This is what most outside counsel in WA advise their corporate clients. Use non-competes. Even though everyone knows they are essentially unenforceable.
A "venomous separation" is more lucrative for outside counsel than an amicable one where they are not needed.
Attempting to enforce a non-compete would be handled by outside counsel. It is likely that oustide counsel were consulted before Amazon began using non-compete provisions. It is also likly that the "boilerplate" non-complete provision(s) Amazon is using originated from an outside firm.
A "venomous separation" is more lucrative for outside counsel than an amicable one where they are not needed.