Amazon is determined to use AI for everything – even when it slows down work
Corporate employees said Amazon’s race to roll out AI is leading to 
surveillance, slop and ‘more work for everyone’.

Varsha Bansal
Wed 11 Mar 2026

When Dina, a software developer based in New York, joined Amazon two years ago, 
her job was to write code. Now, it’s mostly fixing what artificial intelligence 
breaks.

The internal AI tool she’s expected to use, called Kiro, frequently 
hallucinates and generates flawed code, she says. Then she has to dig through 
and correct the sloppy code it creates, or just revert all changes and start 
again. She says it feels like “trying to AI my way out of a problem that AI 
caused”.

“I and many of my colleagues don’t feel that it actually makes us that much 
faster,” Dina said. “But from management, we are certainly getting messaging 
that we have to go faster, this will make us go faster, and that speed is the 
number one priority.”

Just days after speaking to the Guardian, Dina was laid off.

Lisa, a supply chain engineer who has worked at Amazon for over a decade, says 
that AI tools at work have been helpful to her only in about one in every three 
attempts. And even then, she often finds issues and has to consult with 
colleagues to verify and correct their results, which takes up more time than 
if she’s done the task without AI.

She doesn’t take issue with the AI tools themselves, but rather the company’s 
logic in pushing all employees to use them daily. “You don’t look at the 
problem and go, ‘How do I use this hammer I have?’ she said. “You look at it 
and go, ‘Is this a problem for a hammer or something else?’”

Group of figures inside a glowing digital space, facing a large window that 
shows a landscape with trees and sky
‘I wish I could push ChatGPT off a cliff’: professors scramble to save critical 
thinking in an age of AI
Read more
More than a half a dozen current and former Amazon corporate employees, in 
roles ranging from software engineer to user experience researcher to data 
analyst, told the Guardian that Amazon is pressing employees to integrate AI 
across all aspects of their work, even though these workers say this push is 
hurting productivity. They say Amazon is rolling out AI use in a haphazard way 
while also tracking their AI use, and they’re worried the company is 
essentially using them to train their eventual bot replacements. All of this, 
they said, is demoralizing. The Guardian granted these workers anonymity 
because of their fear of professional repercussions.

“We have hundreds of thousands of corporate employees in a wide range of roles 
across many different businesses, each of which is using AI in different ways 
to learn about what works best for their use cases,” Montana MacLachlan, an 
Amazon spokesperson, said. “While different employees may have different 
experiences, what we hear from the vast majority of our teams is that they’re 
getting a lot of value out of the AI tools that they use day-to-day.”

This pressure comes as Amazon has laid off 30,000 workers in the last four 
months – nearly 10% of its roughly 350,000 corporate workforce. Its cuts are 
part of a wave of recent AI-connected tech layoffs, including at Block, 
Pinterest and Autodesk. Exactly how much these companies will be able to rely 
on AI to replace headcount is unclear, and each company has given an array of 
sometimes contradictory reasons for reductions. Jack Dorsey, the Block CEO, 
said outright that AI was behind his 40% staffing cuts, while Pinterest and 
Autodesk said they were redirecting investments to AI. Amazon has waffled in 
explaining how AI factors into its layoff decisions, saying both that it would 
lead to reductions, but that recent cuts weren’t AI-driven. The company said in 
February it would spend some $200bn this year on AI infrastructure and 
announced a $50bn investment in OpenAI.

In a moment of rising anxiety about AI and work, the decisions Amazon makes 
around automation – and even how it talks about these shifts – will be 
consequential for not just its massive workforce, but for people in industries 
around the world. Amazon is the second-largest employer in the US and has long 
influenced workplace practices across both white collar and blue collar 
industries.

“There’s a lot of talk among corporate employees about how some of these 
practices – about performance, surveillance and monitoring – are somewhat 
imported from the warehouse and the drivers space, and that it is Amazon 
expanding this model of labor to white collar workers,” Jack, a software 
engineer at Amazon for more than a decade, said. “It does feel like we’re at 
the vanguard of a new stage in employer relations with the advent of AI.”

While Amazon has a reputation for being a tough place to work, the impact of 
its AI campaign has pressurized its workplace, workers said. “It’s worse now,” 
said Denny, a software engineer, who works in the retail space at the company. 
“If we don’t pivot ... then we risk becoming obsolete and being let go in the 
next layoff.”

Whenever there’s a task at hand, the biggest question managers ask is whether 
it can be done faster with AI tools, according to Denny. This is leading 
employees to use AI tools just for the sake of it. Recently, someone in Denny’s 
team shared that an internal AI agent had saved him about a week of developer 
effort on a feature. But when Denny looked at the actual code review, he found 
dozens of comments from colleagues pointing out basic issues. The AI generated 
code was full of slop.

“In the end, my guess is that the developer cycle is not going to change, and 
[could] even be potentially longer,” said Denny. “This pressure to use [AI] has 
resulted in worse quality code, but also just more work for everyone.”

Denny was one of several workers who told the Guardian they’re pressured to use 
an overwhelming array of AI tools, many of which were hastily developed in 
internal hackathons and then have to spend time answering surveys about their 
experience with the tools.

“I would get shown these random tools by my manager who’d be like: ‘Why don’t 
you try using this thing?’, and it was just the result of a hackathon,” said 
Denny. He says the tools are “half-baked” and unhelpful, and in fact add to his 
workload because he has to vet them.

Amazon typically organizes quarterly hackathons to encourage engineers to 
develop new projects. Sometime last year, Denny recalls, the company primarily 
switched to generative AI hackathons, during which the majority of projects 
ended up being developer productivity focused tools.

“We don’t mandate teams use AI tools,” said Amazon’s MacLachlan. “However, we 
believe these tools can help employees work more efficiently and automate 
time-consuming, undifferentiated tasks.”

There have also been public slip-ups that seem connected to Amazon’s embrace of 
AI. According to a February FT report, Amazon recently experienced at least two 
outages because of issues with the company’s internal AI tools, including a 
13-hour interruption to a customer-facing system in December after some 
engineers allowed its AI tool “to make certain changes”. Amazon, however, said 
that an employee, rather than AI, caused the service interruption. The FT 
reported on Tuesday that Amazon would convene engineers to explore “a spate of 
outages, including incidents tied to the use of AI coding tools”.

“I think if you continue to push people to use AI tools in every single aspect, 
you’re going to get more errors like that,” Sarah, an Amazon software engineer, 
said.

Sarah said that AI can be useful, but its potential is best realized when 
engineers decide how to use it. But at Amazon, even when AI is not suited for a 
task, she’s now expected to train it. “We have to write out detailed procedures 
so that the AI can understand it and give better output,” said Sarah. “Part of 
my new job role, it feels like, is being asked to train the AI to essentially 
replace you.” She’s early in her career and worries that offloading her work to 
AI is stunting her learning curve.

Forcing employees to adopt tools, according to Ifeoma Ajunwa, founding director 
of the AI and Future of Work Program at Emory University and the author of The 
Quantified Worker, usually backfires. “Generally, employees are in a better 
position [than management] to determine what tools can aid productivity,” she 
said.

Meanwhile, Amazon workers are often having to seek out training for AI best 
practices on their own.

Will, a user experience researcher, said Amazon offers employees plenty of AI 
training videos on their learning portals, though most of them are optional. 
When he’s attended training sessions, “the focus is always, ‘here’s how to 
build something as quickly as possible’”. He said trainers – who are typically 
peer employees who are also AI power users – advise to carefully review each 
step before letting AI start building. At the same time, Will said: “I have 
been in several trainings where the instructor says you can just ask the AI to 
check its own work.” However, you can’t fully rely on AI to detect its own 
mistakes; that’s something human judgment is better suited for.

“One of the biggest predictors of AI adoption and whether employees feel that 
AI increases their productivity is whether management encourages it and 
provides training,” Alex Imas, professor of behavioural science and economics 
at Chicago Booth, said.

The rushed deployment of AI means an uncritical expansion of surveillance ...
Nick Srnicek
MacLachlan said Amazon provides different training and resources for people 
across the company, including structured options. “Employees are encouraged to 
use the tools themselves as a learning mechanism, adopting a learn-as-you-work 
approach that is proving to be one of the most practical and effective methods 
of AI adoption across the company,” she said.

An AI-fueled shift to surveillance
Along with the productivity challenges that have come with Amazon’s AI push, 
workers said it’s also making them feel surveilled.

For years, each morning when Amazon employees logged in to work, an internal 
system called Amazon Connections would greet them with a message and ask for 
feedback on topics like how their teams were functioning, or how satisfied they 
felt with their work. Over the last year, these questions have increasingly 
centered less on human factors and more on AI.

Maria, a former product manager who was laid off from Amazon in January, said 
questions asking her about her career or team shifted to more often focus on 
AI: “‘Are you using AI in your daily work?,’ ‘How often are you using it?,’ ‘Do 
you think that you’re a power user?,’ or ‘Is AI a priority in your 
organization?’”.

Then there are more obvious indicators of surveillance. Workers said managers 
at Amazon have a dashboard where they track their team members’ AI use, 
including if they’re using certain tools and how often they do so. (The 
Information first reported this in February.)

Jack, the software developer who’s worked at Amazon for more than a decade, 
said the company also launched a different dashboard, which the Guardian has 
viewed, so teams could see their generative AI adoption, engagement and depth 
of usage. “Every team treats it differently,” he said, with some managers using 
it with a goal of getting at least 80% of their team using AI tools weekly.

Sarah said her team’s principal engineer told her and his other reports he 
checks this dashboard daily. “He’s really been pushing our AI usage,” she said.

“Of course we want to understand what tools our teams are using and whether 
those tools are working well for them or could be improved,” said MacLachlan.

The inevitable result of AI tools getting deployed at scale is surveillance, 
according to Nick Srnicek, author of Platform Capitalism and a senior lecturer 
in digital economy at King’s College London. “The rushed deployment of AI means 
an uncritical expansion of surveillance since these tools increasingly require 
detailed knowledge of personal workflows and data,” he said. “To make them more 
capable means giving management greater insight and control over workers’ 
everyday activities.”

Workers also said they suspect their career advancement is increasingly 
dependent on their enthusiastic embrace of AI.

“We have promotion documents which have a template with questions like, ‘What 
has this person done?’, ‘What impact did it have?’ – and now it also has a 
question asking, ‘How [did] they leverage AI?’,” said Lisa. “I think they want 
to only keep the people who support this investment [in AI] and are going to 
try and filter out people who do not support it or have concerns about it.” The 
Wall Street Journal reported in late February that at Amazon, “managers do 
consider who is all-in on AI when it comes to promotions”.

“While we expect employees to use resources – including AI – to make work more 
engaging and improve customers’ lives, we don’t instruct managers to consider 
AI utilization as part of our evaluation process,” said MacLachlan. “Instead, 
we focus on AI adoption and sharing best practices to celebrate innovation and 
operational efficiency gains across the company.”

At the same time, Andy Jassy, Amazon CEO, hasn’t been shy about his AI 
expectations for his employees. In a company-wide email last June, he predicted 
that AI-driven productivity gains would reduce the company’s corporate 
workforce, and urged workers to embrace AI. “Educate yourself, attend workshops 
and take trainings, use and experiment with AI whenever you can, participate in 
your team’s brainstorms to figure out how to invent for our customers more 
quickly and expansively, and how to get more done with scrappier teams,” he 
wrote.

The unspoken math
That same company-wide email prompted heavy internal pushback at Amazon last 
summer, with employees slamming Jassy’s leadership and speaking of the 
demoralizing impact of the company’s AI push, according to Business Insider. 
Months later, over 1,000 workers signed a petition that raised concerns about 
the company’s “aggressive rollout” of AI tools.

As Amazon has laid off thousands of workers, it’s shared growing revenue 
numbers each quarter. Though Jassy has repeatedly said that these layoffs are 
neither “financially-driven” nor AI-driven, for Maria, all of this adds up.

“If you say you automated away two hours of someone’s job, you need to convert 
that into savings on that job title,” she said, explaining the company’s logic 
behind cutting jobs. “That’s the unspoken math of what they’re doing.”

Jack keeps thinking about comments Jassy made during a companywide all-hands 
meeting last spring. According to a Business Insider report about this meeting, 
Jassy responded to a question about running Amazon as “the world’s largest 
startup”, and said they want to be “scrappy” to “do a lot more things”. He also 
warned that their competitors are the “most technically able, most hungry” 
companies, including startups “working seven days a week, 15 hours a day”.

“All of those things put together was an implicit threat that the people 
remaining at the company are expected to work longer and harder,” said Jack. It 
“really struck home to me that if [Amazon] can’t amass profits with endless 
growth, then it can get a little bit more by squeezing it out of the people 
working for it”.

<https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ng-interactive/2026/mar/11/amazon-artificial-intelligence>

Reply via email to