I apologize for sounding brusque, but yours is a defense of Amazon that I've heard many times - multiple times from people who ended up quitting in frustration/anger. It's a view I held myself until things got bad enough to make me leave. Things are always fine, until they aren't, and then they have a tendency to compound very quickly.

> "Amazon is a giant company, so this statement is kind of broad"

It really isn't. Amazon's attrition problems are company-wide, and not limited to a few bad orgs. Amazon's on-call problems are also company-wide, with only a minority of teams spared from it (actually, I was on one of those teams, thank God). Amazon's policy of not readjusting employee compensation to fit a rising market is also company-wide. So yes, they are a huge company, but that is not a defense.

I was a returning intern, so I knew a lot of fellow ex-interns returning full-time. My opinion of Amazon is formed by both my own experience and also a whole lot of commiseration with others from across the company stretching over every org.

In fact, of all the interns I returned with, only 3 remain, 3 years in. In fact, several quit without even fulfilling their first year. They willingly handed back their signing bonus clawbacks (+tax!) just to GTFO.

My impression is that senior-level engineers see a whole different world. SDE1/2 employees are just cogs, but SDE3 and up are treated like Faberge eggs. Unfortunately, I was only a lowly SDE1.

> "just like with any other giant company (insert Yahoo, Oracle, etc. here)."

Amazon is trying to hire at the level of Facebook and Google. Comparing oneself to Yahoo and Oracle (both known for being particularly poorly managed, and the latter having a reputation for being a bit of a code sweatshop) is not praise.

Hell, Amazon's hiring process may be harder than Google's. A full-day of 5-6 interviews, including lunch interviews, with a single member of the group having full veto rights over all other interviewers. It's a wonder they have anyone passing said gauntlet. With that high of a hiring bar, new hires trickle in, and the attrition rate pretty much negates any hiring anybody does.

> "a couple years back they had a focus on operational excellence to reduce oncall pages company-wide."

Platitudes. I was there. Nothing actually changed. I know a few sub-orgs had actual drives to decrease technical debt and drive down operational pain, but for everyone else it didn't do squat.

Amazon's on-call misery stems from the high attrition rate. It's a vicious cycle. Most teams accumulate technical debt since they are constantly under-resourced, what with people leaving all the damned time. Most teams I've seen have perpetual open headcount, and never enough hands to really root-cause and fix the chronic problems that are waking up their on-calls at 5am on a Saturday.

Combined with upper management that keeps trying to drive features and this is a recipe for disaster. The pace at Amazon is relentless (which is often good), but it affords almost no opportunities to refactor, redesign, rearchitect for better operational performance. Hell, if you want a prime example of this, look at how the Catalog systems are set up. It's like a brick wall extended by wooden beams extended by rebar extended by I-beams.