Apple investor's shareholder proposal could force racial diversity among leadership

124»

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 79
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member

    This is the very definition of racism.  Preferring one individual over another based upon race, rather than upon their qualifications.

    Brings my stomach up.  
    You correct if it were a Utopian world.  Bias correction however, is often required in most things, be it a professional quality lens or a choice made by mere mortals and is not necessarily a bad thing if done carefully.
    Actual bias replacing alleged bias? How is that an improvement?
    tallest skil
  • Reply 62 of 79
    The solution is not simply to hire more minorities. The real problem is when no minorities are even considered for certain positions. If Apple is looking to hire an executive and the 50 candidates are all white, it's highly likely that their new hire will be white. The solution is to include minorities in the candidate pool and hire the best available, giving everyone a fair shot. You should never hire purely based on race.

    @ sigma4life: " looking to hire an executive and the... candidates are all white, it's highly likely that their new hire will be white" This is profound, right up there with rocket science and brain surgery¡

    Now I could not agree more with this: "You should never hire purely based on race." said sigma4life
  • Reply 63 of 79
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    Apple might be forced to add "people of color" to its senior ranks if an investor submitted resolution is voted through at an upcoming 2016 shareholders meeting, though the company contends the proposal constitutes micromanagement and is therefore invalid.
    Fuck this bullshit.
    I could go on…
    Except none of that is what is being said. So please do; you might find a relevant example.
    edited January 2016 SpamSandwich
  • Reply 64 of 79
    Remember they have Dr. Dre
  • Reply 65 of 79
    It wasn't hard to see this coming. I have voiced my displeasure with Tim Cook and his activism. While honorable and I do believe Cook is a good man using his status as CEO of Apple to constantly get involve with equal rights issues was bound to come back and bite Apple. If Tim wants to be political he should step down as CEO and run for office or just become and activist like Bill Gates. This issue was one of the two main reasons I sold all my AAPL this year. I don't see 2016 as a good year for Apple. Just glad I came to that conclusion at 128 a share and not 105.
  • Reply 66 of 79
    What is most interesting is that many posters are just fine with apple's upper management being completely white, and mostly male: this is what needs explaining. Why is apple's top management white and male? Research shows that social reproduction is alive and active in the workplace, where people hire others like themselves. So, white males will prefer to hire white males. Common answers to the lack of diversity in the workplace includes nonsense such as minorities don't work as hard, they are not as smart, it' hard to hire them. These answers typically come from white males doing the hiring which, ironically enough, ensures a predominantly white workplace. As the comments show, a few self-hating minorities are just fine with a White workplace and cringe at any mention of diversity. For an enjoyable read on this topic, I suggest the following reading: Racism without Racist: Color-Blind Racism and the Persistence of Racial Inequality in the United States by Eduardo Bonilla-Sylva. It is a book that discusses how racial inequality is sustain by ideology, many of which emerge in these posts. 
  • Reply 67 of 79
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    social said:
    What is most interesting is that many posters are just fine with apple's upper management being completely white, and mostly male: this is what needs explaining. Why is apple's top management white and male? Research shows that social reproduction is alive and active in the workplace, where people hire others like themselves. So, white males will prefer to hire white males. Common answers to the lack of diversity in the workplace includes nonsense such as minorities don't work as hard, they are not as smart, it' hard to hire them. These answers typically come from white males doing the hiring which, ironically enough, ensures a predominantly white workplace. As the comments show, a few self-hating minorities are just fine with a White workplace and cringe at any mention of diversity. For an enjoyable read on this topic, I suggest the following reading: Racism without Racist: Color-Blind Racism and the Persistence of Racial Inequality in the United States by Eduardo Bonilla-Sylva. It is a book that discusses how racial inequality is sustain by ideology, many of which emerge in these posts. 
    Apple is 100% politically Left in their management and on their board of directors. Are you calling all of these Progressuves and Democrats racists?
    tallest skil
  • Reply 68 of 79
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    social said:
    this is what needs explaining.
    Why does it need explaining that we’re fine with Apple hiring the best people for the job?
    Why is apple's top management white and male?
    Because they’re the best people for the job.
    Common answers to the lack of diversity in the workplace includes nonsense such as minorities don't work as hard, they are not as smart, it' hard to hire them.
    Or, you know, they don’t go into these fields because they don’t want to.
    …racial inequality is sustain by ideology…
    It’s also sustained, definitionally, by biology.
  • Reply 69 of 79
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    social said:
    this is what needs explaining.
    Why does it need explaining that we’re fine with Apple hiring the best people for the job?
    Because they’re the best peop le for the job.
    Or, you know, they don’t go into these fields because they don’t want to.
    It’s also sustained, definitionally, by biology.
    How do you know they're the best people for the job? Were you there vetting the candidates? Are you on the selection committee? 
  • Reply 70 of 79
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    dasanman69 said:
    How do you know they're the best people for the job?
    They were hired, weren’t they?
    Are you on the selection committee? 
    Do you have evidence of better candidates who were passed over?
  • Reply 71 of 79
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    dasanman69 said:
    How do you know they're the best people for the job?
    They were hired, weren’t they?
    Do you have evidence of better candidates who were passed over?
    Who knows why they were hired. They could've been the best white male candidate.I don't have any evidence, and neither do you. You're going on faith. 
    edited January 2016
  • Reply 72 of 79
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    Angela Ahrendts seems to have been a better choice than John Browett.  Who's doing the job that Mark Papermaster was fired from now?
    edited January 2016
  • Reply 73 of 79
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    crowley said:
    Angela Ahrendts seems to have been a better choice than John Browett.  Who's doing the job that Mark Papermaster was fired from now?
    Dan Riccio. He was promoted to the position. 
  • Reply 74 of 79
    the comments here are insane... sure if you set up your bogus strawman argument where you are hiring a completely unqualified individual for a job because of the colour of their skin it seems to make sense... BUT no one is suggesting that.. that's not the case... AND there is almost never just ONE best person for a job... there is almost always a pool of people qualified for a job and you pick from that pool... and that's how diversity programs work.. you find QUALIFIED individuals for positions and of the qualified people you pick people that are underrepresented... you're not just grabbing random people off the street... lol... you want to tell me that the only qualified upper management types suitable to work at Apple are white males?? ..how come Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, Adobe, Xerox etc... etc all managed to find suitable CEOs of color that are not white males... And Apple can't even find any upper management types that are not white males (except one women)... not only that it's good for optics and business of an international company to have people of all backgrounds that reflect the buyers of your products, the countries you are selling into to get perspective and understand how socially, politically etc how those countries operate... and to negotiate with governments etc into those countries... this is not just a good will thing... this is a good for business thing... the shareholders are right to be holding hot coals under the feet of Apple execs...
    edited January 2016 dasanman69
  • Reply 75 of 79
    Do you think we can get someone more diverse than Algore?   What a useless hypocrite of a board member.  
  • Reply 76 of 79
    social said:
    this is what needs explaining.
    Why does it need explaining that we’re fine with Apple hiring the best people for the job?
    Because they’re the best people for the job.
    Or, you know, they don’t go into these fields because they don’t want to.
    It’s also sustained, definitionally, by biology.
       This is a good question that tallest skil asks: Why does it need explaining . . . ? We'll, in a diverse country such as the USA, in both ethnic/racial and gender terms, the lack of  diversity in upper management raises concerns. There is a large literature on the "glass ceiling" that speaks to the obstacles that women (of all  backgrounds) face in reaching upper management. There is also a large literature on why minorities (racial/ethnic) face similar obstacles. Aside from racial and ethnic discrimination, there are a number of ideological frames of thinking that perpetuate an all White Male management team. 

    One ideological frame is that White males are the best people of the job. As this logic goes, minorities and women are not as good for the job, therefore, they are not found in upper management. This way of thinking is widespread, so much so, that experiments have shown that when just the racial and gender backgrounds of resume's is changed, Whites are more likely to get hired and promoted, compared to women and minorities. For instance, In these experiments all the information in the qualifications of the candidates are identical, the only thing that changes is the racial and/or gender background of the candidate. In a race neutral work environment, where race and gender do not matter, you would expect similar or identical hiring/promotion based on race and gender. But because race and gender discrimination is widespread, even with identical qualifications, White males are preferred. Thus, it is the ideology or thinking process (i.e. assumption) that White males are the best and brightest that solidifies the status of White males in upper management. It is interesting that many people are comfortable with a 100% White male team but when diversity is raised, they cry fowl. From what the literature shows us and our History, we should be crying fowl when there is no diversity. 

    Another ideological frame that sustains and maintains racial inequalities is the assumption that these hierarchical employment issues are due to Biology. This is equivalent to the notion that Whites are Biologically superior to minorities. There are several problems with this line of thinking. First, there is not Biological Basis to Race. This is hard to phantom and digest since we are all taught this from the time we are children. There is an awesome and informative PBS series called, "Race, The Power of an Illusion" that completely documents that race is a social construction with no biological foundation. Second, Hitler, drawing on the U.S. eugenics movement, tried to argue for the superiority of the White race. Advances in genetics completely contradict the White=superior ideology. In short, there is no biological foundation to the notion that social status and racial inequality in the workplace are based on Biology. Everyone on this thread, please watch the series.

    A third ideological frame is that people make choices to work were they work. This way of thinking essentially boils down to, if we bring it to its logical conclusions, that women and minorities do not want to work in upper management because they do not aspire to be in highly paid fields. As Bonilla-Silva points out in the book "Racism without Racists", this is a highly questionable assumption. I really recommend this book. 

    Finally, there was a comment somewhere on this thread about apple being a liberal, leftist organization. I want to be clear that these ideological stances supersede left or right political leanings; they are shared by both the left-liberal and right-wing. They are deeply ingrained in our way of thinking in the U.S., so much so, that both males and females think this way, as do some minorities. 

    At the end of they day, as long as we blindly and uncritically accept these ideological stances, we will continue not to embrace diversity in the workplace, incorrectly assume that White is superior, and make excuses that are based on faulty assumptions that sustain racial/ethnic/gender inequalities in the workplace and in society. The U.S. is stronger and we are better off as a nation when we all prosper. The eugenics style type of thinking needs to be put behind us. 
  • Reply 77 of 79
    EsquireCatsEsquireCats Posts: 1,268member
    Is Apple's senior management the result of demographic inequalities or simply picking the right people for the role? (Noting the line up already has some ethnic diversity.)

    Even if we try to distill something as complex as demographic inequality into one company's leadership, the solution isn't to shoe-horn racial diversity. Rather the solution is to address the drastic inequality at a community level. Anything else would only perpetuate the problem by hiding it behind diversity statistics.
    edited January 2016
  • Reply 78 of 79
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    TerrenceM said:
    you find QUALIFIED individuals for positions and of the qualified people you pick people that are underrepresented…
    Bullshit. There’s no reason to do that, and it’s a false premise.
    how come Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, Adobe, Xerox etc... etc all managed to find suitable CEOs of color that are not white males
    And look how well they’re doing. Maybe, just maybe, they’re not Apple.
    it's good for optics
    So instead of letting the products and services sell themselves, people are supposed to want to buy garbage based on seeing people that look like them use it? If I’m misunderstanding, please correct me.
    the countries you are selling into to get perspective and understand how socially, politically etc how those countries operate…
    Shouldn’t it be the concern of, say, Apple India to hire native Indians to get said perspective? If Apple India was comprised exclusively of Americans or Europeans, you’d have a point.
    the shareholders are right to be holding hot coals under the feet of Apple execs…
    Not really.
Sign In or Register to comment.