talked to wants 5 days in the office anymore. 2-3 tops. Even 3 levels above me don’t.

    • veni_vedi_veni@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      13 days ago

      The “anonymous” survey asked this question with two choices: I agree or I’m looking for opportunities elsewhere

    • evilcultist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      13 days ago

      He has to be straight up lying. There’s no way 9/10 are excited to be ordered back into the office. If that were the case, they’d have been in the office already.

      • billwashere@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        That’s a very good point that I’ve never really thought of. It’s not like anybody was keeping them from going back into the office. If they wanted five days a week, they would already have been there five days a week.

        • jj4211@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          13 days ago

          If 9/10 were already voluntarily coming into the office every day, I could see it. Of course it would only be 9/10 of the people he bothered to speak to it about, and maybe he only spoke to people that were already there.

          As to why they would care if they were already there, well one guy in my team goes in every day of his own accord. He applies pressure to everyone on my team to be there with him every day, in spite of the stated WFH policy. So everyone but me goes in every day because I’m the only one that is willing to disappoint him. I’m reasonably certain that guy would love a forced into the office every day mandate, to force me to be there too. Then he could stop making passive aggressive comments about how people who didn’t come in must not care about the work as much as they should at every opportunity.

  • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    13 days ago

    He pointed to Amazon’s principle of “disagree and commit,” which is the idea that employees should debate and push back on each others ideas respectfully

    That’s all fine and dandy for ending debate about a stupid roadmap feature, but “disagree and commit” is a different story when you’re asking people to spend 3 hours unpaid in a car everyday.

    • Banik2008@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      13 days ago

      As a long time Amazon employee, disagree and commit essentially works like this:

      Employee: “I’m not convinced this is the best way to do something”

      Manager: “Noted, now stfu and do what I say”

  • AFK BRB Chocolate@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    13 days ago

    I’m a manager at a large aerospace and defense company. We had a hybrid arrangement where most people (who didn’t have to touch hardware) could work from home a couple days a week. Most people seemed to think it was pretty reasonable. There really are benefits to in person collaboration, so some on site days seemed to make sense.

    We recently moved to fully RTO, and I find it frustrating. It’s not a big deal personally - I live close and I’m older - but it pisses off a lot of the employees, who see no good reason for it. I don’t see any notable productivity increase moving from three to five days on site, it just makes my management job harder.

  • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    14 days ago

    I don’t know about everyone else, but if that were my boss, they’d be severely underestimating my capacity for petty behavior.

    • Odelay42@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      14 days ago

      This is the part not being reported in the news.

      Many of us are simply working half as much as we did when we were remote. It’s not worth trying to impress these people. They hate us.

  • buzz86us@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    13 days ago

    This makes zero sense… If you’re a cloud company why can’t employees be in the cloud

      • fibojoly@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        13 days ago

        But that’s something I don’t actually understand, since real estate would fall under the sunk cost fallacy. Ie, if you’ve invested in real estate, the cost is spent already, right? Whether someone comes in that building is irrelevant. The costs spent to maintain, heat, clean, power the buildings, on the other hand… It’s just not really obvious to me. Seems like fewer people would cost cheaper, no?

        • Revan343@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          13 days ago

          If you’re using that real estate as collateral for loans, it needs to maintain its value, or you’ll have to put up more collateral

  • _sideffect@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    14 days ago

    Never quit in these situations, or they win.

    Do the absolute fucking minimum you can, or even less so you piss off management, until they have to fire you, which they can’t outright as after a certain number of years they have to give warnings and trainings first.

    • rtxn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      14 days ago

      That only works in places with actual worker protection and labor laws, which disqualifies pretty much all of the USA.

      • GBU_28@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        14 days ago

        I work with several European tech teams and when staffing issues happen the other devs absolutely have to carry the slack.

    • Encrypt-Keeper@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      14 days ago

      which they can’t outright as after a certain number of years they have to give warnings and trainings first.

      I mean, says who? There’s currently only one state in the union that requires cause before you can fire someone. The real issue with firing people is that without a documented cause, that person can collect state unemployment, and the number of people who go on state unemployment from a single company has a financial impact on that company.

    • linearchaos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      14 days ago

      There are many at-will states that can fire you on demand (if done carefully) and there’s nothing you can do about it.

    • Fedizen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      14 days ago

      There are two ways to quit: How management wants you to or because you’re forming a union.

    • catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      14 days ago

      That’s stupid. Don’t get fired for cause, that only hurts you. Spend your time looking for a new job, then quit and leave ASAP.

      • Postmortal_Pop@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        14 days ago

        Split the difference, spend as much of your time on the clock job hunting and doing the bare minimum. Then quit without notice mid shift for the new job.

        • Bob Robertson IX @discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          14 days ago

          I work for a real shitty company with a lot of people who do things just to justify their jobs. This leads to stupid mistakes happening that can cause MASSIVE disruptions for the entire workforce. One such stupid mistake happened this week and caused my team (and several others) a shitload of unnecessary work. Yesterday a guy on my team who works in an already understaffed office had enough and told me that he’s done, and quitting. I can’t blame him, he is in a very shitty situation and I wouldn’t have stayed as long as he has… but if he walked out it would have put that entire location, the rest of our team both locally and extended, in a much worse situation. What it wouldn’t do is hurt the company or the executives.

          I’m all for people finding better jobs and leaving toxic environments, but it really does no one any good to pick the absolute worst time to walk out. That’s petty and will burn a lot of bridges, and depending on your situation and industry could come back to haunt you down the road.

            • chakan2@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              14 days ago

              Ok…that’s not bootlicking…that’s a legit plea for some poor fuck in the poorest of situations.

              I’ve been in situations where I know I’m about to fuck my coworkers over and I let them know beforehand. Management can eat my dick however.

              Bob, you might want to take a sick day on Wednesday…why?..just do it…here’s my linked in info.

            • Bob Robertson IX @discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              14 days ago

              Don’t get me wrong, I fully know that it’s bootlicking shit and I hate it… but I have a family to support, bills to pay, etc. It is soul crushing and someone purposefully picking the most painful time to walk out only hurts their coworkers, because even if you choose to take a sick day when they walk out, the next day you still have to go in and deal with the mess left behind.

            • Bob Robertson IX @discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              14 days ago

              You know what, fuck off. Who the fuck do you think you’re trying to impress? I know my fucking job sucks, I know the company I work for sucks and I know that almost everyone who works for this company is suffering. So what, fuck me for not wanting to make it worse on everyone else who isn’t in a position to just walk off the job? I wish I lived in your dream world where you never have to do things you don’t 100% agree with, it must be nice, but for me I’m living in this shit and I’m trying my best to take care of the people who count on me. So let me say, just to be clear: fuck you.

          • catloaf@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            14 days ago

            if he walked out it would have put that entire location, the rest of our team both locally and extended, in a much worse situation. What it wouldn’t do is hurt the company or the executives.

            That’s not your problem, that’s the company’s problem. You still get paid the same. If you have issues, take them to your supervisor, and go on with your life.

            • GBU_28@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              14 days ago

              Unfortunately that’s not how it works.

              Boss turns around and says “new responsibilies. Get after them.” You’re especially fucked if the work is the type of tasks you are already responsible for.

              Sure, you can say no, or slow play it, but that just means you’ll either get a shitty review or get fired.

              I’m not justifying this, I’m recounting what often happens.

              Downvotes are hilarious. Doesn’t matter if you line it, it’s how it happens around the world.

              • acockworkorange@mander.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 days ago

                The downvotes are because you’re the kind of rug your boss cleans his boots on, making it worse for everybody in the company. You’re the problem employee.

                • GBU_28@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  11 days ago

                  Nope, just aware how the real world works.

                  When this happens my response is to go find another job

                  No where in my comment did I say I felt it was a good thing, or acceptable. It’s just common. You assumed I am cool with it cause it fits your worldview

                  Edit Tell me: you think you’re just going to say “no, I’m not gonna take on new or increased tasks” , and come out successfully at the end of the year? (In review, raise, or continued employment?)

                  The only move is to leave or do the work

            • Bob Robertson IX @discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              14 days ago

              Except I don’t still get paid the same. Someone walked out last year and put the whole team in a tailspin and the rest of the team paid for it when review time came around and since we missed so many deadlines due to staffing issues no one got any sort of substantial raise. And missing your once-a-year raise doesn’t just impact your pay for that year, it impacts it for every year going forward.

      • _sideffect@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        13 days ago

        It’s not stupid as you put it. If you know the laws of where you live, it makes perfect sense.

    • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      Why quit when you could get paid to sabotage the company from inside and maybe get a swipe at performing a bezonian head removal ?

      • Pika@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        12 days ago

        Naw you just wait to get fired and then submit unemployment for the job changing past what was agreed with

      • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        13 days ago

        You’re not wrong. Best case would be finding a labor-friendly judge and that would likely get appealed to the USSC, comprised of conservatives and neoliberals, would almost inevitably rule that labor protections only apply to those whose net with is in the top 5%.