Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by marbletiles 3947 days ago
That's zero-sum: the (minor) cost the team pays for supporting the leave is repaid by the support they get when they need to take leave themselves.

The other things could and should have been improved by Amazon. Their obligation is to get you back into a situation as close as practicable to the one you left.

1 comments

what are you talking about? reporting to a new manager is far from a minor cost, especially when it's a manager you never reported to to begin with. since everyone else is making random unfounded statements, her going on maternity leave probably had a lot to do with why there was only one person left on the team when she came back.

what about the new manager? why should they have to change teams? basically what you're saying is that everyone on the team should suffer significantly so that one person can return to lead the same team with different members rather than just leading a new team that needs a manager?

If properly handled maternity cover is a pretty painless process. It's not like a boss quitting: there are handover periods and keep-in-touch mechanisms. The new manager should be explicitly hired for maternity cover, and have their expectations set. It happens in most of Europe, almost without comment it's so routine.

If it's a massive career-impacting hassle for employees of people on leave at Amazon, where they "suffer significantly" that's yet more evidence for Amazon being a terrible place to work.