AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Jobs on Leopard; Orange to sell unlocked iPhones; retail firings
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Jobs on Leopard; Orange to sell unlocked iPhones; retail firings

post #1 of 80
Thread Starter 
Apple chief executive Steve Jobs says he can almost feel Apple reaching an inflection point in personal computer market. Meanwhile, there are some rumblings about 'official' unlocked iPhones going on sale in France. And rumor has it that as many as 800 Apple retail employees were recently given the boot for cheating the company.

Jobs on the Mac's mainstream prospects

As Apple nears the release of the first significant upgrade to Mac OS X in two years, its chief executive believes the software could help the company pick up the pace of gains it has been making against primary rival Microsoft Corp. in the personal-computer business.

Leopard will arrive in stores as Mac sales are growing at more than twice the pace of the PC market in general, reports The Wall Street Journal (subscription required), helping the Cupertino-based firm make small, steady market-share gains against Microsoft in 10 of the 11 most recent quarters.

In an interview Tuesday, Jobs said he expects Leopard will help continue that trend, especially in the consumer market, where Apple puts most of its emphasis.

"The question is are we headed for a tipping point," said Jobs. "It sometimes feels like that."

Orange to sell unlocked iPhone

Apple's announcement Tuesday that it had signed France Telecom's wireless unit, Orange, to be its exclusive seller of the iPhone in France may have included a first-time clause that the carrier may also sell an unlocked version of the device that consumers can use on any network.

"The move, which ended a month of speculation, is a concession to a French law that forbids bundling the sale of a mobile phone and a mobile operator," the International Herald Tribune (IHT) reports. "Orange plans to sell both a version of the iPhone locked to its network in France for €399, or $560, and an unlocked version, which will cost more, an Orange spokeswoman [...] said."

According to the Orange spokeswoman, the cost of the unlocked version of the iPhone will be announced in November. For its part, however, Apple appears to be disputing that an official agreement has been made in this regard. Speaking to Gizmodo, a spokesperson for the iPhone maker said IHT was 'only citing French law, not Orange's intentions.'

Mass Apple Retail firings

Here's one that you may want to take with a grain of salt, but is interesting nonetheless. According to Ars's David Chartier, Apple may have recently fired as many as 800 of its retail store employees for taking advantage of the company's $100 iPhone credit program.

The backstory and rumor is essentially this: in June, all full-time Apple employees (including retail) were given free iPhones on the company's dime. Following the backlash from paying iPhone customers after September's unexpected $200 price cut on the handsets, Apple instated its $100 iPhone credit program which offered to reimburse early adopters with $100 Apple Store credits.

In order to receive this credit, all you needed was an active iPhone and AT&T contract. You simply typed your iPhone's phone number into a form on Apple.com. Apple then verified with its records that the phone number belonged to an active iPhone account and then sent a unique verification code via a text message to that iPhone. Once the text message was received and the unique code entered back into the form on Apple.com, a page containing a $100 credit number and barcode was made available for printing.

Well, it appears that Apple did not build a check -- or was unable to build a check -- into their $100 credit system to determine which iPhone accounts belonged to employees who were given a free phone and which did not.

So as Ars explains, some of those "lucky retail employees let their greed get the best of them" and were subsequently served with "pink iSlips" once Apple caught on to their little scam.
post #2 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

"The question is are we headed for a tipping point," said Jobs. "It sometimes feels like that."

Translation: We are about to announce an xMac!
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
post #3 of 80
So if you got an iphone as a gift, you aren't entitled to the refund? And fire 800 people because of it?
Seems full to the brim of BS to me. Unless there was a company memo that expressly said not to try for the refund.
post #4 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post

Translation: We are about to announce an xMac!

"...especially in the consumer market, where Apple puts most of its emphasis."

...new Macbook?
post #5 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by studiomusic View Post

So if you got an iphone as a gift, you aren't entitled to the refund? And fire 800 people because of it?
Seems full to the brim of BS to me. Unless there was a company memo that expressly said not to try for the refund.

I agree, that's a bit ridiculous. Perhaps quietly asking the employees to give back the $100 would have been more apt, as they never explicitly said that they couldn't claim the refund. Then there's the double-edged sword...they knew the phone was a gift, but still claimed the money on it. Hmm...I still don't think firing the employees was a good idea.
post #6 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by studiomusic View Post

So if you got an iphone as a gift, you aren't entitled to the refund? And fire 800 people because of it?
Seems full to the brim of BS to me. Unless there was a company memo that expressly said not to try for the refund.

If it was a gift from the company and nobody outside of apple paid for it, of course not. You really think that employees who were given a FREE iPhone were entitled to $100 back on top of that? They were abusing the system, plain and simple, and they should have known better. I'm surprised there were that many who were that greedy/stupid.

I agree that an xMac would be a great addition to increase market share. The current hardware lineup has a serious limitation without such a model.
post #7 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by studiomusic View Post

So if you got an iphone as a gift, you aren't entitled to the refund? And fire 800 people because of it?
Seems full to the brim of BS to me. Unless there was a company memo that expressly said not to try for the refund.

The iPhones that were given to Apple employees were not "gifts." They were assigned to employees as tools of their profession. And, since no one (including the "giver" of the iPhones) paid the $599.00 original selling price, asking for a $100.00 "refund" is unethical.
post #8 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThinkExpensive View Post

I agree, that's a bit ridiculous. Perhaps quietly asking the employees to give back the $100 would have been more apt, as they never explicitly said that they couldn't claim the refund. Then there's the double-edged sword...they knew the phone was a gift, but still claimed the money on it. Hmm...I still don't think firing the employees was a good idea.

Yeah. It is hard to form a solid opinion without knowing what actually happened. We don't know what the employees were told (if anything) in relation to the $100 and we don't know if they were given a chance to "come clean" afterwards. Heck, we don't even know if anybody was really fired over this--it is still a rumor.
Possibly, Apple just used this as an excuse for axing some dead weight at the stores...


That said, I hope it was not a surprise massacre of some people who made one bad decision...
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
post #9 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by studiomusic View Post

So if you got an iphone as a gift, you aren't entitled to the refund? And fire 800 people because of it?
Seems full to the brim of BS to me. Unless there was a company memo that expressly said not to try for the refund.

The iPhone credit program was to reimburse people that bought an iPhone. I am not for the firing of the employees that took advantage of the company that gave them an iPhone for free, but I can understand the company's point of view.
post #10 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by studiomusic View Post

So if you got an iphone as a gift, you aren't entitled to the refund? And fire 800 people because of it?
Seems full to the brim of BS to me. Unless there was a company memo that expressly said not to try for the refund.

Do you really think this surprising?

If I were an apple employee who had figured out this little loop-hole, it would have been really tempting to use it. However, it should be obvious to anyone that there was an easy way to track this down, and eventually you would have been discovered. Anyone with more than a pea for a brain could have run through that logic themselves. In the end, it only requires one other person to figure it out and mention it to management to receive their gold star for being a diligent employee.

I don't think that there is any way of justifying taking even a pen, let alone $100, from your employer when you have not been explicitly told you can do so.

I find this story quite believable. It might be false (perhaps this loophole doesn't exist, or perhaps the number fired was not 800), but the basic premise, that if you take advantage of your employer's trust to their detriment, you will be fired, is quite sound. I'd fire their asses.
post #11 of 80
Quote:
Terms and Conditions for the $100 store credit for Early iPhone owners program

This credit is extended to end-customers who own a qualifying iPhone purchased from Apple or AT&T prior to August 22, 2007. To receive a credit, customers must submit requests between September 13, 2007, and November 30, 2007, at www.apple.com/iphone/storecredit. Requests will not be accepted after November 30, 2007. The program is for a $100 Apple electronic store credit in the form of a numeric code consisting of a credit number and PIN. This program is limited to one $100 Apple electronic store credit per eligible iPhone. Customers may apply this credit as provided in these terms and conditions. Customers should record the numeric codes that are presented electronically through the web browser. Apple will not replace lost or stolen codes. Only iPhones activated through AT&T are eligible to receive a credit.

Some iPhones will not qualify for a credit. They are: (1) iPhones purchased from Apple from August 22, 2007, through September 4, 2007, as they are subject to price protection (Separate terms and conditions apply. Details are available at www.apple.com/iphone/storecredit/priceprotection), (2) iPhones that have been returned to Apple or AT&T, (3) iPhones for which a Gift Card, rebate, or other consideration have already been issued, (4) iPhones that Apple provided to employees, either for personal use or for departmental use, (5) iPhones provided by Apple for product reviews, (6) AppleCare Service iPhones, (7) iPhones registered to customers whose addresses are outside the United States, (8) iPhones for which Apple or AT&T already has extended price protection under applicable sales terms, and (9) iPhones purchased by corporations or education institutions where Apple has provided alternative accommodation.

Seems plainly obvious to me.
"Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." - Bertrand Russell
Reply
"Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." - Bertrand Russell
Reply
post #12 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post

I agree that an xMac would be a great addition to increase market share. The current hardware lineup has a serious limitation without such a model.

I doubt that Jobs was talking about any such thing. He is just pumping the up-coming release of Leopard.
post #13 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

"The question is are we headed for a tipping point," said Jobs. "It sometimes feels like that."

When they achieve double digit world wide marketshare (i.e. at least 10%) per quarter consecutively and incrementally for serveral quarters and years, then you can say they're at a tipping point.

Firefox has reached that point and when 3.0 comes out IE will just keep sliding in share.
post #14 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCJ001 View Post

... asking for a $100.00 "refund" is unethical.

Bingo!

Many such employees are trusted with a lot of access and information.

I do not think that any ethical person would think twice about firing an unethical employee.
post #15 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Mass Apple Retail firings

Here's one that you may want to take with a grain of salt, but is interesting nonetheless. According to Ars's David Chartier, ............

focus.... focus....
95% of your DNA is junk.... or is it?
Reply
95% of your DNA is junk.... or is it?
Reply
post #16 of 80
that's not the entire story they where also claiming refunds on store display models, so not only where they claiming the $100 back on something that was given to them, but most of them took advantage of the store models too, remember store models are also activated if you did not know, so expect att to fire a few people to for the same thing
post #17 of 80
I think the story about the Apple Store employees could hold a version of the truth.

I sent my resumé into Apple for a Mac Genius position YEARS ago and heard nothing. Then out of the blue I got a call 2 weeks ago from a placement agency that Apple uses. They told me that there were jobs opened up at the stores and I needed to tell them which store I lived closest to.

After going through all the "riggamaroos" I found out that the position was only part time, which I can't take, plus the closest store is 62 miles from my house.

Then this weekend I had to go to that store to get my MacBook battery fixed. When I went in, there were only 2 people out of the 8 working that I recognized from over the years it has been there.

Kind of funny that this story is breaking right now after the experience that I had.

But then again it's probably a whole mess 'o coincidence!
post #18 of 80
Of course any retail firings were justified for any employees claiming a $100 store credit. This is simple common sense and ethics. The 100 refund is just that: a refund for those who actually purchased a phone. The employees given phones were not the same as someone who was given it as a gift from a paying customer, as in that scenario someone still actually purchased the phone.

If an employee is given an iPhone from the company, there is no purchase and thus no credible claim for a refund. Any employee trying to claim the refund is just trying to be incredibly sneaky and sleazy in trying to get an extra buck or two. Not only is such a person ethically challenged and demonstrated they cannot be trusted, but also quite stupid to risk their job over a measly $100. Apple is better off without any such employees.
post #19 of 80
I ceased visiting the Apple store conveniently located next to my residence as they are insipid asses. My wife and I have been in line to purchase items while the Apple personnel are chatting on the phone for personal business (saying, "I love you" to the person on the other end does not constitute a customer in our eyes) while we stand and wait to be served. Another aspect is how poor the employees know actual tech. Yes, there are some smart ones on board, but too few to make a difference. Plus, the store questions exchanges too much with dumb reasonsthis from customers who are mature.
post #20 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThinkExpensive View Post

I agree, that's a bit ridiculous. Perhaps quietly asking the employees to give back the $100 would have been more apt, as they never explicitly said that they couldn't claim the refund. Then there's the double-edged sword...they knew the phone was a gift, but still claimed the money on it. Hmm...I still don't think firing the employees was a good idea.

You do not need employees like that. Anyone trying to skim 100 off the till should be fired. There are plenty of new guys willing to fill the spots. They can spend the time on the unemployment line reflecting back on ethics and being a stand up guy instead of the chump they currently are losing a job for a measly 100 dollars.
post #21 of 80
While I generally have been very satisfied with the level of customer service at Apple stores, I will say that at least in the few stores I have been in they seem to hire in only those with a kind of avante guard kind of image...usually young people who kind of look like they are in a punk band, so to speak. While I understand why, and indeed have friends who look like that, I wonder how many good people Apple managers reject because they look too conventional, too buttoned down, so to speak.

So while many retailers may unfairly reject someone for looking too unconventional, I think Apple may commit the opposite fault, and reject good people who look too conventional or conservative. I think the ideal would be to have a mixture...especially as Apple enlarges its appeal to more conventional type of people.
post #22 of 80
Good thing they fired those employees. Go Apple!

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #23 of 80
I'm totally for the firings. Apple gave these people an expensive gift, and then they turn around and try to extract more $$ from the company, through dishonest means? How can Apple continue to employ these people in good faith?

Again, fire away, Apple. I'm glad we still live in a world where there are real consequences for stupid behavior. It helps reinforce the difference between good and bad behavior in society as a whole. A slap on the wrist wouldn't have such an effect...
post #24 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Bingo!

Many such employees are trusted with a lot of access and information.

I do not think that any ethical person would think twice about firing an unethical employee.

Exactly if they are willing to scam the system for 100 dollars which is not much, That means they are untrustworthy employees and who knows what else they have done in the past and have not been caught or what they are thinking about doing in the future.
post #25 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thinking View Post

So while many retailers may unfairly reject someone for looking too unconventional, I think Apple may commit the opposite fault, and reject good people who look too conventional or conservative. I think the ideal would be to have a mixture...especially as Apple enlarges its appeal to more conventional type of people.

I agree. Fry's Electronics used to have qualified personnel too. Now, it appears to be a bunch of misfits who know very little other than to point you to another department because they have no answers—in others word: self-serve.
post #26 of 80
Terms and Conditions for the $100 store credit for Early iPhone owners program

This credit is extended to end-customers who own a qualifying iPhone purchased from Apple or AT&T prior to August 22, 2007. To receive a credit, customers must submit requests between September 13, 2007, and November 30, 2007, at www.apple.com/iphone/storecredit. Requests will not be accepted after November 30, 2007. The program is for a $100 Apple electronic store credit in the form of a numeric code consisting of a credit number and PIN. This program is limited to one $100 Apple electronic store credit per eligible iPhone. Customers may apply this credit as provided in these terms and conditions. Customers should record the numeric codes that are presented electronically through the web browser. Apple will not replace lost or stolen codes. Only iPhones activated through AT&T are eligible to receive a credit.

Some iPhones will not qualify for a credit
. They are: (1) iPhones purchased from Apple from August 22, 2007, through September 4, 2007, as they are subject to price protection (Separate terms and conditions apply. Details are available at www.apple.com/iphone/storecredit/priceprotection), (2) iPhones that have been returned to Apple or AT&T, (3) iPhones for which a Gift Card, rebate, or other consideration have already been issued, (4) iPhones that Apple provided to employees, either for personal use or for departmental use, (5) iPhones provided by Apple for product reviews, (6) AppleCare Service iPhones, (7) iPhones registered to customers whose addresses are outside the United States, (8) iPhones for which Apple or AT&T already has extended price protection under applicable sales terms, and (9) iPhones purchased by corporations or education institutions where Apple has provided alternative accommodation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by audiopollution View Post

Seems plainly obvious to me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fraklinc View Post

that's not the entire story they where also claiming refunds on store display models, so not only where they claiming the $100 back on something that was given to them, but most of them took advantage of the store models too, remember store models are also activated if you did not know, so expect att to fire a few people to for the same thing


There you go. Fire away!
post #27 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Apple chief executive Steve Jobs says he can almost feel Apple
Orange to sell unlocked iPhone

Apple's announcement Tuesday that it had signed France Telecom's wireless unit, Orange, to be its exclusive seller of the iPhone in France may have included a first-time clause that the carrier may also sell an unlocked version of the device that consumers can use on any network.

"The move, which ended a month of speculation, is a concession to a French law that forbids bundling the sale of a mobile phone and a mobile operator," the International Herald Tribune (IHT) reports. "Orange plans to sell both a version of the iPhone locked to its network in France for 399, or $560, and an unlocked version, which will cost more, an Orange spokeswoman [...] said."

According to the Orange spokeswoman, the cost of the unlocked version of the iPhone will be announced in November. For its part, however, Apple appears to be disputing that an official agreement has been made in this regard. Speaking to Gizmodo, a spokesperson for the iPhone maker said IHT was 'only citing French law, not Orange's intentions.'

I always had a feeling that maybe Apple would do this in order to sell more phones a few months along the line - eventhough the reason here is the French law, maybe everyone else will get this chance sometime?
post #28 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

"The question is are we headed for a tipping point," said Jobs. "It sometimes feels like that."

Only if you start to diversify your hardware offerings, Steve!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post

Translation: We are about to announce an xMac!

Let's hope so.

And some 15" and 17" MacBooks (non pro) while you're at it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTel View Post

When they achieve double digit world wide marketshare (i.e. at least 10%) per quarter consecutively and incrementally for serveral quarters and years, then you can say they're at a tipping point.

I agree, mostly. I'm not sure it would have to be several years. But I get this feeling that 10% is an important number in the eyes of developers and such like. It it were to ever reach this number, OS X would become less marginalised and therefore an easier choice for the wider population.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTel View Post

Firefox has reached that point and when 3.0 comes out IE will just keep sliding in share.

I'm not so sure. Maybe IE 7's tabs, no matter how horrible its UI, will halt the slide.
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #29 of 80
Employees can no longer, if they could even do it before, receive $100 store credit. They receive a message saying their is no record of their iPhone. I'm guessing they 800  employees let go were seasonal for the summer anyways.
post #30 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by studiomusic View Post

So if you got an iphone as a gift, you aren't entitled to the refund? And fire 800 people because of it?
Seems full to the brim of BS to me. Unless there was a company memo that expressly said not to try for the refund.

These employees were given the phone at no cost. To take another $100 from Apple is blatant theft and every one of them deserved to be fired.
post #31 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeefNasty View Post

Employees can no longer, if they could even do it before, receive $100 store credit. They receive a message saying their is no record of their iPhone. I'm guessing they 800  employees let go were seasonal for the summer anyways.

With the biggest holiday season upon us? That makes no sense.
post #32 of 80
I smell another lawsuit coming in for unlawful firing...

its just sad...
post #33 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by k2director View Post

I'm totally for the firings. Apple gave these people an expensive gift, and then they turn around and try to extract more $$ from the company, through dishonest means? How can Apple continue to employ these people in good faith?

Again, fire away, Apple. I'm glad we still live in a world where there are real consequences for stupid behavior. It helps reinforce the difference between good and bad behavior in society as a whole. A slap on the wrist wouldn't have such an effect...

You could just as easily be talkiing about Steve Jobs and some of the other execs implicated in last years stock options snafu. Did any of those guys get fired? Oh right, they were important enough to the company to hire high-priced lawyers to figure out neat legal loopholes--soemthing $12/hr employees don't rate. And maybe someone fell on their sword, as i said I don't remember.

Things are never so simple when it comes to business and ethics. They supposedly fired 800 retail store employees, essentially the bottom tier of their employee heirarchy. How many other Apple employees comitted the same infraction, and did they all get fired? (Somehow I suspect a guy working in the Leopard program might be still working, just as Steve Jobs is still working, )

My point: it's easy to make an example of some poor schnub working for $12/hr. You prove you committment to ethics with equal treatment of your high value employees.
post #34 of 80
I think one potential problem for Apple with their retail stores is that they try to project to employees this easy going, come as you are attitude. This in many ways is great, but it can also have the effect of giving some employees the impression that they can get away with anything. In short, this attitude of going easy on employees needs to be balanced with letting employees know they have the expectation of meeting certain standards of self discipline, performance, and ethics. It's a tough balancing act for every company.

Also, these fired employees were just plain stupid. Any employee of Apple, if they are smart, are maxing out on their 401k contributions to get as much matching Apple stock as possible. Given the stock run up, employees who have been with Apple for the last few years or more could easily have amassed a small fortune in their retirement fund. That is a huge benefit of working for Apple, and I wonder just how many retail employees realize that.
post #35 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ptrash View Post

My point: it's easy to make an example of some poor schnub working for $12/hr. You prove you commitment to ethics with equal treatment of your high value employees.

Excellent response.
post #36 of 80
Ptrash: First, you wrongly assume that Jobs was found guilty of any wrongdoing in the options mess. He was not. Those that were truly implicated have faced punishment of one form or another. You do Jobs a disservice by assuming his guilt.

Second, any violation in the rewarding of options is a violation only against shareholders. If shareholders believe someone like Jobs is worth having in the company regardless of any involvement in the options mess, then that is their right. Indeed, it would be a true crime to have Jobs forced out when the shareholders want him there.

Third, I would bet that anyone trying to unjustly claim their $100 refund would get fired, even a software developer working on Leopard. Of course, most of those higher up in the company aren't so stupid or needy of an extra 100 bucks to even attempt that. I hardly think the lead programmer on Leopard, for instance, would even think of such a thing.

So sure you have to practice ethics across the board, even and especially among the higher ups. But there is not one shred of evidence that Apple has failed to do that. If you do have such evidence, please furnish it before making baseless accusations.
post #37 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thinking View Post

So sure you have to practice ethics across the board, even and especially among the higher ups. But there is not one shred of evidence that Apple has failed to do that. If you do have such evidence, please furnish it before making baseless accusations.

None that the general public is privy to. There is a lot that happens in the higher ranks that never sees the light of day. This is not implicating Jobs, but I believe we all know this fact. The high ranks hide behind confidentially agreements, and attorney-client privilege.
post #38 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by ros3ntan View Post

I smell another lawsuit coming in for unlawful firing...

its just sad...

How is it unlawful? Did you not see this post:

Quote:
Originally Posted by studiomusic View Post

Some iPhones will not qualify for a credit. They are: (1) iPhones purchased from Apple from August 22, 2007, through September 4, 2007, as they are subject to price protection (Separate terms and conditions apply. Details are available at www.apple.com/iphone/storecredit/priceprotection), (2) iPhones that have been returned to Apple or AT&T, (3) iPhones for which a Gift Card, rebate, or other consideration have already been issued, (4) iPhones that Apple provided to employees, either for personal use or for departmental use, (5) iPhones provided by Apple for product reviews, (6) AppleCare Service iPhones, (7) iPhones registered to customers whose addresses are outside the United States, (8) iPhones for which Apple or AT&T already has extended price protection under applicable sales terms, and (9) iPhones purchased by corporations or education institutions where Apple has provided alternative accommodation.

It's painfully obvious that they stole $100 from Apple, it's just the same as reaching into the register and removing cash. No lawsuit, such as you describe, will ever gain traction.
post #39 of 80
Unless I missed it in the headline, Apple should have told their employees ahead of time that they were not to request the credit. Yes, it was a free phone, but I can totally see someone thinking they could apply for this (no, I don't agree with that, I just can see someone thinking it was OK). Apple could have avoided confusion with a simply memo to all of it employees. I find it hard to believe that Apple did in fact distribute any kind of notice if 800 employees tried to take advantage of this, nor can I believe that all 800 employees knowingly did something wrong.
post #40 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThinkExpensive View Post

I agree, that's a bit ridiculous. Perhaps quietly asking the employees to give back the $100 would have been more apt, as they never explicitly said that they couldn't claim the refund. Then there's the double-edged sword...they knew the phone was a gift, but still claimed the money on it. Hmm...I still don't think firing the employees was a good idea.

Quote:
According to Ars's David Chartier, Apple ***may*** have recently fired

As chic as it seems to be to assume the worst about Apple Corp, note the word "may have".
I'll wait until I see a verified news account of this before I pass judgment.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Jobs on Leopard; Orange to sell unlocked iPhones; retail firings