Revelio Labs’ Post

What if Amazon's RTO Policy Required 40% of Customers to Relocate? Here's a post from Revelio Labs, that I found interesting. It analyzes a workforce decision, in a way that is similar to how marketing might evaluate how a decision might affect potential customers. The results suggest that 40% of Amazon Web Services (AWS) engineers may need to relocate, to comply with the mandate that all employees work in the office for five days a week. In an earlier post, I suggested a thought-experiment: Imagine if a similar policy was applied to Amazon's customers, and then imagine how much greater the required level of analysis, risk-assessment and strategic planning might be, if the policy was applied to customers, compared to employees. https://lnkd.in/g-fKwiUm This Revelio Labs analysis nicely illustrates the analogy. Thanks, as always, to Revelio Labs for this analysis, and for those of you who were kind enough to comment, reshare and react to my previous post.

The post-pandemic workplace continues to evolve, with companies using return-to-office mandates as a strategic tool for cost reduction. Notably, 9% of organizations are leveraging a return-to-office initiative as part of their cost-cutting measures. This marks a shift from more traditional methods like layoffs or reducing business travel, which are still prevalent. Read more in our HR Trends & Issues Survey 2024: https://lnkd.in/dSuyNi_C

When I joined AWS in 2021, one of my main motivations for doing so was that Amazon seemed to be taking a progressive approach to hiring distributed teams, and I could work for them without having to uproot my 20+ year life in Chicago. I feel privileged to have been part of a team led by Harry Mower that intentionally took that approach to hiring, and at one point we had 100+ teammates working together across the globe to build a major new product. It's disappointing to see Amazon undo this hiring strategy with their new "5 days in the office" policy. Not only will this affect the people who were hired as "remote" / not in a "hub" location, forcing them to make the choice of relocating to keep doing the job they've done for years, or to leave... but in my opinion, it'll also put Amazon at a competitive disadvantage by limiting their talent pool to only those in (or willing to move to) specific locations. They had a chance to do better... and instead have doubled down on acting like remote work and distributed teams are a liability, not an asset.

I am going to share my opinion (and it is JUST that) regarding Amazon's RTO policy announcement. I live in the Seattle area; I have LOTS of friends that do/have worked for "The World's Largest Bookstore", I worked there (not in recruiting) MANY years ago, so my opinion has some personal basis. Amazon is the undisputed EMPEROR of data. They have had 4 years to capture data from the results of remote, hybrid, and prior in-office work. You can bet your button these decisions are based on DATA, not Jassy's whim. If employees have issues with the environment, as always there is the option to find/create other options (lots of Amazonians move on to become entrepreneurs.) I personally would caution employees from publicly complaining too much; express your disappointment, sure. Rage against the machine? 18K layoffs last year is repeatable. And yes, I believe that part of this may be an effort to see disgruntled employees self-select themselves elsewhere; severance packages are EXPENSIVE and it is a lot easier NOT to backfill and have that flexibility instead of facing legal requirements about time restrictions on refilling a job. Finally, I guarantee you there are PLENTY of people that are happy to go into an office 5 days/week for whatever reason.

What does a 500k salary at Amazon really mean for your career satisfaction? I came across an honest account from a senior TPM at Amazon, who shared his 1.5 years in the role with little to show for it. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆 ➜ After being laid off from Google, he joined Amazon, hoping to take it easy and just "do nothing." (dream of many ?) ➜ A manager at Amazon recently admitted that in 1.5 years, he hasn’t completed a single significant task, yet he earned about $555,000 during that time. ➜ Previously a programmer at Google, he found himself laid off and then joined Amazon, hoping to minimize his workload while still collecting a hefty paycheck. 𝗛𝗶𝘀 𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗶𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 in 𝗳𝗶𝗿𝘀𝘁𝘀 𝟭𝟴 𝗺𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗵𝘀 ➜ Spending around 8 hours a week in meetings. ➜ Resolving just 7 tasks. ➜ Creating a single automated dashboard using ChatGPT in 3 days—though he told management it took him 3 months. ➜ His main role now seems to involve declining collaboration requests from other teams and offloading nearly all the work onto colleagues and subordinates. Do you see similar activities happening aroound you? Follow Sergey Masyagin for more. ♻️ if you like this one.

"Unintended consequences?" I think they meant "intended consequences." The article says, "Amazon's new policy appears to be backfiring, as the company’s employees are starting to look for the nearest exit." Many critics of the new 5-day #RTO mandate suspect that the entire goal was to get people to quit. So are the consequences unintended or completely and utterly intended? As a leader of a remote-first company myself, my personal approach to leadership is rooted in trust, transparency, autonomy, and treating people like the adults they are. Frankly, it's not just better for business, it's a heck of a lot more fun. It's also the right thing to do. Of course, I'm sure there's a segment of the employee base that loves working from an office and is happy with Amazon's announcement. But for everyone else who is negatively impacted, my heart goes out to you. I'm happy to be an ear or a shoulder — just shoot me a DM. I also have connections to great companies (our customers share our values) who offer flexibility and may be hiring.

Amazon pulling employees back to 5-days in office... Basically, they want to make layoffs without paying people redundancy. This isn't down to company performance, as the below was their Q2 performance: - In Q2 2024, Amazon net sales increased to $148.0 billion globally. That’s up 10% from $134.4 billion in the previous year’s second quarter. - Operating income increased to $14.7 billion in Q2 204, from $7.7 billion in the prior year’s second quarter. - Overall unit sales grew 11% year over year. Oh and there stock price is up 35% over the past 12 months...

Layoffs are happening everywhere, including Amazon Web Services - although these are primarily focused on sales/marketing rather than tech. But this article and other recent events make me wonder if some companies grow too big, too fast - always chasing "the next big thing" rather than growing and supporting their base. When companies try to be everything to everyone as Amazon has when you see all of the various entities they own, are they watering down their products/services? Bottom line, how does one strike a balance between growth/profit and long-term sustainability/viability? https://lnkd.in/grCsvUg7

The days of rocket ship big tech jobs are gone. Amazon grew 100x in the 15 years Ethan Evans, former VP of Amazon was there with stock going up 9082% and revenue that grew 67x. Another 67x would make Amazon's revenue larger than the US Gross Domestic Product. According to Ethan, those big tech days are gone and it simply cannot happen again. "Most of big tech is still laying off or not hiring and there is increasing return to office pressure". Evan said in his recent blog post. His Advice: Working with big tech would suit people looking for stability, a fat pay cheque, new graduates, and those looking for a path to retirement or a second career of their choosing. Those who should leave or look elsewhere are those who can afford higher risk / lower short-term compensation, people frustrated with the 'large, slow system', top performers or those that already have street cred and scale in their careers. Dive into his full article here: https://lnkd.in/gWNFAdYd https://lnkd.in/gVqVicfH Photo description: Image of a phone showing apps Photo credit: Unsplash: Jamer Yarema

Amazon doesn’t actually want their employees in-office. They want them to leave altogether. My take: 1. They want/need to reduce headcount 2. They don’t want the bad optics of “layoffs” The solution? → Force everyone to come in 5 days/week → Have a certain % of people quit Headcount reduced, bad optics avoided. My opinion on RTO in general: 1. Necessary for huge companies 2. Unnecessary for small startups The bigger you get, the more people you’ll have trying to fly under the radar. Doing so at a 1.6M-person company (Amazon) is much easier than at a 9-person startup. Remote work only amplifies how easy that is. So if Amazon wants to maximize productivity, they need a closer eye on the team. Love it or hate it…RTO is the way to do it.