or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple reveals most employees are white men, says diversity needs to be improved
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple reveals most employees are white men, says diversity needs to be improved - Page 2

post #41 of 798
As a shareholder this concerns me. As malodorous said, diversity for diversity's sake is lazy and harmful. I am not only a shareholder but a former employee, and I can attest to the fact that the VAST majority of applicants to Apple are white males. However, hiring was always more diverse. At our store 30% of the employees were gay, a significant portion were asian, and there was still representation for nearly every other ethnic group.

There is nothing wrong with diversity, but there is a a lot wrong with discrimination. If the majority of white or male applicants are passed over simply because Apple wishes to create a more diverse work force, then that in itself is discrimination and is thus wrong. I sincerely hope that is not the direction Apple is heading.
post #42 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gustav View Post

You are turning a blind eye the fact that are circumstances in society preventing smart and qualified people from being seen or applying to Apple. 

Can you be more specific, instead of making a ridiculous broad-brush statement? Why should this be? Are they uninformed about Apple? Illiterate? Do they lack the motivation to find out?

post #43 of 798

So this is why Apple acquired Beats......

 

makes sense now.

post #44 of 798
So how does Apple measure sexual orientation? Are new hires asked to supply HR with whether they're gay or straight?
post #45 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gustav View Post

Wow, tallest skil and maloderous completely miss the point. Labelling it as "Diversity for Diversity's sake" is lazy and harmful. You are turning a blind eye the fact that are circumstances in society preventing smart and qualified people from being seen or applying to Apple. This is what Cook is talking about. Believing it means Apple will hire someone not qualified for the job just to increase the diversity numbers is a lazy and ignorant take on it.

 

Exactly the point!!!

post #46 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


Yeah, see, this isn’t what I said at all. Try again.



Except there are genetic differences between races.

But you know there is greater genetic variability within races than between - sooooo.
post #47 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

So this is why Apple acquired Beats......

makes sense now.

Seriously?!

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #48 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nobodyy View Post


But you know there is greater genetic variability within races than between - sooooo.

Like in the NBA or NHL?

post #49 of 798

Whites constitute the majority of the U.S. population, with a total of 223,553,265 or 72.4% of the population in the 2010 United States Census. There are 63.7% Whites when Hispanics who describe themselves as "white" are taken out of the calculation.

 

So it would seem Apple is right in line with reflecting the population they are drawing form...  I don't see the problem there.

post #50 of 798
If anything, perceived "imbalances" are an indictment of the public education system which should be burned to the ground and replaced with competing privately run organizations. Just as is true in life beyond school, let the best schools win!

Can you imagine the demand for a school system run or designed by Apple?

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #51 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by pigybank View Post
 

Whites constitute the majority of the U.S. population, with a total of 223,553,265 or 72.4% of the population in the 2010 United States Census. There are 63.7% Whites when Hispanics who describe themselves as "white" are taken out of the calculation.

 

So it would seem Apple is right in line with reflecting the population they are drawing form...  I don't see the problem there.

The "problem" is apparent; that white dudes make them feel bad.

post #52 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by maloderous View Post
 

Diversity for Diversity's sake is bad.

 

not really.

 

Do you think a company made up of 100% white males would be successful selling women's clothes?

 

Having diversity leads to new ideas and viewpoints. 

post #53 of 798
You're only half-right maloderous. Business decisions need to be made on logic. But there's more to running a successful organization than just "business decisions". If only you had added a measure of "diversity" to your thought you may have considered that? Because sometimes Diversity on its own can open the path to an alternate source of superior talent or logic. Emotion, and social dynamics are a huge part of a successful business that relies on human (not robot) customers. And thank goodness Tim Cook has made it clear on numerous occasions that pure-business logic is not his only consideration when running Apple.

I appreciate Apple's transparency. I will appreciate even more when they actually measure up to their own standards of diversity.
post #54 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by pigybank View Post

Whites constitute the majority of the U.S. population, with a total of 223,553,265 or 72.4% of the population in the 2010 United States Census
. There are 63.7% Whites when Hispanics who describe themselves as "white" are taken out of the calculation.

So it would seem Apple is right in line with reflecting the population they are drawing form...  I don't see the problem there.

You're right. There is no problem, there is only kowtowing to collectivists and racists who believe race is more important than the individual.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #55 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

If anything, perceived "imbalances" are an indictment of the public education system which should be burned to the ground and replaced with competing privately run organizations. Just as is true in life beyond school, let the best schools win!

By offering higher paying jobs to minorities who have relatively same skills as those who are white and are paid for their skills (to the greater degree), those people can invest in public education, move to better school districts, etc, to help to change the cycle that is creating such a divid between races.

In all helping the "finding the best person just happens to be a white male" through investment in our children.
post #56 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

not really.

Do you think a company made up of 100% white males would be successful selling women's clothes?

Having diversity leads to new ideas and viewpoints. 
But Apple's workforce isn't 100% white male. Personally I would want to be hired based on my qualifications not because the company didn't have enough females and needed to meet some quota.
post #57 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by TechManMike View Post
 

As a black male I have to say that I hate this kind of crap, I don't ever want to feel like somebody's charity case just because i'm black. I used to work at an Apple Store in Seattle (on the outskirts actually), and while I do agree that most of the workforce was white I don't believe it had anything whatsoever to do with some kind of effort to hire only whites. The store manager was black and hispanic, the Redzone manager was Asian, and so was another manager. If there was a real case of discrimination that could be proven that would be a different story, but I never felt discriminated against. AFTER 7 INTERVIEWS I feel that they knew I was the best person to get the job done and so I was hired. I was the best person by the way....I rocked the sh!t out of all my interviews.

 

Good for you.

 

I'm glad you had great experiences interviewing for jobs.  Seattle is a very progressive city, I'm not surprised.

But sad to say many minorities in the deep south don't have the same experiences.

post #58 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


But Apple's workforce isn't 100% white male. Personally I would want to be hired based on my qualifications not because the company didn't have enough females and needed to meet some quota.

 

I'm just making the point that diversity can be an advantage.

post #59 of 798

This isn't about diversity quotas. Apple is a multinational company and will be selling more devices to China than any other country soon.

 

There are qualified people of every race, religion, cultural background, etc. Apple sees their goal as finding the most diverse group to represent their customer base. It doesn't mean Apple is turning away qualified white guys. It means that they are just looking harder to find the most diverse group of experts and employees.

 

It's corporate Darwinism. Diversity always beats uniformity when it comes to people. 

post #60 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

COME OFF IT. NO. Either hire the best person for the job or screw you all. This isn’t how to run a business.

This is what should tank the stock, not record sales numbers.

Not just Apple now: Instead of spending money getting a magical “complete” subsection of people into every industry for no reason whatsoever, why not spend that money improving the experience/education of the people who already WANT TO BE THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE. Don’t force people to take occupations they don’t want.

This is a topic in which you should remain silent. As someone who had two businesses over the years, in which I hired hundreds of people, I can say that things aren't as simple as you would like them to be.

My first reaction is simple, as yours is, which is to only hire the most qualified people. I'm sure Apple isn't going to be hiring second rate people in order to fill some arbitrary quotas. But, on the other hand, there are many qualified people out there who don't even fill out the forms for large corporations because they are certain they won't be hired by them. Encouraging them to do so, is important.

Even for my companies I often got the feeling from minority candidates that they weren't expecting me to hire them.

But the USA numbers don't look bad. After all, if Apple's employee numbers come anywhere close to the percentages of the USA population, then it's about right, and nothing more can really be done.

As far as the numbers for higher management goes, that's a more difficult topic. When hiring there, mere qualifications mean less. How do you measure the qualifications of a major candidate? That's very complex.
post #61 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

You're right. There is no problem, there is only kowtowing to collectivists and racists who believe race is more important than the individual.
I'll bet if Apple released stats based on political allfiliafion you would see next to no diversity. At Tim Cook's Apple diversity is measured by skin color, gender and sexual orientation.
post #62 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

But Apple's workforce isn't 100% white male. Personally I would want to be hired based on my qualifications not because the company didn't have enough females and needed to meet some quota.

However, because the company did not have enough gay black males in their pipeline (as in my case), I'd appreciate the extra look at my work to show them I do compare, if not exceed the other talent in the pool. If i don't compare, it will be obvious and I will not survive if given a "pass". But that second look means I get judged more accurately if I've been looked over in the start because of who I am - the country is slated against you and I, I don't think its carity or cheating to get a stool to prop ourselves on now and again.
post #63 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by carloblackmore View Post

You're only half-right maloderous. Business decisions need to be made on logic. But there's more to running a successful organization than just "business decisions". If only you had added a measure of "diversity" to your thought you may have considered that? Because sometimes Diversity on its own can open the path to an alternate source of superior talent or logic. Emotion, and social dynamics are a huge part of a successful business that relies on human (not robot) customers. And thank goodness Tim Cook has made it clear on numerous occasions that pure-business logic is not his only consideration when running Apple.

I appreciate Apple's transparency. I will appreciate even more when they actually measure up to their own standards of diversity.

 

Great comment!

post #64 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post
 

 

not really.

 

Do you think a company made up of 100% white males would be successful selling women's clothes?

 

Having diversity leads to new ideas and viewpoints. 

Then your example wouldn't be for Diversity's sake. It'd be a legit business decision. You'd assume that women know women's clothes.

post #65 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

It's becoming more and more clear to me now that the Beats deal was in fact a racial quota thing. Ugh. Disturbing and disgusting collectivist nonsense. Is this really what Apple is becoming? Hiring people without taking race or background into consideration is the right thing to do.

Apple products ALREADY appeal to people everywhere because of their simplicity and well-thought out function. Dragging race and political matters into Apple's public image is a huge misstep. Silicon Valley is going through yet another self-made crisis created by middle-managers who live by appeasement.

Just focus on the products!

That's ludicrous! You have no idea of what you're saying here.
post #66 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

Good for you.

I'm glad you had great experiences interviewing for jobs.  Seattle is a very progressive city, I'm not surprised.
But sad to say many minorities in the deep south don't have the same experiences.

I find the word "minority" extremely offensive, quite frankly. It diminishes the individual and perpetuates the insane notion that race has anything to do with intellect or ability. Judge people not by race, but by their individual ability and character.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #67 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

Do you think a company made up of 100% white males would be successful selling women's clothes?

That's silly. A woman is more likely to understand women's fashion and women's needs for fashion better than a man so you're likely to have more women in this field. Your argument in favour of diversity for diversity's sake is suggesting that you hire a man who is less qualified than a woman simply to make diversify a position based on sex for its own sake.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #68 of 798
I wonder what percent of the male employees have been with Apple for a significant amount of time. The amount of females in the tech world has dramatically increased over the past 10 years (which is great) but I wonder how many older male employees may skew the data if at all. It would be great to track the timeline.
Edited by photodenk - 8/12/14 at 10:45am
post #69 of 798
I certainly agree with those who say that the best practice is to hire the best people for the job, no matter what "group" they fall into.

What's the alternative? Quotas? How can that possibly improve things? And how is that not discrimination?
post #70 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gustav View Post

Wow, tallest skil and maloderous completely miss the point. Labelling it as "Diversity for Diversity's sake" is lazy and harmful. You are turning a blind eye the fact that are circumstances in society preventing smart and qualified people from being seen or applying to Apple. This is what Cook is talking about. Believing it means Apple will hire someone not qualified for the job just to increase the diversity numbers is a lazy and ignorant take on it.

 

Actually, "diversity for diversity's sake is very damaging. Just not to the people who get a nearly "free ride."

 

As a while male, born in the United States, I have been shocked as I entered the college and workforce years to discover that the entire system was against me. Going to university cost a lot. I had to work to support myself and school and am still paying off loans.  Meanwhile, I noticed the black, hispanic, and especially middle eastern folks were getting mostly free rides with grants.  And they were allowed to use the money even for personal support. Meanwhile my loans must be paid in full, even the extra unused portion kept by the school.

 

My wife of middle eastern descent was constantly offered many benefits by this country to get ahead, with little to no investment.

 

Me? Perhaps because I'm white and it's expected that I grew up with a silver spoon instead of dirt poor living in the back of a trailer and eating reject food that benevolent restaurant owners so generously provided to my single mom, brother, and I.

 

So take that idea that diversity is the main thing that needs to be there. It doesn't. What needs to be there are hard working people who care about what they do, regardless of ethnicity or gender. 

 

No one believes that Apple is a prejudiced company. And no one believes it's about to be one.

 

Moves like this to satisfy a public facing chart don't help anyone. 

post #71 of 798

Post the applicant rejection numbers, broken down by race / sex. Then MAYBE we'll have something to discuss. Till then, this is all pointless BS.

post #72 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by photodenk View Post

I wonder what percent of the male employees have been with Apple for a significant amount of time. The amount of females in the tech world has dramatically increased over the past 10 years (which is great) but I wonder how many older male employees may sqew the data if at all. It would be great to track the timeline.

FYI: It's "skew".

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #73 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


I think his point is clear.

My question to you is how is it better for a company to hire based on sex or "race" over hiring the best individual for the position?

Obviously it isn't, on the assumption that your criteria for "best individual for the position" are broad and complete.

 

However, you're only viewing this from a single perspective.  What if the hypothetical best person for the position doesn't apply for the position because Apple are a company full of old white men that have shown no interest in diversity and appealing across cultural boundaries?

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #74 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

not really.

Do you think a company made up of 100% white males would be successful selling women's clothes?

Having diversity leads to new ideas and viewpoints. 
And in what world would you get 100% white male applicants for that company??? Or in what world would a person in charge of hiring think only white males are qualified for that kind of company (selling women's clothes)? You built a ridiculous straw man.

Another straw man is the idea that people of different races have fundamentally and inherently different worldviews. Two people of different races who grew up as neighbors are going to be far more similar than two people of the same race who grew up in different places/circumstances.

If an applicant thinks they have a unique perspective that could bring value to the company, they should be able to express that. But note that it's their brain that makes them valuable/diverse, not their race or sex.
post #75 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

Thank you for continuing to prove you do not read posts before replying to them.

Wow, you gave in to your last resort I-have-no-argument defence very quickly that time.  I guess it's pointless to continue then?  Right-o.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #76 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

Obviously it isn't, on the assumption that your criteria for "best individual for the position" are broad and complete.

However, you're only viewing this from a single perspective.  What if the hypothetical best person for the position doesn't apply for the position because Apple are a company full of old white men that have shown no interest in diversity and appealing across cultural boundaries?
Correlation does not imply causation.
post #77 of 798

I've probably hired 100 people in my last 30 years of business. All types. What really counts is NOT political correctness of any kind. We've trained the untrained (lots of companies do not want to train anyone these days... they used that insipid phrase, "hit the ground running.")

 

What I have found is that attitude counts for a lot, as does work ethic. Entitlement doesn't count at all. If it's a technical position, aptitude is certainly important. Never had much of a problem with "getting along with others." The two biggest "bad" people were older white men who felt I wasn't paying enough attention to their belief systems (theft and entitlement). Yet one competent black woman was leaving work early at night when no one else was around. She was fired, the two men quit when they discovered I was on to them. One Hispanic man was fired for ripping off the company as well as one of the customers. One lady was originally hired as a proofer but became highly qualified as a keyboard operator! I'm telling you, there are plenty of bad eggs to go around but I never limited their "type" (race, etc.) when hiring them. Just looking for qualified people to make money for my company. The bad ones often weed themselves out. I think many on this post have not been in this situation and don't really know what they are "talking" about, just theory. I want results. I suspect, in the end, Apple does too and if you READ what was originally mentioned in THEIR (Apple's) charter, it said "qualified" not just anybody. We interviewed 54 people for our first proofreading test, created by a national company... two people passed it... lots of people who post on AI would have failed.

post #78 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


That's silly. A woman is more likely to understand women's fashion and women's needs for fashion better than a man so you're likely to have more women in this field. Your argument in favour of diversity for diversity's sake is suggesting that you hire a man who is less qualified than a woman simply to make diversify a position based on sex for its own sake.

 

its not silly.

 

The person said diversity has no advantage.

I say it does.

 

No one here who champions diversity is saying to hire a less qualified candidate.  All we want is that minorities have an equal chance of being hired.  It may be hard to understand if you never were in this situation.  But it is extremely frustrating.

 

If you want a taste of it (if you are a white male) you should try to apply for a job in Hawaii. 

Its one of the few states that actually descriminates against White males.  Many of my white friends who experienced it have a much better appreciation of what Blacks/Asian/Latino's have been talking about for decades.

post #79 of 798
Preach it, sir!
Quote:
Originally Posted by TechManMike View Post

As a black male I have to say that I hate this kind of crap, I don't ever want to feel like somebody's charity case just because i'm black. I used to work at an Apple Store in Seattle (on the outskirts actually), and while I do agree that most of the workforce was white I don't believe it had anything whatsoever to do with some kind of effort to hire only whites. The store manager was black and hispanic, the Redzone manager was Asian, and so was another manager. If there was a real case of discrimination that could be proven that would be a different story, but I never felt discriminated against. AFTER 7 INTERVIEWS I feel that they knew I was the best person to get the job done and so I was hired. I was the best person by the way....I rocked the sh!t out of all my interviews.
post #80 of 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sporlo View Post


Correlation does not imply causation.

Of course it doesn't.  But I didn't quote any correlation?

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple reveals most employees are white men, says diversity needs to be improved