employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

Amazon Web Services

Part of Amazon

Is this your company?

Most toxic place I have ever worked - Technical Recruiter Amazon Web Services Employee Review

1.0
Dec 8, 2023
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

-I could improve professionally (e.g. stakeholder management, professional communication and writing) -the brand looks good on CV

Cons

-Amazon is like a cult, it is either you follow it or leave -It depends on the team if you feel ok, if you are unlucky like I was, you may suffer -no real collaboration, team work is just not part of the company culture, non-existent; very much working in silos -no real support from your direct manager, nobody is backing you -everything is about performance, no humanity is represented -Recruiters actually does not prescreen candidates, they just source them, no added value work, the job itself is a process management -EU Recruitment is led by UK leaders, feels like working on a colony -If upper management likes you, you will have a great career for ages, if not, you are just done -it is really hard to change levels and get a promotion -when I applied back then they did not tell me I was down leveled, I learned it on my first week. Total lack of transparency. -the average employment time is 1,8 years - speaks for itself -they fired a friend of mine during probation, although they have a very detailed and long hiring process. My friend relocated his whole family to Germany and had to find a job again.

Explore other reviews about Amazon Web Services

5.0
Apr 20, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Great opportunity to learn about AWS and get experience.

Cons

Limited on what you can do as an intern.

4.0
May 12, 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