or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Critics take issue with lack of diversity on Apple Board of Directors
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Critics take issue with lack of diversity on Apple Board of Directors - Page 2

post #41 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post
 

 

Not easy to control when somebody (you and christopher126) concoct some outrageous, male hating nonsense to explain things. There are plenty of companies and countries headed by females that are in trouble. Argentina and Yahoo come to mind right off the bat. Are you two really that delusional to think males running things always makes for trouble? 

 

Delusional? 

post #42 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

Not easy to control when somebody (you and christopher126) concoct some outrageous, male hating nonsense to explain things. There are plenty of companies and countries headed by females that are in trouble. Argentina and Yahoo come to mind right off the bat. Are you two really that delusional to think males running things always makes for trouble? 

Got be careful citing examples like that. You are in danger of walking into the 'Exception that proves the rule' trap there. IMHO gender makes absolutely no difference all things being equal, sadly they rarely are Any deviance from that is almost certainly due to a societal history of preferential treatment of males.
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
post #43 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by starbird73 View Post
 

 

 

 

 

 

I am with the above. Call me naive, but I feel that all this focus on diversity does more good than good. It is a "feel good" move to specifically hire someone based on color/gender.

 

 

By your comment, I am guessing you think specifically hiring based on color/gender is a good thing? May I ask why? I honestly don't know why anyone would think this way, but am open to learning/understanding why.

 

Disclaimer: I am a white, English speaking, college educated, male. So I know I have no first-hand experience. However, if I was ever offered a job to fill some checklist? I would take offense.

 

To me, it is those that claim to want equality that keep these issues going, all the while not looking for equality at all, but looking for special treatment. If we truly want to get beyond these issues, we will look beyond uncontrollable factors such as color/gender/sexual orientation. These things do not define a person. Their character and qualifications should be what does.

 

I'm not for the quotas, and I don't think it's a solution. What I like here is the acknowledgement of a problem. I don't think it would be realistic (or even useful) to have a perfect representation of gender/color etc... However without going this far I don't think it would be a problem for a company like Apple to find excellent alternatives for one or two members of their board.

post #44 of 176
Well, when a group of people who have historically been discriminated against uses legal means to attempt to acquire equal power, I say good luck. That is why we (the USA) came to be, after all, for those who have forgotten their history.

And it is worth considering that the large majority of Apple's customers (at least in the US) are women. Got a problem with that?

Macintosh 512Ke.......

Reply

Macintosh 512Ke.......

Reply
post #45 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by JONOROM View Post

Well, when a group of people who have historically been discriminated against uses legal means to attempt to acquire equal power, I say good luck. That is why we (the USA) came to be, after all, for those who have forgotten their history.

And it is worth considering that the large majority of Apple's customers (at least in the US) are women. Got a problem with that?

Good points. My only concern is the US still has such a long way to go to level the playing field and for example, introducing quotas for corporate board members, would come a long way behind equal opportunities in education and equal pay (to name just two examples) IMHO.
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
post #46 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post
 

 

Not easy to control when somebody (you and christopher126) concoct some outrageous, male hating nonsense to explain things. There are plenty of companies and countries headed by females that are in trouble. Argentina and Yahoo come to mind right off the bat. Are you two really that delusional to think males running things always makes for trouble? 

 

Time for your meds! You're soon going to feel better.

post #47 of 176

Google's BOD is equally not "diverse" depending on the yardstick. Same goes for Amazon.

 

Let's play "Beat the Apple Horse". What will critics criticize Apple for next? Come to think of it, there's not much left, is there?


Edited by cherrypop - 1/6/14 at 7:42am
post #48 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by JONOROM View Post

Well, when a group of people who have historically been discriminated against uses legal means to attempt to acquire equal power, I say good luck. That is why we (the USA) came to be, after all, for those who have forgotten their history.

Not to put too fine a point on it...The Puritans came to this country not for "religious freedom." They came to this country because they wanted everyone to be "Puritans!" Rather like most religions.

 

I agree with your premise though, and thanks to the forward thinking founding fathers you're correct.

 

America is the best country in the world. After Thailand, that is. (It's a great country, even the men look like chicks!)

post #49 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


Good points. My only concern is the US still has such a long way to go to level the playing field and for example, introducing quotas for corporate board members, would come a long way behind equal opportunities in education and equal pay (to name just two examples) IMHO.

Agreed! Well said.

post #50 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Anyone with half a brain knows Apple is neither sexist nor racist.
Proof of that? This half a brain needs a bit more than unsubstantiated opinion.

The board and exec team are almost exclusively white men. Does that tally with what you'd expect based on the diversity of the engineering staff, the retail staff, or generally of CompSci grads?

Even if it does, is Apple presenting itself as an attractive place to work for minorities thereby encouraging that career choice?

If Apple is evidently non-sexist and non-racist then they will have policies in place to address diversity. A lack of policy indicates a passive attitude, which is conducive to a closed-off workplace, and systemic racism/sexism.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #51 of 176
Originally Posted by reroll View Post

I can rephrase if you want : "I wish I were like you, able to tell right from wrong without any doubt".

 

Wish you were, too. You’d be able to avoid moronic beliefs like the one you hold here.

 

Originally Posted by Crowley View Post
Proof of that?

 

Ownership of more than half a brain, I’d guess. Or the ability to read any of the many human languages to see that Apple has no history of this behavior.

 
The board and exec team are almost exclusively white men.

 

“, therefore Apple is racist and sexist.” is your position, is it?

Good luck with that.

 
If Apple is evidently non-sexist and non-racist then they will have policies in place to address diversity. A lack of policy indicates a passive attitude, which is conducive to a closed-off workplace, and systemic racism/sexism. 

 

Yeah, here’s their policy: Do the best work and you get promoted.

post #52 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post
 

Agreed! Well said.

 

True in many countries.

post #53 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

If Cook is that concerned about diversity he could always replace Al Gore on the board. What are his qualifications anyway?

Al Gore could very well be a major influence on Apple's environmental policies. Their renewable energy outlays for their data centers are evidence of some heavy commitment in this area. This may be one of his "qualifications" that you're asking for—making carbon reduction a tangible goal.
post #54 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by reroll View Post
 

 

I'm not for the quotas, and I don't think it's a solution. What I like here is the acknowledgement of a problem. I don't think it would be realistic (or even useful) to have a perfect representation of gender/color etc... However without going this far I don't think it would be a problem for a company like Apple to find excellent alternatives for one or two members of their board.

I agree whole-heartedly that it is a problem. Articles like this, with these 140 character or less statements do nothing but cause problems. 

 

Problem Statement: Many BODs of American Companies are comprised heavily of white men. There are little to no women or people of color.

 

That is the problem. This calling out a company for not having enough diversity, that is just throwing a bomb and not caring about the outcome.

 

Caring about the outcome requires doing some work. Asking questions to which we know the answers, but are afraid to address. 

 

Until we are able to have honest conversations about the problems, we will continue to have these issues.

post #55 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

Wish you were, too. You’d be able to avoid moronic beliefs like the one you hold here.

 

Moronic?

post #56 of 176
Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post
Moronic?

 

Well, yeah. It’s moronic to demand that any entity be comprised of “diversity” rather than the best people for the job, whoever that may be.

post #57 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by starbird73 View Post
 

I agree whole-heartedly that it is a problem. Articles like this, with these 140 character or less statements do nothing but cause problems. 

Agreed. Perhaps it's the medium, but I'm often disappointed with "News." There is hardly ever an attempt to create a "frame of reference."

 

I agree with your comments. Very thoughtful. :)

 

Best.

post #58 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

Well, yeah. It’s moronic to demand that any entity be comprised of “diversity” rather than the best people for the job, whoever that may be.

No one has suggested this. I think you need to reread the above posts. Especially, reroll, digitalclips, starbird73 and jonorom. Or not.

 

In future, you may want to count to 10 before hitting the "submit" button. :)

post #59 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by reroll View Post

True in many countries.

'Most' countries sad to say.
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
post #60 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

No one with any intelligence whatsoever gives a flying frick. Apple isn’t going to hire “minorities” to fill some magical quota. They’ll hire who can do the job, whoever that may be.

 

Since when are women a minority?

 

People tend to hire people who are similar to themselves, rather than the absolutely best person for the job. 'Blind' interview/audition experiments have proven this. Just look at the success of the Rooney Rule in the NFL.

 

If you're mostly hiring white men, you're probably not hiring the best person for the job.

post #61 of 176
Who said the meeting was Feb 28? Was there a formal announcement yet?
post #62 of 176

Thank god - finally - someone has determined the most effective way to solve all inequities in the world based on gender - force Apple to have more women on the board of directors - and everything for ever after will be sunshine and puppy dogs. 

 

If the pundits really want there to be more women in these positions I think they need to start at the bottom, not the top, meaning that such change is far more effective when it is pervasive and begins at the earliest stages of childhood development rather than forced at the end stage. 

 

If you want to claim that you are making up for years of inequity then where do you stop? 

 

To me equal opportunity should be like a batter in baseball. Every batter gets 4 balls and 3 strikes - regardless of age, sex, race, religion, or ability. Those who develop their talent are more likely to be successful than those who do not. But even in a case where the rules are equally applied to all batters does not mean that every single batter faces the same pitches or the same fielders. Imagine if all the ideas about equal opportunity as they are pushed in the business world were used in baseball - we would have a machine "throwing" identical pitches to each batter - and the speed would be adjusted for each batter - and there would be no fielders - just paint boxes so wherever your balls lands that what you get - make it like the pin ball machine version of baseball. and then we could have the distance to the basses adjusted for the height or stride length and age of each batter. 

 

I am not suggesting that discrimination doesn't happen but also consider that in hiring for anything but menial labor there can be considerations beyond what's on your resume that make one candidate more qualified than another. 

 

Also - if only 17% of all members of boards of directors are women across all fortune 500 companies - shouldn't that mean that Apple is right in line if they have eight members on the board and one is a woman that is about 13% - so looks like they are right in line with the proportion of the population of qualified board members. 

 

Which raises the question - how do you determine what the "correct" ratio is? should it be 50/50 if the male/female ratio in the public are large is 50/50? but what if you exclude people who are not actively employed or seeking employment, is that still 50/50? and what if you restrict it to only people who have a certain level of education and experience as managers or team leaders or business owners, is it still 50/50? and if any of those groups don't meet your golden ratio - then you should work to change the underlying conditions that lead to that ratio - if you change the ratio of qualified applicants from 83/17 male/female to something like 60/40 then it might be a valid criticism if Apple is under 20%. 

 

Another factor is how long does the average member sit on a board of directors? if it is 20 or 30 years then you might need to wait 40 or 60 years for changes in the available pool of qualified applicants to spread throughout the business world. 

 

Reminds me of the story of the government inspector who shows up at a small business and tells the owner that with his 10 employes he must have two minorities - so the business owner calls in two minority workers and tells them they are fired - when the government agents asks for an explanation - the business owner says I have four minority employees but you said I had to have two so I have to let these two go. 

post #63 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

No one with any intelligence whatsoever gives a flying frick. Apple isn’t going to hire “minorities” to fill some magical quota. They’ll hire who can do the job, whoever that may be.



 



AI, don’t perpetuate this nonsense.


 


Hiring is not a weightlifting contest, can’t always 'empirically measure' whose is best. So.. if there are two candidates that are 'qualified', one a 'minority'(your words... woman might take issue) and one not, what should they do?
Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster by your side, kid.
Reply
Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster by your side, kid.
Reply
post #64 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Satorical View Post
 

The comments here? #everydaysexism

The idea that Apple can't find qualified board members who aren't white males is ridiculous.

The idea that any company should be pressured to hire any person based on any other measurement beyond being qualified is ridiculous.

“What would I do? I’d shut Apple down and give the money back to the shareholders”

Michael Dell - 1997

Reply

“What would I do? I’d shut Apple down and give the money back to the shareholders”

Michael Dell - 1997

Reply
post #65 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by boeyc15 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

No one with any intelligence whatsoever gives a flying frick. Apple isn’t going to hire “minorities” to fill some magical quota. They’ll hire who can do the job, whoever that may be.

 

 

 

AI, don’t perpetuate this nonsense.

 


Hiring is not a weightlifting contest, can’t always 'empirically measure' whose is best. So.. if there are two candidates that are 'qualified', one a 'minority'(your words... woman might take issue) and one not, what should they do?

They should make the decision based on other traits such as personality, not gender, colour or even disability.

To clarify, if a disabled purple woman is the most qualified for the job, she should get it based only on being the most qualified for the job.

“What would I do? I’d shut Apple down and give the money back to the shareholders”

Michael Dell - 1997

Reply

“What would I do? I’d shut Apple down and give the money back to the shareholders”

Michael Dell - 1997

Reply
post #66 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL View Post
 

If you're mostly hiring white men, you're probably not hiring the best person for the job.

 

Let's try it in reverse and see how people respond "If you're mostly hiring black women, you're probably not hiring the best person for the job".

Now do you see how stupid your statement sounds?

“What would I do? I’d shut Apple down and give the money back to the shareholders”

Michael Dell - 1997

Reply

“What would I do? I’d shut Apple down and give the money back to the shareholders”

Michael Dell - 1997

Reply
post #67 of 176

I've always been surprised at the lack of complaining about the fact that Apple's Keynotes were always a who's-who of Your Favorite Ivy League College's Fraternity Board. 

 

Please post the one or two exceptions to this when an Asian has come on stage. 500 points for a female. An extra 1,000 points for any African-Americans. 

post #68 of 176
Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post
No one has suggested this.

 

Sure thing. Certainly the shareholder group in the article didn’t¡

 

Originally Posted by boeyc15 View Post
if there are two candidates that are ‘qualified, one a 'minority'(your words... woman might take issue) and one not, what should they do?

 

Not hire based on skin color or gender. That’s rule number one. Not hire to “round out the colors and genders” is rule number two.

post #69 of 176

It reminds me of when I stumbled across a protest at Berkeley in the late eighties--they were protesting a lack of diversity among the (actually quite diverse) faculty, and one of their points of contention was that there were no African Americans in the Scandinavian department. I'm not kidding.

 

The field I work in (technology-related) has a lot more men than women, and the people are of an ethnic mix that certainly doesn't reflect the general population: white American, Chinese, Russian and Indian. To some, that might sound diverse, it doesn't feel like it. It's just that those are the cultures and education systems that produce people with the skills required, and I think most women are either drawn or pushed toward other fields. I hope this will change, but I think there would need to be changes in education and upbringing, rather than just saying you have to hire people based on their genetics. I'm sure discrimination is still an issue in some cases, but I doubt that's what's going on with Apple's board.

post #70 of 176

Anyone that believes in the US we hire or promote based on who does the best job is living on Fantasy Island. Apple is high profile and the advocacy groups will haunt this issue forever. For police and fire in the state I live in if a certain demographic can't pass the test and they need those numbers they simply lower the standard for the test.

 

I worked for both GE Capital and IBM and I can tell you at every HR meeting the flow charts based on race and gender are the first to come out. If you don't have enough of either the manager better be promoting whatever shortfall he/she has in that department. The pressure on Apple will not stop until they fall in line and if they don't the lawsuits will be non stop. 

 

The advocacy groups justify their entire existence on issues like this. 

post #71 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by GadgetCanadaV2 View Post
 

 

Let's try it in reverse and see how people respond "If you're mostly hiring black women, you're probably not hiring the best person for the job".

Now do you see how stupid your statement sounds?

Stupid?

post #72 of 176

They should be the best. All the rest is irrelevant.

post #73 of 176
Originally Posted by RichL View Post

If you're mostly hiring white men, you're probably not hiring the best person for the job.

 

Wow, I missed this. Talk about ludicrous nonsense.

post #74 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by GadgetCanadaV2 View Post
 

 

Let's try it in reverse and see how people respond "If you're mostly hiring black women, you're probably not hiring the best person for the job".

Now do you see how stupid your statement sounds?

 

Both statements are correct, aren't they?

 

1) "...if you're mostly hiring white men, you're probably not hiring the best person for the job". 

 

2) "...if you're mostly hiring black women, you're probably not hiring the best person for the job". 

 

With all due respect, you're using convoluted logic. And in an inartful way, making the opposite argument.

 

Best.

post #75 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

Wow, I missed this. Talk about ludicrous nonsense.

Ludicrous? Nonsense?

post #76 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppeX View Post
 

They should be the best. All the rest is irrelevant.

Yes. In a perfect world. :)

post #77 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppeX View Post
 

They should be the best. All the rest is irrelevant.

 

And like we all know: http://www.maniacworld.com/anything-unrelated-is-irrelephant.jpg

post #78 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by macinthe408 View Post
 

I've always been surprised at the lack of complaining about the fact that Apple's Keynotes were always a who's-who of Your Favorite Ivy League College's Fraternity Board. 

 

Please post the one or two exceptions to this when an Asian has come on stage. 500 points for a female. An extra 1,000 points for any African-Americans. 

Most racist thing posted today

“What would I do? I’d shut Apple down and give the money back to the shareholders”

Michael Dell - 1997

Reply

“What would I do? I’d shut Apple down and give the money back to the shareholders”

Michael Dell - 1997

Reply
post #79 of 176
Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post
Ludicrous? Nonsense?

 

Are you having trouble with English today? Stop this nonsense.

post #80 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post


Al Gore could very well be a major influence on Apple's environmental policies. Their renewable energy outlays for their data centers are evidence of some heavy commitment in this area. This may be one of his "qualifications" that you're asking for—making carbon reduction a tangible goal.

Well said.

 

I may not agree with him on every issue, but he certainly has done a lot to bring environmental issues more to the fore.


Edited by christopher126 - 1/6/14 at 6:13pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Critics take issue with lack of diversity on Apple Board of Directors