Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Businesses Cloud

Amazon Inadvertently Announces Cloud Unit Layoffs In Email To Employees (cnbc.com) 21

Amazon appears to have prematurely acknowledged layoffs inside AWS after an internal email referencing "organizational changes" and "impacted colleagues" was mistakenly sent to cloud employees. CNBC reports: "Changes like this are hard on everyone," Colleen Aubrey, senior vice president of applied AI solutions at Amazon Web Services, wrote in an email viewed by CNBC. "These decisions are difficult and are made thoughtfully as we position our organization and AWS for future success." The note also references a post from Amazon's HR boss Beth Galetti and said the company notified "impacted colleagues in our organization." The subject of the email mentions "Project Dawn," and the email says it was "canceled," possibly indicating it was recalled by the sender after the fact. It's unclear what Project Dawn refers to.

The job cuts come after Amazon announced in October that it would lay off 14,000 corporate employees. At the time, the company indicated the cuts would continue in 2026 as it found "additional places we can remove layers." Amazon CEO Andy Jassy said the layoffs were meant to reduce management layers and bureaucracy inside the company. He also predicted last June that efficiency gains from AI would shrink Amazon's corporate staff in the coming years.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Amazon Inadvertently Announces Cloud Unit Layoffs In Email To Employees

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    It was well known that AWS's problem was that customer service and reliability had gotten too good. They had become the cloud computing equivalent of Rolls Royce, and they just had to knock things down a bit to hit the mass market.

    No wait, it was the opposite. What is the Jasshole thinking??

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Get fucked.

  • by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Wednesday January 28, 2026 @02:47AM (#65953968)

    I notice that, with this and other layoffs, they euphemistically talk about "removing layers" - but in actual practice they're typically only removing the very bottom layer (a bunch of actual workers).

    • by ergo98 ( 9391 )

      Is that really true? Many of the layoffs I've seen over the past year have been legitimately "removing layers", purging loads of fat in middle management.

      Companies constantly go through cycles where they stretch to a very vertical structure with a manager for every three employees (exaggerating, but only slightly), and then there's the periodic flattening where they prune it out.

      • Is that really true? Many of the layoffs I've seen over the past year have been legitimately "removing layers", purging loads of fat in middle management.

        HEY! Middle Management is just big boned!

    • by DrXym ( 126579 )
      Amazon had a serious issue if they truly had 16,000 managers to layoff. Personally I think this is just company speak for removing people they want to get rid of regardless of their role, even if they were extremely competent & productive but had the misfortune be on a dud project. Since this Amazon I would be surprised either if there was plenty people let go who were victims of vindictive performance reviews by blame shifting managers.
    • by gweihir ( 88907 )

      Nobody of the higher-ups has any respect for the ones doing the actual work. Otherwise they would have to face how useless they are themselves.

  • Uptime is already suffering
  • > Amazon CEO Andy Jassy .. predicted last June that efficiency gains from AI would shrink Amazon's corporate staff in the coming years.

    I don't think so. AI is oversold. There will be less efficiency rather than more and no one to talk to.
    • by Sethra ( 55187 )

      People miss that AI isn't REPLACING corporate positions, it's identifying positions that are not needed. This is something it's good at.

      It doesn't need to reach the level where it can do someones job to determine that the job is useless to the company or that a reorg can make the position redundant. This is where the layoffs are coming from - cutting out the fat.

      You only need one manager reading the TPS reports.

      • I haven't found it good at any sort of data analysis that would be required for identifying fat. It can search document repositories well and read a user the manual conversationally but feeding it an org chart is bound to get a useless hallucination back. Unless you're trawling Teams for "who didn't actually interact with any coworkers this week" but if you have incompetent enough management that doing so would improve things then you're in deep trouble.
  • by hadleyburg ( 823868 ) on Wednesday January 28, 2026 @03:57AM (#65954014)

    It's odd that in this sort of situation - delivering bad news to employees - the communication skills that HR departments usually promote, seem lacking.

    Presumably in an effort to soften the blow, terms like "impacted", and "positioning for future success" are used, which to the impacted employees just sound like management-speak, and probably add a sprinkle of irritation onto the serving of bad news.

    Management-speak is a dialect used to add the impression of professionalism to what is often a content of marketing or obfuscation. It can work on peers, but can be counter-productive when used on people who value precision, like computer folk.

    • In this case it's true though. Anyone working at Amazon would be better off working somewhere else. That place is toxic (the HR-speak only emphasizes it).
    • It's less odd if you consider the contexts both sides are coming from: If you operate above the level of immediate consequences; the belief that how you characterize it can be as or more important than what actually happened is simply a correct empirical deduction. Just ask anyone who somehow skates blithely from one...opportunity for learnings...to another...difficult transformation period...seemingly with no impact on future employability. While if, regardless of the euphemism used, you'll be having your
    • What if it's actually a stragedy (h/t to Bugs)? What if they intentionally "mistakenly released" this letter before the official release to get people used to the idea that they might be let go? The victims get the unmistakable idea that people are going, but they don't if it's them. Then, when it happens, they could, "I knew it! Those bastards!" and it's not a complete shock.
      • That doesn't really benefit the corporation, they don't want the most desirable staff to get spooked and jump ship, they want them to feel 'safe and valued' after the cuts and stick around.
        • Eh, I dunno. If I work for MegaCorp, and see that they're laying off thousands of people, it's going to shake my faith in the company, regardless. Maybe I survived, today, but do I really want to stick around for the next batch?
  • I hear that the pay is competitive or better than most, but the environment - "It's not for everybody and takes a certain type of personality to thrive there."
    With a company that size, there are usually SOME bad parts. Amazon and big tech companies are always going to be profits first, labor last. Static pay, instability, toxic management culture. Sounds like a dystopian nightmare. I got invited to one of their recruiting festivals when they still did those. No thanks.

  • This is what happens when you let Agents do your work. They reply-all to the whole organization with a draft they weren't supposed to see.
    "I'm sorry, yes I made a terrible mistake! Do you want me to send a follow up email telling everyone that was a joke?"

The moving cursor writes, and having written, blinks on.

Working...