Holy hell. Damning on so many fronts. This in particular is what I'd call "out of touch bonkers" if they genuinely expected results. Though I, a highly qualified man genius, came up with the plan...
Holy hell. Damning on so many fronts. This in particular is what I'd call "out of touch bonkers" if they genuinely expected results.
For example, the first goal required her to create a plan to reduce data storage costs across the entire AmazonBot web crawling organization by 75 percent in just eight workdays.
Ms. Ghaderi asked several senior, high-performing engineers about this goal, and they confirmed that they did not believe it was possible within the given timeframe. Even if it were possible, Ms. Ghaderi had not been responsible for data storage until the week she was placed on the Pivot plan, meaning that she had no time to understand the existing storage architecture.
Though I, a highly qualified man genius, came up with the plan inside of 60 seconds: Delete 75% of the index. What? They made no mention of retaining functionality, only to reduce costs. I'll take that job title now.
Yes, and that behavior needs to be heavily scrutinized. It really shouldn't be anywhere near status quo, but here we are. That said, we fired a lady on a performance improvement plan with...
Yes, and that behavior needs to be heavily scrutinized. It really shouldn't be anywhere near status quo, but here we are.
That said, we fired a lady on a performance improvement plan with completely reasonable requirements. In short, she had the position for 3 years, was borderline useless and had obviously lied on her resume. Boss kept giving her additional chances, but finally had enough. Legal wanted a bulletproof case because she was also a minority. Coworker wrote up a list of '10 tasks we would expect someone with this job after 3 months of onboarding to complete within an hour each'. She was given an entire day for each task. She quit after failing her third consecutive task, then filed a discrimination suit.
also called "being managed out". the classic way to do it for ICs is by extreme nitpicking in pull requests, make sure to use the big red 'CHANGES REQUESTED' button, be slow and inconsistent in...
also called "being managed out". the classic way to do it for ICs is by extreme nitpicking in pull requests, make sure to use the big red 'CHANGES REQUESTED' button, be slow and inconsistent in responding to questions. Basically make working actively miserable to burn the person out as fast as possible to make them quit.
I would caution that this isn't some "aMaZoN Is bReAkInG LaWs tO GeT An eDgE In AI TeCh" story as the headline might indicate rather this is a case of workplace discrimination. All the outlandish...
I would caution that this isn't some "aMaZoN Is bReAkInG LaWs tO GeT An eDgE In AI TeCh" story as the headline might indicate rather this is a case of workplace discrimination. All the outlandish things is just what seems like 2-3 hostile managers trying to force her out of the company. Kinda glad she is fighting the workplace discrimination in the court, if the allegation are true, I'm sure the individual defendants aren't gonna stick around at Amazon much longer and hopefully the publicity around this means they can't easily jump to another company.
According to the complaint, Styskin rejected Ghaderi's concerns, allegedly telling her to ignore copyright policies to improve the results. Referring to rival AI companies, the filing alleges he said: "Everyone else is doing it."
Holy hell. Damning on so many fronts. This in particular is what I'd call "out of touch bonkers" if they genuinely expected results.
Though I, a highly qualified man genius, came up with the plan inside of 60 seconds: Delete 75% of the index. What? They made no mention of retaining functionality, only to reduce costs. I'll take that job title now.
It's an impossible task common to "performance improvement plans."
Yes, and that behavior needs to be heavily scrutinized. It really shouldn't be anywhere near status quo, but here we are.
That said, we fired a lady on a performance improvement plan with completely reasonable requirements. In short, she had the position for 3 years, was borderline useless and had obviously lied on her resume. Boss kept giving her additional chances, but finally had enough. Legal wanted a bulletproof case because she was also a minority. Coworker wrote up a list of '10 tasks we would expect someone with this job after 3 months of onboarding to complete within an hour each'. She was given an entire day for each task. She quit after failing her third consecutive task, then filed a discrimination suit.
also called "being managed out". the classic way to do it for ICs is by extreme nitpicking in pull requests, make sure to use the big red 'CHANGES REQUESTED' button, be slow and inconsistent in responding to questions. Basically make working actively miserable to burn the person out as fast as possible to make them quit.
I would caution that this isn't some "aMaZoN Is bReAkInG LaWs tO GeT An eDgE In AI TeCh" story as the headline might indicate rather this is a case of workplace discrimination. All the outlandish things is just what seems like 2-3 hostile managers trying to force her out of the company. Kinda glad she is fighting the workplace discrimination in the court, if the allegation are true, I'm sure the individual defendants aren't gonna stick around at Amazon much longer and hopefully the publicity around this means they can't easily jump to another company.
It is known.
The Dothraki are not forgotten