Lee visited Silicon Valley this week to meet with tech industry leaders in a Congressional Black Caucus initiative meant to stimulate more diverse hiring practices in the sector, USA Today reports.
...
"We have asked them all to release the data," Lee said on Tuesday of the tech companies visited this week. "If they believe in inclusion, they have to release the data so the public knows that they are being transparent and that they are committed to doing the right thing."
...
When the Congressional Black Caucus, NAACP, NBA, etc. release their diversity data maybe then Barbara Lee can see some data from the tech companies. I think it would show something amiss with this whole diversity fetish.
Apple should have asked the Congressional Black Caucus what they were doing to ensure minorities would graduate with an interest in working in High tech with the appropriate degrees and such, you can not hire what does not exist. By the Congressional Black Caucus does not care care minorities are qualified to do the work, as long as they get hired. They not interesting in ensure we have a nation of people who are capabily of doing what high performing companies like Apple need to make good products. I just hope Apple does not hire people for the sake to met the Congressional Black Caucus political goals, if they do that then they will begin to fail.
How long will it be before Apple is asked to release figures on how many employees are 'Lefties'? (I'm a half-cast lefty)
What about 'Left footed, left handed Male to Female Gay transexuals'? Aren't they a minority? Are there any working for Apple? If not why not? Shame on Apple for discriminating against a minority... etc etc etc
Enough already ok!
As a Slovenian-Italian-American I am highly offended you didn't include my ethnicity in your example.
IMO, the absolute worst thing about Apple is their political correctness. The complete absence of anything other than a politically Left viewpoint is harming their ability to comprehend how disgustingly weak these decisions make them look. The outward appearance is that Apple is an "easy mark".
Hasn't Apple always skewed left though? Historically haven't apples most well-known customers been subversive/degenerate lefty types?
The gay pride and diversity initiatives under tim cook are bothersome but disconnected from their business moves.
If they can maintain this distance the company will continue to do well but if I know leftists, they're never happy so AAPL might scope creep into some kind of activist company, and that would be especially nauseating.
I'll say again, the company looks mighty white to me. The public face of Apple vis a vis their public events is middle aged white guys recently added to by a few middle aged white women. The public face of Microsoft and Google most definitely is not.
Better turn it mightly black like Detroit amirite? What does it matter what the public face is? Why are you such a god damn racist?
I'll say again, the company looks mighty white to me. The public face of Apple vis a vis their public events is middle aged white guys recently added to by a few middle aged white women. The public face of Microsoft and Google most definitely is not.
Clearly Apple isn't keeping up with their vaunted competition. Fire Tim Cook and hire an Indian lesbian immediately!
It is ridiculous to assume that Apple and other companies automatically hire the "best", regardless of race or gender. There are many factors that go into hiring decisions and many of those are subjective. People making the hiring decision tend to hire people they feel comfortable with and that either means people who are much like themselves or people who they think will "fit in with the team," which also frequently means people they can relate to. Hiring managers who may never think of themselves as being sexist, racist or homophobic make decisions in this way, even if it's on a subconscious level. So a manager who grew up in a white neighborhood, went to white schools and has primarily worked with white people and who is interviewing two job candidates of different races is going to relate more to the white candidate almost regardless of what's on the resume.
There have been numerous studies done where two actors are sent to apply for a job, one caucasian and one black with essentially the same resumes and the white person is offered the job at something like a 10 to 1 ratio.
In addition, there are many subjective qualities that make someone the "best". Diversity in hiring allows companies to do a better job in creating products for diverse marketplaces. Someone with that knowledge may be "better" than someone who is a better programmer or engineer. Also, this notion that companies like Apple hire the "best" without regards to gender and race discounts the fact that most hiring evaluations aren't very good and that it's extremely difficult to analyze someone's capabilities until they're actually on the job.
The fantasy that any examination of hiring practices is going to result in companies like Apple having to hire inferior people is an absurd paranoid notion. When I think about my own multi-company career, if I were Black and had not gotten one job because of it, just because a manager felt slightly more comfortable with a competitor for the position who happened to be white, my whole career might have been entirely different, since almost every position I've had was based on either people who I knew or knowledge I had gained in the previous position. Break that chain and everything changes. When people talk about white privilege, that's what they're talking about.
It is ridiculous to assume that Apple and other companies automatically hire the "best", regardless of race or gender. There are many factors that go into hiring decisions and many of those are subjective. People making the hiring decision tend to hire people they feel comfortable with and that either means people who are much like themselves or people who they think will "fit in with the team," which also frequently means people they can relate to. Hiring managers who may never think of themselves as being sexist, racist or homophobic make decisions in this way, even if it's on a subconscious level. So a manager who grew up in a white neighborhood, went to white schools and has primarily worked with white people and who is interviewing two job candidates of different races is going to relate more to the white candidate almost regardless of what's on the resume.
There have been numerous studies done where two actors are sent to apply for a job, one caucasian and one black with essentially the same resumes and the white person is offered the job at something like a 10 to 1 ratio.
In addition, there are many subjective qualities that make someone the "best". Diversity in hiring allows companies to do a better job in creating products for diverse marketplaces. Someone with that knowledge may be "better" than someone who is a better programmer or engineer. Also, this notion that companies like Apple hire the "best" without regards to gender and race discounts the fact that most hiring evaluations aren't very good and that it's extremely difficult to analyze someone's capabilities until they're actually on the job.
The fantasy that any examination of hiring practices is going to result in companies like Apple having to hire inferior people is an absurd paranoid notion. When I think about my own multi-company career, if I were Black and had not gotten one job because of it, just because a manager felt slightly more comfortable with a competitor for the position who happened to be white, my whole career might have been entirely different, since almost every position I've had was based on either people who I knew or knowledge I had gained in the previous position. Break that chain and everything changes. When people talk about white privilege, that's what they're talking about.
If you had ever been passed over for a job based on your skin color, how would you possibly know? Surely the person in charge of hiring wouldn't make their reasons obvious because they'd be afraid of being sued. I think laws that force anyone to do something they don't want to do will be met with resistance and if the penalties are very high, it will just drive into hiding the real reasons.
Apple should have asked the Congressional Black Caucus what they were doing to ensure minorities would graduate with an interest in working in High tech with the appropriate degrees and such, you can not hire what does not exist. By the Congressional Black Caucus does not care care minorities are qualified to do the work, as long as they get hired. They not interesting in ensure we have a nation of people who are capabily of doing what high performing companies like Apple need to make good products. I just hope Apple does not hire people for the sake to met the Congressional Black Caucus political goals, if they do that then they will begin to fail.
More or less ^this^. I recall an interview with Google's outreach person where she mentioned one year they managed to hire 50% of the black doctorate graduates in a tech field: as in, one of the TWO from that year.... Granted having the CBC's nose rubbed in that by including the diversity data alongside the numbers of available candidates could be useful to force their issue. But we all know it's the messenger that get's shot leaving the failed systems in place. Look at H.S. graduation rates, look at college and graduate school graduation rates and THEN try and fix the underlying issue which, frankly, I can't see how as it's out in "the community" where children just don't bother to show up (the truancy and dropout rates are astounding) and their parents don't bother to make sure they do show up: a government fix is hard to see. Sure Apple etc. can hire H.S. dropouts to bulk up their stats: but is filling the late night halls with facilities department URMs what is really wanted? Emptying trash cans is a necessary and legitimate function but it's not the best use of some of those minds... had they bothered to actually go to school that is.
If you had ever been passed over for a job based on your skin color, how would you possibly know? Surely the person in charge of hiring wouldn't make their reasons obvious because they'd be afraid of being sued. I think laws that force anyone to do something they don't want to do will be met with resistance and if the penalties are very high, it will just drive into hiding the real reasons.
I agree - you wouldn't know. Ten years ago, when I started to "age", I was looking for work and interviewed at a number of web firms and tech companies were I would have been the oldest person in the place. No one seemed interested and I felt like there was definitely age bias involved, since I had a proven track record and felt more than qualified for the positions. But then I did get a new gig and have worked continuously since. So was it that I wasn't the best candidate or I was, but I interviewed badly or I was, but that they made a bad decision, bias not being in a factor, or was it that they felt they could get a less experienced person for less money who could still do the job or was it indeed age bias? I'll never know for sure. And that's the problem with perceptions of bias - is it really bias or is it paranoia - and why it's hard to prove. But it's also why the Government and others look at end results. I remember when I was a senior executive and having to fill out those Government forms.
Of course a hiring manager wouldn't be obvious about being racist, agist or sexist, but most bias today is not the obvious "I hate X's and they're not working here" type, but much more subtle in nature. Most people think of themselves as being fair-minded and not biased, even when they actually do behave in sexist, agist and racist ways.
And no one here is talking about laws. What they're talking about is working with companies to make sure that that their hiring is unbiased and that they're doing outreach to hire a diverse workforce.
Hiring should only be based on performance not on race color sex or anything else.. if it happens that blacks or others qualify for the job based on performance, then so be it. Otherwise this is total nonsense..
I'll say first I'm white, not that it should even matter. You hire the person that's qualified for the job. That color a person's skin is shouldn't even cine into the picture. He'll, white is a minority now in California. Shouldn't we get special benefits now?. Of course not because it's just dumb. This crap is what keeps the whole race thing alive. Where I work, I'm also a minority. My boss is Chinese. Most of his family work there. There's a lot of Filipinos there. Our one black person just got fired, he had a good job as the QA person, but There was a number of issues. He was a nice guy and left with class. Cutting in front of some line or lowering standards to get in front of others that are fully qualified for some race thing is beyond dumb. 3 white people out of around 30 non-white makes me clearly the minority where I work. I have zero problem with that. I go to work and do my job. It should be that simple. Need to stop playing the race card and calling yourself a victim. Get a education and work hard and life will be good. Sit around and bitch and complain and say it's someone else's fault gets you nothing. So many have come to this country with nothing, worked hard and done well for themselves. The American dream.
white is minor in California? Lol...it's like you're talking about iPhone in US as minority vs all other phones combined...in fact it's majority compared to individual brand...white is still a damn majority in any State in US. That's the fact.
I joined this forum just so I can comment in this discussion.
I am a black woman who worked at Apple Corporate for 4 years before leaving for another opportunity. And, after reading this article, I am reminded why my departure was a really good decision. I personally would find it highly insulting if I was hired to fill some race quota and not because of my intelligence.
I did not get hired by Apple because a recruiter came to my college or neighborhood. I actually sought out this job because I admired the company, its products, and Steve Jobs for the past 10 years. It was always my dream to work at their corporate office in Cupertino so I did everything I possibly could to pursue it. The opportunity is there for those who want it and are willing to work for it. The company's only focus should be hiring the best so they can create great products. Oh, and not damaging the environment or violating human rights in the process That goes for any company. If the congressional black caucus really wants to be of service, they can change their focus to improving neighborhoods and schools for young people. Find ways to inspire people to seek out opportunities rather then begging/guilting/threatening Apple and other companies into hiring more minorities. They should not be forced to fill a certain quota and you should not think so lowly of minorities to believe they are incapable of obtaining these positions themselves without your interference.
I joined this forum just so I can comment in this discussion.
I am a black woman who worked at Apple Corporate for 4 years before leaving for another opportunity. And, after reading this article, I am reminded why my departure was a really good decision. I personally would find it highly insulting if I was hired to fill some race quota and not because of my intelligence.
I did not get hired by Apple because a recruiter came to my college or neighborhood. I actually sought out this job because I admired the company, its products, and Steve Jobs for the past 10 years. It was always my dream to work at their corporate office in Cupertino so I did everything I possibly could to pursue it. The opportunity is there for those who want it and are willing to work for it. The company's only focus should be hiring the best so they can create great products. Oh, and not damaging the environment or violating human rights in the process That goes for any company. If the congressional black caucus really wants to be of service, they can change their focus to improving neighborhoods and schools for young people. Find ways to inspire people to seek out opportunities rather then begging/guilting/threatening Apple and other companies into hiring more minorities. They should not be forced to fill a certain quota and you should not think so lowly of minorities to believe they are incapable of obtaining these positions themselves without your interference.
Can't wait until some liberal moron comes in and tells this woman she's some kind of uncle tom and a self-hating black person or whatever because she goes against the leftist narrative.
Come on, leftists, let's see your responses to that post! What do you do when an intelligent minority (actually, a minority within a minority) tells you that your pathetic socially engineered white guilt-driven programs are insulting and stultifying to the people they supposedly benefit?
It is painful to be of above average IQ in 2015. It must be 10x more painful to be of above average IQ in a community that considers intelligence treason and whose group identity is driven by its lowest elements.
Can't wait until some liberal moron comes in and tells this woman she's some kind of uncle tom and a self-hating black person or whatever because she goes against the leftist narrative.
Come on, leftists, let's see your responses to that post! What do you do when an intelligent minority (actually, a minority within a minority) tells you that your pathetic socially engineered white guilt-driven programs are insulting and stultifying to the people they supposedly benefit?
It is painful to be of above average IQ in 2015. It must be 10x more painful to be of above average IQ in a community that considers intelligence treason and whose group identity is driven by its lowest elements.
No one is asking anyone to hire anyone who is not qualified. What they're asking is that people not be disqualified because of subtle racism disguised as an evaluation of the qualifications and that companies do outreach to try to hire a diversified workforce. As I wrote in an earlier post, people tend to hire people who are just like themselves because they can better relate to them and they think they'll "be a team player" because the team is just like them as well. So young people tend to hire young people and hiring managers tend to hire people of the same gender and race and then this becomes a cycle where non-white, non-male qualified candidates are hired in much lower proportions than white male candidates in many circumstances.
There have been a number of studies in which trained caucasian and black actors portray candidates using an equivalent resume and the white guy gets offered the job far more times than the black guy does.
Do you really think Apple or Google is going to hire an unqualified candidate in an important tech position and even if they did, how long do you think that person would last? Besides, there are plenty of non-tech positions at these companies in marketing, sales, P.R., human resources, etc. So I don't buy the argument that there's not enough minorities getting tech degrees and that's why tech companies can't hire a diverse workforce. Besides, the stats show that Apple is already doing relatively well in this regard, not that they couldn't do even better.
Comments
...
Lee visited Silicon Valley this week to meet with tech industry leaders in a Congressional Black Caucus initiative meant to stimulate more diverse hiring practices in the sector, USA Today reports.
...
"We have asked them all to release the data," Lee said on Tuesday of the tech companies visited this week. "If they believe in inclusion, they have to release the data so the public knows that they are being transparent and that they are committed to doing the right thing."
...
When the Congressional Black Caucus, NAACP, NBA, etc. release their diversity data maybe then Barbara Lee can see some data from the tech companies. I think it would show something amiss with this whole diversity fetish.
Where does this 'diversity' thing end?
How long will it be before Apple is asked to release figures on how many employees are 'Lefties'? (I'm a half-cast lefty)
What about 'Left footed, left handed Male to Female Gay transexuals'? Aren't they a minority? Are there any working for Apple? If not why not? Shame on Apple for discriminating against a minority... etc etc etc
Enough already ok!
As a Slovenian-Italian-American I am highly offended you didn't include my ethnicity in your example.
My response would be for this group to pound sand.
I agree with the sentiment but the correct response is no response or acknowledgement of any kind.
IMO, the absolute worst thing about Apple is their political correctness. The complete absence of anything other than a politically Left viewpoint is harming their ability to comprehend how disgustingly weak these decisions make them look. The outward appearance is that Apple is an "easy mark".
Hasn't Apple always skewed left though? Historically haven't apples most well-known customers been subversive/degenerate lefty types?
The gay pride and diversity initiatives under tim cook are bothersome but disconnected from their business moves.
If they can maintain this distance the company will continue to do well but if I know leftists, they're never happy so AAPL might scope creep into some kind of activist company, and that would be especially nauseating.
I'll say again, the company looks mighty white to me. The public face of Apple vis a vis their public events is middle aged white guys recently added to by a few middle aged white women. The public face of Microsoft and Google most definitely is not.
Better turn it mightly black like Detroit amirite? What does it matter what the public face is? Why are you such a god damn racist?
Clearly Apple isn't keeping up with their vaunted competition. Fire Tim Cook and hire an Indian lesbian immediately!
It is ridiculous to assume that Apple and other companies automatically hire the "best", regardless of race or gender. There are many factors that go into hiring decisions and many of those are subjective. People making the hiring decision tend to hire people they feel comfortable with and that either means people who are much like themselves or people who they think will "fit in with the team," which also frequently means people they can relate to. Hiring managers who may never think of themselves as being sexist, racist or homophobic make decisions in this way, even if it's on a subconscious level. So a manager who grew up in a white neighborhood, went to white schools and has primarily worked with white people and who is interviewing two job candidates of different races is going to relate more to the white candidate almost regardless of what's on the resume.
There have been numerous studies done where two actors are sent to apply for a job, one caucasian and one black with essentially the same resumes and the white person is offered the job at something like a 10 to 1 ratio.
In addition, there are many subjective qualities that make someone the "best". Diversity in hiring allows companies to do a better job in creating products for diverse marketplaces. Someone with that knowledge may be "better" than someone who is a better programmer or engineer. Also, this notion that companies like Apple hire the "best" without regards to gender and race discounts the fact that most hiring evaluations aren't very good and that it's extremely difficult to analyze someone's capabilities until they're actually on the job.
The fantasy that any examination of hiring practices is going to result in companies like Apple having to hire inferior people is an absurd paranoid notion. When I think about my own multi-company career, if I were Black and had not gotten one job because of it, just because a manager felt slightly more comfortable with a competitor for the position who happened to be white, my whole career might have been entirely different, since almost every position I've had was based on either people who I knew or knowledge I had gained in the previous position. Break that chain and everything changes. When people talk about white privilege, that's what they're talking about.
If you had ever been passed over for a job based on your skin color, how would you possibly know? Surely the person in charge of hiring wouldn't make their reasons obvious because they'd be afraid of being sued. I think laws that force anyone to do something they don't want to do will be met with resistance and if the penalties are very high, it will just drive into hiding the real reasons.
Apple should discriminate against fat people. Ive and Schiller need to get on a treadmill.
Jony does look like he's packed some pounds on. Too much gravy on the biscuits?
Apple should have asked the Congressional Black Caucus what they were doing to ensure minorities would graduate with an interest in working in High tech with the appropriate degrees and such, you can not hire what does not exist. By the Congressional Black Caucus does not care care minorities are qualified to do the work, as long as they get hired. They not interesting in ensure we have a nation of people who are capabily of doing what high performing companies like Apple need to make good products. I just hope Apple does not hire people for the sake to met the Congressional Black Caucus political goals, if they do that then they will begin to fail.
More or less ^this^. I recall an interview with Google's outreach person where she mentioned one year they managed to hire 50% of the black doctorate graduates in a tech field: as in, one of the TWO from that year.... Granted having the CBC's nose rubbed in that by including the diversity data alongside the numbers of available candidates could be useful to force their issue. But we all know it's the messenger that get's shot leaving the failed systems in place. Look at H.S. graduation rates, look at college and graduate school graduation rates and THEN try and fix the underlying issue which, frankly, I can't see how as it's out in "the community" where children just don't bother to show up (the truancy and dropout rates are astounding) and their parents don't bother to make sure they do show up: a government fix is hard to see. Sure Apple etc. can hire H.S. dropouts to bulk up their stats: but is filling the late night halls with facilities department URMs what is really wanted? Emptying trash cans is a necessary and legitimate function but it's not the best use of some of those minds... had they bothered to actually go to school that is.
If you had ever been passed over for a job based on your skin color, how would you possibly know? Surely the person in charge of hiring wouldn't make their reasons obvious because they'd be afraid of being sued. I think laws that force anyone to do something they don't want to do will be met with resistance and if the penalties are very high, it will just drive into hiding the real reasons.
I agree - you wouldn't know. Ten years ago, when I started to "age", I was looking for work and interviewed at a number of web firms and tech companies were I would have been the oldest person in the place. No one seemed interested and I felt like there was definitely age bias involved, since I had a proven track record and felt more than qualified for the positions. But then I did get a new gig and have worked continuously since. So was it that I wasn't the best candidate or I was, but I interviewed badly or I was, but that they made a bad decision, bias not being in a factor, or was it that they felt they could get a less experienced person for less money who could still do the job or was it indeed age bias? I'll never know for sure. And that's the problem with perceptions of bias - is it really bias or is it paranoia - and why it's hard to prove. But it's also why the Government and others look at end results. I remember when I was a senior executive and having to fill out those Government forms.
Of course a hiring manager wouldn't be obvious about being racist, agist or sexist, but most bias today is not the obvious "I hate X's and they're not working here" type, but much more subtle in nature. Most people think of themselves as being fair-minded and not biased, even when they actually do behave in sexist, agist and racist ways.
And no one here is talking about laws. What they're talking about is working with companies to make sure that that their hiring is unbiased and that they're doing outreach to hire a diverse workforce.
i guess i got to vote for republicans this time..
Hiring should only be based on performance not on race color sex or anything else.. if it happens that blacks or others qualify for the job based on performance, then so be it. Otherwise this is total nonsense..
I joined this forum just so I can comment in this discussion.
I am a black woman who worked at Apple Corporate for 4 years before leaving for another opportunity. And, after reading this article, I am reminded why my departure was a really good decision. I personally would find it highly insulting if I was hired to fill some race quota and not because of my intelligence.
I did not get hired by Apple because a recruiter came to my college or neighborhood. I actually sought out this job because I admired the company, its products, and Steve Jobs for the past 10 years. It was always my dream to work at their corporate office in Cupertino so I did everything I possibly could to pursue it. The opportunity is there for those who want it and are willing to work for it. The company's only focus should be hiring the best so they can create great products. Oh, and not damaging the environment or violating human rights in the process That goes for any company. If the congressional black caucus really wants to be of service, they can change their focus to improving neighborhoods and schools for young people. Find ways to inspire people to seek out opportunities rather then begging/guilting/threatening Apple and other companies into hiring more minorities. They should not be forced to fill a certain quota and you should not think so lowly of minorities to believe they are incapable of obtaining these positions themselves without your interference.
I joined this forum just so I can comment in this discussion.
I am a black woman who worked at Apple Corporate for 4 years before leaving for another opportunity. And, after reading this article, I am reminded why my departure was a really good decision. I personally would find it highly insulting if I was hired to fill some race quota and not because of my intelligence.
I did not get hired by Apple because a recruiter came to my college or neighborhood. I actually sought out this job because I admired the company, its products, and Steve Jobs for the past 10 years. It was always my dream to work at their corporate office in Cupertino so I did everything I possibly could to pursue it. The opportunity is there for those who want it and are willing to work for it. The company's only focus should be hiring the best so they can create great products. Oh, and not damaging the environment or violating human rights in the process That goes for any company. If the congressional black caucus really wants to be of service, they can change their focus to improving neighborhoods and schools for young people. Find ways to inspire people to seek out opportunities rather then begging/guilting/threatening Apple and other companies into hiring more minorities. They should not be forced to fill a certain quota and you should not think so lowly of minorities to believe they are incapable of obtaining these positions themselves without your interference.
Can't wait until some liberal moron comes in and tells this woman she's some kind of uncle tom and a self-hating black person or whatever because she goes against the leftist narrative.
Come on, leftists, let's see your responses to that post! What do you do when an intelligent minority (actually, a minority within a minority) tells you that your pathetic socially engineered white guilt-driven programs are insulting and stultifying to the people they supposedly benefit?
It is painful to be of above average IQ in 2015. It must be 10x more painful to be of above average IQ in a community that considers intelligence treason and whose group identity is driven by its lowest elements.
Can't wait until some liberal moron comes in and tells this woman she's some kind of uncle tom and a self-hating black person or whatever because she goes against the leftist narrative.
Come on, leftists, let's see your responses to that post! What do you do when an intelligent minority (actually, a minority within a minority) tells you that your pathetic socially engineered white guilt-driven programs are insulting and stultifying to the people they supposedly benefit?
It is painful to be of above average IQ in 2015. It must be 10x more painful to be of above average IQ in a community that considers intelligence treason and whose group identity is driven by its lowest elements.
No one is asking anyone to hire anyone who is not qualified. What they're asking is that people not be disqualified because of subtle racism disguised as an evaluation of the qualifications and that companies do outreach to try to hire a diversified workforce. As I wrote in an earlier post, people tend to hire people who are just like themselves because they can better relate to them and they think they'll "be a team player" because the team is just like them as well. So young people tend to hire young people and hiring managers tend to hire people of the same gender and race and then this becomes a cycle where non-white, non-male qualified candidates are hired in much lower proportions than white male candidates in many circumstances.
There have been a number of studies in which trained caucasian and black actors portray candidates using an equivalent resume and the white guy gets offered the job far more times than the black guy does.
Do you really think Apple or Google is going to hire an unqualified candidate in an important tech position and even if they did, how long do you think that person would last? Besides, there are plenty of non-tech positions at these companies in marketing, sales, P.R., human resources, etc. So I don't buy the argument that there's not enough minorities getting tech degrees and that's why tech companies can't hire a diverse workforce. Besides, the stats show that Apple is already doing relatively well in this regard, not that they couldn't do even better.