In late January 2026, Amazon confirmed one of the largest workforce reductions in its history, announcing the elimination of roughly 16,000 corporate roles worldwide. The decision followed an earlier cut of about 14,000 positions in October 2025, bringing the total to nearly 30,000 eliminated roles. Together, these reductions accounted for around ten percent of Amazon’s global corporate workforce, excluding warehouse and fulfillment staff. The news was shared through an internal memo and a public post by Beth Galetti, Senior Vice President of People Experience and Technology.

Company leadership framed the cuts as part of a broader effort to simplify operations and sharpen focus. Executives emphasized reducing layers of management, removing bureaucracy, and shifting resources toward strategic priorities such as artificial intelligence, AWS expansion, and faster product innovation. CEO Andy Jassy has consistently argued that these changes are necessary to remain competitive as rivals pour massive investments into emerging technologies.

Employees across departments like AWS, retail, devices, advertising, and HR were affected. In the United States, many received a 90-day transition period with full pay and benefits to seek internal roles. Those who did not transition were offered severance and support, while international arrangements varied based on local laws.

The layoffs triggered intense reactions among employees and communities, particularly in tech hubs like Seattle. Many workers described shock and anxiety, especially after years of rapid hiring. Local economies also felt the impact as spending patterns shifted amid job losses.

One former employee shared a striking experience that highlighted the human cost of these changes. Just days before a long-planned vacation, they were informed their role had been eliminated. Initially, their approved leave was disregarded, and their final paycheck excluded vacation pay, despite prior approval.

By reviewing company policy and challenging the discrepancy, the employee succeeded in having the decision corrected. Their vacation was honored, compensation restored, and the experience became a lesson in self-advocacy. While anecdotal, the story reflects broader tensions between efficiency-driven restructuring and the rights and dignity of individual workers.