More than 500 Amazon employees are voicing their frustration over the company’s strict return-to-office (RTO) mandate, calling for AWS CEO Matt Garman to reconsider his stance. The group, largely made up of Amazon Web Services (AWS) employees, has sent a strongly-worded letter to Garman following his Oct. 17 comments that suggested broad employee support for the new in-office rule—a claim employees flatly reject as “misleading” and “out of touch.”
At the October all-hands meeting, Garman claimed that nine out of ten workers he spoke with were supportive of the full RTO policy. The letter’s signatories, however, argue that Garman’s statements are out of sync with the reality on the ground and portray a distorted picture of employees’ true feelings. “We were appalled to hear the non-data-driven explanation you gave for Amazon imposing a five-day in-office mandate,” the letter begins, calling into question the transparency and authenticity of Amazon’s leadership.
Amazon’s RTO mandate, announced by CEO Andy Jassy in September, has sparked internal frustration as it demands employees clock five days in the office starting next year. To enforce this mandate, Amazon has even required employees to relocate to regional offices or risk job termination. For many, this is simply unrealistic due to family obligations, medical needs, or prohibitive commute distances. One employee described a four-hour distance to the nearest Amazon office, while others fear being forced to choose between their job and family life.
Employees didn’t hesitate to express that their confidence in the company is waning. “I used to be proud of my work and excited about my future here. I don’t feel that anymore,” lamented one employee, whose story was attached to the letter as an anonymous testimony. Several stories highlighted the difficulties this policy would bring, especially for those with family commitments, long commutes, or medical needs. Amazon’s leadership principles, which include a commitment to being “Earth’s Best Employer,” are under scrutiny by employees who believe the five-day mandate flies in the face of those values.
AWS staff also referenced Garman’s 2020 blog post, where he praised AWS for its productivity during the pandemic when nearly all employees were remote. For employees, the contrast between this praise and today’s hardline RTO approach undermines their trust in leadership. They argue that remote work hasn’t just been effective but has proven beneficial to productivity, work-life balance, and employee retention—factors Amazon can’t afford to ignore in a competitive labor market.
In response, Amazon defended the RTO policy, stating that being in the office strengthens collaboration and connection among team members. Garman, who expressed excitement for the upcoming change, argued that the current three-day policy has proven insufficient, with collaboration stymied as employees are in on different days. Amazon insists that having employees in-office consistently will increase engagement and innovation.
Amazon’s mandate, however, is far stricter than policies at other tech giants, many of whom maintain two- or three-day in-office policies. With the tech landscape shifting rapidly, many of Amazon’s peers are focusing on flexibility to retain top talent. Critics argue that Amazon’s top-down approach disregards these industry trends and may risk alienating its workforce.
As the deadline approaches, it remains unclear if Amazon’s leadership will yield to employee feedback or hold firm on a policy that could have long-term impacts on employee morale and turnover. For a company known for breaking barriers in tech and retail, the insistence on a rigid office policy feels like a step backward to many—a move that could shape the company’s culture and talent pool for years to come.
