FYI: all of these are off the mark, some more than others. Here's some more info to help flesh it out (which is lacking too because there is so much nuance to this stuff).

> 1. Amazon's internal beurocracy enables good teams to be very good, and bad teams to be very bad

These get sniffed out eventually. It's usually a cluster of teams and it comes down to a specific leader creating a toxic environment. Some are very good at managing up and hiding the problems. But that only lasts so long (although sometimes years).

> 2. However, there is significant internal mobility, so you can move if you get stuck on a bad team

Not true.

If you are SDE I (entry level) moving teams is incredibly hard. All of the job posting are for SDE II (except for rare circumstances) and above so you can't apply for other teams. Usually the only way to switch teams is if you know someone there and they can help you out.

If you are not in an engineering role, switching teams is even harder. The business side tends to be more political and also have more candidates for positions.

> 3. WFH policy is effectively left up to each individual team, so that is something to probe about during the interview

Not true.

If your skip-level or even higher says no remote then there will be no remote. While some groups may leave it to each "individual team" it can always be overruled.

> 4. Everybody at Amazon is in the on-call rotation, but on-call load varies significantly by team (I know someone working on an internal tool that has literally never gotten paged)

Not true.

There are teams that don't have on-call rotations. Groups that are building software that hasn't launched yet are likely not carrying a pager. Higher level managers and engineers (Principals) are likely not on a paper rotation. And a bunch of business teams don't have on-call rotations.

> 5. Churn is roughly 6%, as that is what the infamous URA target is set to;

Oversimplified.

That 6% changes every year. I've seen it much lower in some years. It all depends on what's going on in the company. That 6% is just a number they want forced out. It doesn't include people leaving on their own terms that the company would love to have back, so churn is higher.

> however, you'd be surprised how many incompetent people make it past even FAANG interviews, so I wouldn't particularly worry if you're good at your job and your boss isn't an asshole

That's a dangerous assumption to make. It's not as simple as if your boss isn't an asshole. A big factor is if your boss knows how to set you up for success and if you know the rules of how things work there.

During review time, groups that are run well will have each team bring a list of their lowest performers to discuss. They vet how well these employees are functioning against the expectations for their level. If things naturally fall into the right ratio of people that need to be slotted below the bar, then they are done. But if there are not enough people they start digging more into where people land in relation to each other. If your boss hasn't set you up with work that allows you to demonstrate your real abilities then you are likely in trouble. It's not that your boss is an asshole, but that they are inept and screwing things up.