employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

Amazon Web Services

Part of Amazon

Is this your company?

Uninspired; cheap; broken DevOps; wildly inconsistent management - Software Development Engineer II Amazon Web Services Employee Review

3.0
1 Oct 2023
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

It's a tech job that pays you enough that you ought to have some disposable income. In good stock years, it can be somewhat better.

Cons

I worked on a service that grew very quickly and was extremely profitable. It was great for upper management, not particularly for worker bees. I had a couple of "good years" as I worked there during a period when my RSUs (stock units, treated as pay not options) appreciated about 300%, but the resulting total compensation was probably half what someone at another FAANG company would have experienced. Now to the salient points: * Uninspiring: If you are fortunate, you may spend a couple years doing something really exciting. Otherwise you are working in the digit mines. * Cheap: Amazon will put you to work on the 20th floor of a building and make you buy (full price) soda and (full price) snacks out of a machine. Your manager can get a snack budget for your team, but someone has to go to Costco to get the stuff. If there is a cafeteria, it's mediocre, and it's not cheap, either. Basically, Amazon would rather you take an hour and a half for lunch, or bring a sandwich to work, than feed you in the office. I'm not big on perks that replace what your mother used to do for you (e.g. laundry) but this policy is just stupid and wasteful. Still cheap: Amazon employs a ton of H-1B, and they are regularly held over the barrel, both with regard to working conditions, and pay. Broken DevOps: Much or Most of AWS has dispensed with the notions of QA and Operations. In the poorly run (but often extremely profitable) services, development runs open loop, with predictably unenjoyable results. In some services, this works out all right, ish. In others, especially when bug fixes never get into production because new features are more important to revenue, developers (who all have on call rotation) will experience brutal, and I mean absolutely brutal, on-call periods, with 20, 50, even 100 open tickets among teams of at most a handful of engineers. Most every engineer experiencing this mess is constantly looking for another job, either elsewhere in Amazon (moving to retail is popular) or elsewhere, period. Wildly inconsistent management: Your experience in your job will depend on your management. Period. If your good manager leaves, there is no guarantee or even expectation of continuity. Your rewarding job Friday may be a nightmare Monday although nothing at all other than a single manager changed. Remember the saying: "People join companies. They leave managers."

Explore other reviews about Amazon Web Services

5.0
8 Jun 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Great team when you have a manager and full team that works well and collaborates well. Stock is great. And you know when youre doing well, the pay increase is roughly the same as everyone else.

Cons

Low perks compared to other FAANG companies and most teams have high turn over

4.0
12 May 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Operated in systems that had real scale, operational constraints, and production consequences.

Cons

Working at Amazon Web Services gave me strong exposure to distributed systems, operational ownership, and production-scale infrastructure, but there were definitely tradeoffs as well. One downside was that, like many large organizations, ownership could become fragmented. You often own a subsystem or workflow rather than an entire product end-to-end, which can limit exposure to broader architectural decision-making unless you deliberately seek it out. There was also significant process overhead. Design reviews, operational processes, dependency coordination, and organizational alignment were valuable for learning rigor, but they can slow iteration compared to smaller engineering teams. Another challenge is that large internal ecosystems can abstract away infrastructure complexity. AWS has extensive internal tooling, deployment systems, and operational platforms, which are powerful, but some of that experience does not transfer directly outside the company. I also found that operational work could dominate engineering time at points. Handling production issues, retries, integration failures, and on-call responsibilities teaches reliability engineering well, but it can reduce the amount of time spent on deeper technical exploration or greenfield development. Finally, there is the perception aspect. AWS is a strong name, but experienced interviewers know there is wide variance between teams and roles. The company name opens doors, but ultimately you still need to demonstrate technical depth, ownership, and strong engineering judgment independently of the brand.

See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All