Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses

Amazon To Layoff Over 18,000 Employees (seekingalpha.com) 54

Posted by BeauHD from the not-so-happy-new-year dept.
Longtime Slashdot reader walterbyrd shares a report from Seeking Alpha: Amazon is reducing its headcount by more than 18K employees the company confirmed on Wednesday. Amazon CEO Andy Jassy confirmed plans to eliminate "just over 18K roles" between the reductions made in November and the latest round in a statement. The company was previously projected to cut about 10K roles, but has accelerated layoffs due to economic uncertainty. The bulk of roles due for elimination are concentrated in Amazon Stores and PXT organizations, per the statement.

Jassy said that he was hoping to notify all impacted employees prior to his statement, but was forced to comment due to a report in the Wall Street Journal regarding the staff reductions. "We typically wait to communicate about these outcomes until we can speak with the people who are directly impacted. However, because one of our teammates leaked this information externally, we decided it was better to share this news earlier so you can hear the details directly from me," he said. "We intend on communicating with impacted employees (or where applicable in Europe, with employee representative bodies) starting on January 18."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Amazon To Layoff Over 18,000 Employees More

Amazon To Layoff Over 18,000 Employees

Comments Filter:

  • "Roles" eh? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Rosco P. Coltrane ( 209368 ) on Wednesday January 04, 2023 @10:35PM (#63181082)

    eliminate "just over 18K roles"

    Nah. You didn't elmininate 18,000 "roles", you laid off 18,000 actual people. Elminiating roles would have those 18,000 people stay employed in another role.

    God I hate this PC bullshit. Like "letting people go". They're not "let go": they don't want to go! Just say it as it is: you're laying them off. Why sugarcoat it?

    • Even "laying them off" is an euphemism. They're being fired.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Settle down, it's not like they're being taken behind the building and shot. The sun will rise tomorrow.

      • Well, you sure? After all, this is Amazon we're talking about.

        • Amazon wouldn't take them behind the building to shoot them. They'd do that shit at the front door. Hell, Bezos would probably stand shoulder to shoulder with them smiling just so he can watch the splatter pattern up close.

          • And I wouldn't be surprised if they charged the employee for the bullet while at the same time counting the time for getting shot as a break.

            • Can we just face the fact Bezos is a monocle and a white cat away from being a Bond villain? Some would argue, that's just a modern update on the archetype.

    • Yeah nothing better than all-caps YOU HAVE BEEN TERMINATED.

    • eliminate "just over 18K roles"

      Nah. You didn't elmininate 18,000 "roles", you laid off 18,000 actual people. Elminiating roles would have those 18,000 people stay employed in another role.

      God I hate this PC bullshit. Like "letting people go". They're not "let go": they don't want to go! Just say it as it is: you're laying them off. Why sugarcoat it?

      Back when my mom was still working decades ago, 'laid off' meant you were still a member of a company but were not working due to economic issues, etc. When conditions improved you were called back to work. During the many years she worked for Whirlpool, there were multiple times back in the 70's and 80's when she would be laid off and then called back. She could draw unemployment benefits, etc during her time off. I haven't seen such a setup like that for many years now. Nowadays they call it a 'layof

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by mjwx ( 966435 )

      eliminate "just over 18K roles"

      Nah. You didn't elmininate 18,000 "roles", you laid off 18,000 actual people. Elminiating roles would have those 18,000 people stay employed in another role.

      God I hate this PC bullshit. Like "letting people go". They're not "let go": they don't want to go! Just say it as it is: you're laying them off. Why sugarcoat it?

      I'm sick of this "PC bullshit" bullshit.

      This isn't PC... this is plain old corporate doublespeak used to avoid responsibility. They don't care if you're offended (which is what PC is allegedly about) they just want to avoid any form of legal responsibility or potential recourse.

      Regardless of what "PC" originally meant, it now means "something I disagree with but cant argue against without sounding like an arsehole". "Woke" has now also joined this category of words.

  • So 1.1%??? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Somervillain ( 4719341 ) on Wednesday January 04, 2023 @10:44PM (#63181090)
    They employ 1.6 million. This is a little over 1% of their workforce. They're a famous talent hoarder. I know that it increases engagement to have people freak out, but this is a non-issue at this point. Amazon has a history of aggressively hiring technical talent with the goal of having a pool of brains to help them expand as they figure out where. Most of Silicon Valley does this and it's a point of pride. The tech giants compete with each other over how many talented engineers they can grab...often grabbing talent before even figuring out what they want to do with them. Amazon has contacted me many times for software engineering positions and a few times, they couldn't even tell me what I would be doing if I got the job. The recruiter just knew a division had some requisitions that needed to be filled. They wanted generic talent. I'd consider that a "hire first" "figure out what we'll do with you later" scenario and rarely an efficient strategy.

    Corrections are scary. They're a noteworthy metric, but nothing to freak out about. If your employer has more than 200 people, I will wager that losing the worst 1% will make the place better. Amazon accumulates bad employees, just like any other employer and they also have a lot of pie in the sky investments that just don't pan out. I am sure some of their robotics initiatives were just never meant to be. They also acquire a lot of companies and accumulate redundancies.

    As an insider, I am not surprised by many of these layoff stories...other than they didn't happen sooner. Big Tech is known for its excess. It's been a recruitment strategy. It was not sustainable, but it's also not stupid. It lets you compete for top talent with high wages, aggressive growth, and rediculous perks...and the instant you face headwinds, you can painlessly cut costs just by running your business sustainably and sensibly. I'd be mildly concerned if these layoff stories keep coming and the body counts get higher, but when it's the most excessive laying off 1% or loser companies downsizing, it's not yet something that worries me, personally.

    • Spiral (Score:5, Insightful)

      by shmlco ( 594907 ) on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:02AM (#63181204) Homepage

      My problem with it is that it's largely a self-fulfilling prophecy.

      Instead on cutting other costs or--heaven forbid--taking a minor short-term hit on profitability, at the first hint of trouble hundreds of companies rush to fire thousands to tens-of-thousands of employees who now, of course, aren't making an income, which means that they in turn cut their spending, which ends up cutting into company revenues...

      And so the downward spiral perpetuates...

      • Double edge cut. Amz invested in screening and training, which will be lost but better than excess capacity costs. Will frighten enough workers to do OT and whatever it takes to keep their livelihood. Not long term sustainable but Amz can bring in fresh legs again. Despite these hard actions Amz brand still well known to attract n retain talent. They do pay their top well.

      • That's not the real problem. One single company got so large that they employ as many people as you would find in a small country. That's what makes it easy for these companies to screw over such a large number of people and nobody can do anything about it. They have way too much political power, so the problem just gets worse and nobody can stop it.

        I'm not sure the best way to solve the problem of automation is to prop up the coal miners and carriage builders, but I do think the best way to stop an enti

      • My problem with it is that it's largely a self-fulfilling prophecy.

        Instead on cutting other costs or--heaven forbid--taking a minor short-term hit on profitability, at the first hint of trouble hundreds of companies rush to fire thousands to tens-of-thousands of employees who now, of course, aren't making an income, which means that they in turn cut their spending, which ends up cutting into company revenues...

        And so the downward spiral perpetuates...

        They are a business, not a government agency or a charity.

        Also, most of these people (in particular tech people), they make very good salaries and the exposure to Amazon tech alone is worth getting in and becoming the 1% getting let go (with a severance package.)

        Warehouse workers are another matter (Amazon could do better here.) But for these specific rounds of layoffs, your complaint is a "first world problem." If Amazon were engaging in percentage-massive layoffs with an attrition rate in the double

    • Also keep in mind that for the most part, Amazon employs a lot of software designers and engineers. Most of the positions being eliminated will be this kind of talent. Yes, unemployment is scary - I've been there multiple times, both by stupid decisions on my part and similar corporate decisions made outside of my control. On the other hand, these are precisely the jobs that are in high demand across the country. I doubt many of them will be unemployed for long. Will they get the same perks as they had with

      • Also keep in mind that for the most part, Amazon employs a lot of software designers and engineers. Most of the positions being eliminated will be this kind of talent. Yes, unemployment is scary - I've been there multiple times, both by stupid decisions on my part and similar corporate decisions made outside of my control. On the other hand, these are precisely the jobs that are in high demand across the country. I doubt many of them will be unemployed for long. Will they get the same perks as they had with Amazon? Probably not. Will it require them to relocate to another part of the country? Maybe. Will they still be able to put food on the table? Most certainly.

        Exactly, and unlike other less fortunate workers in other sectors, tech workers do get relatively good severance packages (remember the last round of layoffs at Meta?)

  • pay for a phallus rocket to fly you to space. Imagine how much better the world would be if the $1bn was reinvested in something other than a rich prick's prick shaped vanity project.

    • pay for a phallus rocket to fly you to space. Imagine how much better the world would be if the $1bn was reinvested in something other than a rich prick's prick shaped vanity project.

      That's private money and the holder can do with it as it pleases. If you want investment for a better world, then elect public officials to engage in that kind of funding. The world is not meant to be improved by magnates and private people, but by governments and social collectives.

    • The belief that some wiser being can predict economic need and respond rationally is a true act of faith, given that it has never been achieved, and, because bureaucrats are not omniscient, never likely to be achieved. The invisible hand of the market has bought prosperity to hundreds of millions over the past few decades, socialism has not.

      • The invisible hand of the market pass in our butts! (There's several socialistic experiences in history that led to prosperity: inform yourself before posting BS)

        • Socialist alternatives leading to prosperity? Other than monasteries and kibbutzim - both small scale and voluntary associations, which is not a way to operate a national economy - I am not aware of any. Want to point me to one?

          • Are you aware that indigenoous tribes in America where prosperous before "conqueror" becamne here? URSS had prosperity for decades (Cuba too)... Nordic countries in EU were almost socialists...

            • What evidence have you that the previous occupants of the USA were socialist before the white conquest?

              The collapse of the Cuban economy after the subsidies from the USSR were withdrawn is the clear demonstration of the 'prosperity' of that dictatorship.

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

              The Nordic countries are, ultimately, capitalist, allowing the invisible hand of the market to operate and with variable levels of growth / recessions to occur. A clear example of this is Finland, where over regulation was re

            • Are you aware that indigenoous tribes in America where prosperous before "conqueror" becamne here?

              How do you scale tribal economies to industrialized populations in the hundreds of millions, and how were these tribal economies (many ruled by hereditary chieftans) were "socialist"? BTW, socialist theory does not consider them "socialist" at all.

              URSS had prosperity for decades (Cuba too)...

              Uh, I knew people who grew up in the USSR in the times between Krushev to Andropov who will severely disagree with you.

              Nordic countries in EU were almost socialists...

              They are not by any means of the imagination. Have you ever actually been to a Nordic country?

        • The invisible hand of the market pass in our butts! (There's several socialistic experiences in history that led to prosperity: inform yourself before posting BS)

          Name a few, and explain how they are generally applicable.

  • People shudder and post articles.

  • The government asked Bezos to fire 9000, but he fired 18000. Mostly from the cab subsidary.

Slashdot Top Deals

Software production is assumed to be a line function, but it is run like a staff function. -- Paul Licker

Close