Quote:

---

The approach has changed over the years for sure, in terms of the transparency.

---

What I described was still happening when I left this spring.

Noble07 said:

---

Quote:

---

The approach has changed over the years for sure, in terms of the transparency.

---

What I described was still happening when I left this spring.

---

I don't think it's been incredibly consistent over the years. Don't tell them. Tell them. Don't. I've always started with asking, how do you think things are going? Here's my take. You're operating below the expectations. Here are the examples. People shouldn't be surprised by the conversation. If they are, then I've failed them. Coaching shouldn't be once in a while based on HR cycles. I think this is one of those super important topics that junior/newer leaders struggle with. Everyone needs feedback.

TarponChaser said:

---

My biggest takeaway is that there were a minimum of 150 meetings in a 3 month period.

Holy ****! How can you accomplish anything when you're having so many meetings? **** that noise.

---

As a developer I'm guessing she had short daily meetings with the team + a project manager to address the tasks for that day and any roadblocks (the standups shes referring to), updates from the day before, and then at least a couple more broader department meetings during the week. Not that uncommon of a structure, especially in a semi remote team.

aggie93 said:

---

Aust Ag said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

I'm guessing she didn't feel like it was so terrible when she was getting all those RSU's. Amazon has a rough culture and they pay very well. No shortage of folks trying to work there either.

---

Why is this such an attractive place to work?

---

Because they pay extremely well and give a ton of RSU's. Most people who go to work there are doing it for the money in my experience. When people hit their vest they bail out unless they get another big package and Amazon is famous for cutting people short of their vest.

I don't love it or hate it but people who go to work there know what they are getting into or else they are naive. Go there and expect to get used and abused but you can make really good money, they certainly have no personal loyalty to employees.

---

Proud to say I don't know what "RSU" or "vest" mean.

double aught said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

Aust Ag said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

I'm guessing she didn't feel like it was so terrible when she was getting all those RSU's. Amazon has a rough culture and they pay very well. No shortage of folks trying to work there either.

---

Why is this such an attractive place to work?

---

Because they pay extremely well and give a ton of RSU's. Most people who go to work there are doing it for the money in my experience. When people hit their vest they bail out unless they get another big package and Amazon is famous for cutting people short of their vest.

I don't love it or hate it but people who go to work there know what they are getting into or else they are naive. Go there and expect to get used and abused but you can make really good money, they certainly have no personal loyalty to employees.

---

Proud to say I don't know what "RSU" or "vest" mean.

---

Restricted Stock Unit is stock given to an employee that vests over time, once it vests it is literally in their investment account.

For instance say you have a Software Engineer hired by AWS and they get paid $200k in salary and $500 in RSU's vested over 3 years. They can put in a "cliff" on the vest so that they get 20% after year 1, 30% after year 2, then 50% after year 3. Then they push them out after Year 2 and never pay out the Year 3 "Cliff" vest. I've seen it much more dramatic than that.

The folks in Finance understand they won't end up paying out a significant percentage of the RSU packages so they can offer really attractive packages with big numbers. A lot of Engineers have gotten tired of the games though and companies are moving to much faster vesting periods if they want to get the best talent. A company like Google basically looks at employees like contractors and they pay them a lot and give them a lot of stock while they are doing something valuable to them but won't hesitate to cut them either. Some of the stuff that happens in the Bay Area is really wild with pay packages if you have the right skillset.

Thanks. Interesting stuff.

aggie93 said:

---

double aught said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

Aust Ag said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

I'm guessing she didn't feel like it was so terrible when she was getting all those RSU's. Amazon has a rough culture and they pay very well. No shortage of folks trying to work there either.

---

Why is this such an attractive place to work?

---

Because they pay extremely well and give a ton of RSU's. Most people who go to work there are doing it for the money in my experience. When people hit their vest they bail out unless they get another big package and Amazon is famous for cutting people short of their vest.

I don't love it or hate it but people who go to work there know what they are getting into or else they are naive. Go there and expect to get used and abused but you can make really good money, they certainly have no personal loyalty to employees.

---

Proud to say I don't know what "RSU" or "vest" mean.

---

Restricted Stock Unit is stock given to an employee that vests over time, once it vests it is literally in their investment account.

For instance say you have a Software Engineer hired by AWS and they get paid $200k in salary and $500 in RSU's vested over 3 years. They can put in a "cliff" on the vest so that they get 20% after year 1, 30% after year 2, then 50% after year 3. Then they push them out after Year 2 and never pay out the Year 3 "Cliff" vest. I've seen it much more dramatic than that.

The folks in Finance understand they won't end up paying out a significant percentage of the RSU packages so they can offer really attractive packages with big numbers. A lot of Engineers have gotten tired of the games though and companies are moving to much faster vesting periods if they want to get the best talent. A company like Google basically looks at employees like contractors and they pay them a lot and give them a lot of stock while they are doing something valuable to them but won't hesitate to cut them either. Some of the stuff that happens in the Bay Area is really wild with pay packages if you have the right skillset.

---

Annie, this is not correct in regards to Amazon. I'll say it again. Amazon does not fire people at specific vesting periods to avoid paying them. You've said this multiple times. Your sources are wrong.

Amazon wants people who are great at delivering results. Amazon doesn't want to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to train someone and to get someone invested in their work and the company culture, only to fire them two, three, or four years later. The cost of finding that next person and onboard them is incredibly high. There's zero logic in that.

The fiscal cliff. Let me explain this because once you understand it, you'll see it's not really a fiscal cliff. The comp plan includes a base, a guarantee for the first two years, and RSUs that vest for 4 years. The guarantee drops off after year two but the amount of RSUs that vest increases to fill the gap made by losing the guarantee. You could say that's the cliff but amazon doesn't look at RSUs as a bonus. It's part of the pay package.

I hope this clear things up.

Is she a possible DEI hire who's never been a decent employee (poor attitude, incompetence, etc.) but had a manager that let her BS slide? I'm guessing her old manager was shipped out, not up, and her new no nonsense manager is calling out her performance, but it's not her fault.

GenericAggie said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

double aught said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

Aust Ag said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

I'm guessing she didn't feel like it was so terrible when she was getting all those RSU's. Amazon has a rough culture and they pay very well. No shortage of folks trying to work there either.

---

Why is this such an attractive place to work?

---

Because they pay extremely well and give a ton of RSU's. Most people who go to work there are doing it for the money in my experience. When people hit their vest they bail out unless they get another big package and Amazon is famous for cutting people short of their vest.

I don't love it or hate it but people who go to work there know what they are getting into or else they are naive. Go there and expect to get used and abused but you can make really good money, they certainly have no personal loyalty to employees.

---

Proud to say I don't know what "RSU" or "vest" mean.

---

Restricted Stock Unit is stock given to an employee that vests over time, once it vests it is literally in their investment account.

For instance say you have a Software Engineer hired by AWS and they get paid $200k in salary and $500 in RSU's vested over 3 years. They can put in a "cliff" on the vest so that they get 20% after year 1, 30% after year 2, then 50% after year 3. Then they push them out after Year 2 and never pay out the Year 3 "Cliff" vest. I've seen it much more dramatic than that.

The folks in Finance understand they won't end up paying out a significant percentage of the RSU packages so they can offer really attractive packages with big numbers. A lot of Engineers have gotten tired of the games though and companies are moving to much faster vesting periods if they want to get the best talent. A company like Google basically looks at employees like contractors and they pay them a lot and give them a lot of stock while they are doing something valuable to them but won't hesitate to cut them either. Some of the stuff that happens in the Bay Area is really wild with pay packages if you have the right skillset.

---

Annie, this is not correct in regards to Amazon. I'll say it again. Amazon does not fire people at specific vesting periods to avoid paying them. You've said this multiple times. Your sources are wrong.

Amazon wants people who are great at delivering results. Amazon doesn't want to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to train someone and to get someone invested in their work and the company culture, only to fire them two, three, or four years later. The cost of finding that next person and onboard them is incredibly high. There's zero logic in that.

The fiscal cliff. Let me explain this because once you understand it, you'll see it's not really a fiscal cliff. The comp plan includes a base, a guarantee for the first two years, and RSUs that vest for 4 years. The guarantee drops off after year two but the amount of RSUs that vest increases to fill the gap made by losing the guarantee. You could say that's the cliff but amazon doesn't look at RSUs as a bonus. It's part of the pay package.

I hope this clear things up.

---

K. Well I know of a number of Amazon employees that were forced out. Not fired per se but there are plenty of ways to push someone out. I've also seen many other comp plans from Amazon.

As I said they aren't unique in this either.

If you go on a pip, take it as a nice sign to start looking. I've been in IT for quite a while, and have been around people on pips quite a bit. One of my good frinds was s bad ass jr dba. He always would go the extra mile but rubbed people wrong. He went on a pip at my last company, and my advice to him was to start looking as they were wasting his talent. He took my advice, bolted and is now a principal data architect. They're just companies.

infinity ag said:

---

Backyard Gator said:

---

Sid Farkas said:

---

I'm pretty careful with my LinkedIn profile. I've felt disgruntled quite a bit over the years, like anyone else. But I'd never put this kind of stuff out there.

She's begging for companies to ignore her applications going forward

Career suicide at such a young age.

---

Implying "I'm being targeted because I'm a Chinese woman" is going to cause a lot of HR people to toss her application. Hiring her is like hiring a headache.

---

Don't think anyone will remember after 3 weeks. As long as she has a good lie to tell about why she left. No one cares, things move on.

---

You think no future employer will Google her name, and this won't pop up?

Buford T. Justice said:

---

Inconsistent management practices.

---

This.

I took over a group from a previous manager. I did it to help the company out. I wasn't t looking for the job.

I downgraded 3 of the 5 employees who got decent ratings every year previously . I increased ratings on the other two.

I had a massive problem dealing with hr who didn't like my ratings being wildly different from previous manager.

I think there is far more to the story than a sob post on linked in.

fixer said:

---

Buford T. Justice said:

---

Inconsistent management practices.

---

This.

I took over a group from a previous manager. I did it to help the company out. I wasn't t looking for the job.

I downgraded 3 of the 5 employees who got decent ratings every year previously . I increased ratings on the other two.

I had a massive problem dealing with hr who didn't like my ratings being wildly different from previous manager.

I think there is far more to the story than a sob post on linked in.

---

Username checks out

Yes, but there is a cliff after year 4. Amazon has drastically cut new vest schedules so comp in year 5 is less than year 4.

No mention of Gladys?

GenericAggie said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

double aught said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

Aust Ag said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

I'm guessing she didn't feel like it was so terrible when she was getting all those RSU's. Amazon has a rough culture and they pay very well. No shortage of folks trying to work there either.

---

Why is this such an attractive place to work?

---

Because they pay extremely well and give a ton of RSU's. Most people who go to work there are doing it for the money in my experience. When people hit their vest they bail out unless they get another big package and Amazon is famous for cutting people short of their vest.

I don't love it or hate it but people who go to work there know what they are getting into or else they are naive. Go there and expect to get used and abused but you can make really good money, they certainly have no personal loyalty to employees.

---

Proud to say I don't know what "RSU" or "vest" mean.

---

Restricted Stock Unit is stock given to an employee that vests over time, once it vests it is literally in their investment account.

For instance say you have a Software Engineer hired by AWS and they get paid $200k in salary and $500 in RSU's vested over 3 years. They can put in a "cliff" on the vest so that they get 20% after year 1, 30% after year 2, then 50% after year 3. Then they push them out after Year 2 and never pay out the Year 3 "Cliff" vest. I've seen it much more dramatic than that.

The folks in Finance understand they won't end up paying out a significant percentage of the RSU packages so they can offer really attractive packages with big numbers. A lot of Engineers have gotten tired of the games though and companies are moving to much faster vesting periods if they want to get the best talent. A company like Google basically looks at employees like contractors and they pay them a lot and give them a lot of stock while they are doing something valuable to them but won't hesitate to cut them either. Some of the stuff that happens in the Bay Area is really wild with pay packages if you have the right skillset.

---

Annie, this is not correct in regards to Amazon. I'll say it again. Amazon does not fire people at specific vesting periods to avoid paying them. You've said this multiple times. Your sources are wrong.

Amazon wants people who are great at delivering results. Amazon doesn't want to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to train someone and to get someone invested in their work and the company culture, only to fire them two, three, or four years later. The cost of finding that next person and onboard them is incredibly high. There's zero logic in that.

The fiscal cliff. Let me explain this because once you understand it, you'll see it's not really a fiscal cliff. The comp plan includes a base, a guarantee for the first two years, and RSUs that vest for 4 years. The guarantee drops off after year two but the amount of RSUs that vest increases to fill the gap made by losing the guarantee. You could say that's the cliff but amazon doesn't look at RSUs as a bonus. It's part of the pay package.

I hope this clear things up.

---

Annie is in deNile?

Never.