Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Businesses

Amazon Says It Will Cut 14,000 Corporate Roles To Remove Layers 50

Amazon said on Tuesday it would reduce its corporate workforce by approximately 14,000 roles as part of an effort to remove bureaucracy and organizational layers. Beth Galetti, the company's senior vice president of people experience and technology, told employees in a memo that the cuts followed earlier work to strengthen teams by reducing layers and increasing ownership.

The company said it would offer most affected employees 90 days to find new roles internally and that recruiting teams would prioritize internal candidates. Those unable to find positions at Amazon will receive severance pay, outplacement services and health insurance benefits, the memo added.

Amazon Says It Will Cut 14,000 Corporate Roles To Remove Layers

Comments Filter:
  • People who want to make stuff stay out of management.

    People who want to manage want to manage from the top.

    No-one wants to be a sad middle manager.
  • by jddj ( 1085169 ) on Tuesday October 28, 2025 @04:56AM (#65755124) Journal

    ...To Remove Lawyers.

    So much better.

    • That's what I read and did a double-take!
    • ...To Remove Lawyers.

      So much better.

      Don't bet on even 2% of them being lawyers. This is nothing less than slashing anything they can to endure the current administration. They have to be more careful at the warehouse level because that could affect sales. We've already noticed an increase in processing times for many items to the point that it's becoming no difference between ordering it from a local store or Amazon, and that's if Amazon isn't more expensive already. Yes, Amazon's prices have risen steadily as well.

      Right now Amazon is in

      • Yep i remember when ordering online was like a super power. Frooogle being the go-to, amazon being where you went next, and all of it being easier and cheaper than going to the store. Most people were still wasting time with best buy and self checkout. My wife and i keep talking about maybeeee we should cancel prime, the conversation is becoming more frequent. Not thinking my subscription is gonna survive to 2026.

        We're starting to pirate things we have available on steaming from time to time. Only even

    • I wonder how many of these layers were offered to keep their job and go back to being a worker bee? If I had Amazon Prime, I'd cancel it.
  • So they're sending the Golgafrinchan Ark Fleet Ship B on their way?
  • But could you add some roles in customer service instead then maybe? Getting anywhere with them is impossible.

    • Customer Service? You mean Steve? Steve is doing a great job and doesn't need any help.
      • I'm legitimately "Steve" at a much smaller tech company. I also do product management (lol) and QA (a cursory check before the customers really QA it for us).

        I will never get any help, the only answer is to build out a magical LLM automation at the same time as responding to a flood of emails/tickets/meetings/calls.

        I've learned not to ask for help as that turns into a homework assignment with due dates.

        At least I still have a well paying tech job in 2025, until the house of cards collapses.

    • Customer service is getting so bad that both my bank and my real estate agent nearly fumbled out buying my home, my last auto insurance claim was nearly worthless when applying my hourly pay to the amount of time i spent making the claim, there are a few businesses that have made me waste time tying to give them money.

      In the past i used to just not pay if anyone gave me a hassle paying a bill, i'd say we've been on the phone an hour, i'm gonna set a timer for 15 minutes and that's how long you have until t

      • I agree, it's bad. When you have some oddball problem to solve that the AI can't handle, you try to get a person to fix it, and it feels like nobody is home. And it's almost everywhere.
  • The collapse of the middle-class starts rolling...
  • Found that out years ago during layoffs.....company runs just fine or better w/o all the fluff. Comes down to who actually is "hands on" in dealing your product whatever it is ! Kinda like working at Merial on 2nd shift and I was the lead in running the area after supervisor left. Things ran great for most part, management just wouldn't fire the slackers ! Brought in 5 supervisors aka "babysitters" who knew nothing about running the job. For the most part they let me do my job and keep things going. But
    • Apparently they have 350,000 workers in corporate, so firing 14k is about 4% of their total employees. Not a huge cut.

      Things ran great for most part, management just wouldn't fire the slackers ! Brought in 5 supervisors aka "babysitters" who knew nothing about running the job.

      If you are a manager, and hire five managers below you, then it increases your importance. The optimal strategy is to hire as many people as you can. If they are useless, that is a bonus (because then you have to hire more people to get the job done).

    • by DarkOx ( 621550 )

      The thing about most management layers is you don't need them most of the time.

      If you are the kind of organization that is able to retain staff, ie working conditions are not shit, pay is reasonable etc, you end up with experienced staff. Experienced staff can keep the trains running on time with minimal 'help' from management.

      Were middle management matters, and this only applies to 'effective middle managment' which is all but certain as to if it is effective at Amazon or anywhere else is adaptation. You

    • by mjwx ( 966435 ) on Tuesday October 28, 2025 @08:06AM (#65755354)

      Found that out years ago during layoffs.....company runs just fine or better w/o all the fluff. Comes down to who actually is "hands on" in dealing your product whatever it is ! Kinda like working at Merial on 2nd shift and I was the lead in running the area after supervisor left. Things ran great for most part, management just wouldn't fire the slackers ! Brought in 5 supervisors aka "babysitters" who knew nothing about running the job. For the most part they let me do my job and keep things going. But 5 supervisors @ $70k = $350k added to the overhead / costs.

      I've worked in both the public and private sector (and education, which is a weird mix of the two at the tertiary level) and I can honestly say I've found more dead wood and Jobsworths in large private sector outfits than anywhere in the public sector.

      It's much easier to hide in a large company but even worse, it's much easier to make yourself an irremovable cog by getting yourself a single task that means you have to be involved, preferably without any real work. The holy grail of this is to be some kind of gatekeeper so people need your authorisation to do their jobs. This kind of role I've found occupied by dedicated brown nosers and as long as the company is making money no-one bothers looking at people like that.. Hell even when companies are not making money they often overlook them because they suck up to senior management.

  • by methano ( 519830 ) on Tuesday October 28, 2025 @07:37AM (#65755306)
    Wasn't the number 30,000 a couple of days ago? Did they realize that 16,000 were actually doing something useful? Or am I remembering this wrong? Maybe that was Target.
    • That number was "the first round of layoffs". My guess is, these 14000 are the second round.

      • 30k was a rumor attributed to "sources" (unnamed). So, this is that. 14k is the real number, at least for now.

        Of course, today's actual story about 14k won't get nearly as much readership as yesterday's rumor about 30k, since now it's 'old news.' Or better yet, people will just assume both, like your post.

  • by kaur ( 1948056 ) on Tuesday October 28, 2025 @07:57AM (#65755338)

    ... but alas. :(

  • Just because someone has a "Manager" title doesn't mean they aren't doing anything besides telling people what to do. Good management is intimately involved in the actual work. If done right, they are in the manager role because they have a higher-level mastery of the work and can better coordinate what needs to be done while also focusing their efforts on the most complex and highest-value tasks. If that's not happening, it may not necessarily be the manager's fault so much as bureaucracy the company foist

  • Because Jeff needs the money to buy another superyacht, and perhaps a few hypercars with the change.

  • It is incredibly efficient. They also work people brutally hard for insanely long hours. They are famous in the IT industry for that and I know several people who have turned it down work there because they can't do the 996 hours demanded while also being on call constantly. I knew a girl who work there who had a nervous breakdown.

    They are not a company that has a bunch of managers sitting around doing nothing.

    So one of two things is going on. First they just announced a bunch of layoffs that they a
    • Amazon has a reputation for being a demanding competitive workplace. Some might not be a good fit but usually get weeded out before long during regular evaluations. Less layers a common explanation to lessen wrongful termination. Amazon might be able to redeploy a portion and other unfortunate have good experience to market elsewhere when job market picks up. Amazon well known name and getting cut during restructuring better reason than low performance. Bad timing near term since economic situation still te
  • Maybe it's just me (Score:4, Interesting)

    by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Tuesday October 28, 2025 @09:35AM (#65755602)

    But, when someone in your company has a title like "senior vice president of people experience and technology" - it seems to imply some of the layers which should be reduced should be peeled right off the top?

  • Nothing says "Booming Economy" like mass layoffs /s

Nothing recedes like success. -- Walter Winchell

Working...