[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by Hitch

Am I the only one who knows that to be ON the list, a company has to actually APPLY to be put on the list? And your operating assumption is that, what...Amazon did, and didn't make the cut? Anyone think that maybe, they didn't bother to apply?

I wasn't aware of the free application process for that particular list, but reading your statement, and after googling, now I am. But there are other surveys like that which I have never seen Amazon listed on, and I doubt companies have to apply to all of them. I don't have time now to verify this and get a reasonable sample of them but may be able to do it in the next couple days.

Oh, BTW: Funnily enough, Apple wasn't on that list, either, were they?

Often, not always, Apple is on best employer lists.

Really? Wow. that certainly explains why Google, the #1 ranked "best company to work for," from your FIRST link, has the third-highest turnover, and 3rd-lowest employee loyalty, from your SECOND link--right?

Silicon Valley culture is famous for job hopping, and that's where Google and Apple are headquartered. I do not believe job hopping is the primary way to measure employee satisfaction -- although it can raise questions open to differing answers. I was using job hopping not to bash Amazon, but to measure whether your private sample of Amazon employees was random.

So, really...these lists prove nothing.

The kind of evidence I prefer to apply in these threads is publicly available evidence, and they are that.

I agree they prove nothing. The reason we can discuss this reasonably and at length is that there is good evidence for multiple positions without any one being scientifically proven.