With the biggest holiday season upon us? That makes no sense.
It makes perfect sense - an employee that starts stealing from you needs to be terminated. This type of employee has shown you that your trust in them is misplaced, and it also means that they are fairly likely to increase the size/scope of their theft at some point in the future.
#1 - It's already been disclosed that Steve knew about the backdating
Yah, but as you said, the accounting was the problem. And what was Apple's position on that?:
All along, Apple maintained that Jobs was not aware of any accounting issue. But Anderson says he told Jobs that selecting option grant dates other than the actual date approved by the board of directors could force Apple to record an expense.
Far as the rest of it goes, it seems to be a gigantic 'he said, he said' of Fred Anderson vs the Apple higher ups. Who's lying? One of 'em is. But why lie unless someone did something they could get in trouble for, eh?...
All along, Apple maintained that Jobs was not aware of any accounting issue. But Anderson says he told Jobs that selecting option grant dates other than the actual date approved by the board of directors could force Apple to record an expense.
Sure. But would Anderson do something illegal on his own, or was he ordered to? And did he inform Jobs of said possible illegality before the fact?
See? This is the 'he said, he said' I was referring to.
.
no, I don't see it because I haven't seen anything where Fred said Steve asked him to break the law or even where Steve asked him not to record the expense. He simply said, according to the quote, that it "could force Apple to record an expense." Doing that was Fred's job. Have you seen anything to indicate that Fred claims Steve ordered him not to record the expense if it was required? And even if that happened, which from what I've read has not been claimed, wasn't it still Fred's responsibility as CFO to follow the law?
It's interesting that everyone is so exercised about the firing of staff that stole $100 from the company and only one person has mentioned the far more interesting news that there will be official unlocked phones in France. Not only should these phones work everywhere- that's what an unlocked phone means- but it may allow the hacking community to find out the 'official' way of hacking the phone which will benefit the rest of us. For us Europeans, the Eurostar will take us to Paris just fine, but the official path to unlocking will benefit the rest.
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.
I agree it's totally lame of the employees leeching like this. BUT a system with glitches will be exploited, and I think it's the instance responsible for creating the system that has to take the full responsibility for what happens. They should have been aware of this prior to pulling it off, and in advance have sent out an e-mail to its employees warning them that Apple didn't have the authority to track down individuals to do this refund, but would appreciate if Apple's employees showed good karma and stayed off the bate.
But... booting them... that's kind of harsh. Perhaps it's the whole QA section at Apple.. I don't mean to be an ass, but this is a typical exploit that would be found and spread through a QA team
It's interesting that everyone is so exercised about the firing of staff that stole $100 from the company and only one person has mentioned the far more interesting news that there will be official unlocked phones in France.
Regardless of whether the story is true or not, in a different time there would have been no question that it would be unethical for the employees who got a free phone to then apply for a $100 credit.
Now we see people who actually think that unless Apple explicitly prohibited it, it should've been okay. Even though the credit was clearly meant for people who paid for their iPhones at the original release prices.
Now we see people who actually think that unless Apple explicitly prohibited it, it should've been okay. Even though the credit was clearly meant for people who paid for their iPhones at the original release prices.
Gargh! No! /Nobody/ really thinks this - the post you're referring to (quoted above) is a superb example of a troll post - carefully crafted to provoke as long a thread of replies as possible. And we're all being reeled-in beautifully In other words it's a wind-up (really; please see the wikipedia article!)
"Fun game: Try to post a youtube comment so stupid people realise you must be joking.
I believe that's known as biting the hand that feeds you...
Anyway, back to those Surrender Monkeys getting unlocked iPhones. I hope that the price is announced around Nov 9th when the iPhone is released in the UK. That way I can decide whether it's worth jumping on the train and stocking up on French unlocked iPhones instead of signing up to an 18th month contract with O2.
I agree it's totally lame of the employees leeching like this. BUT a system with glitches will be exploited, and I think it's the instance responsible for creating the system that has to take the full responsibility for what happens. They should have been aware of this prior to pulling it off, and in advance have sent out an e-mail to its employees warning them that Apple didn't have the authority to track down individuals to do this refund, but would appreciate if Apple's employees showed good karma and stayed off the bate.
But... booting them... that's kind of harsh. Perhaps it's the whole QA section at Apple.. I don't mean to be an ass, but this is a typical exploit that would be found and spread through a QA team
I cannot disagree with you more vehemently. Because a bunch of thieving employees succumbed to an unintended temptation it's the fault of the tempter?
Is it okay now for adults to act like a bunch of kindergartners who have no impulse control and no notion whatsoever of ethics and morality and will only behave properly if an adult is watching them?
Apple is right to fire these employees. As an Apple customer I like hearing that they're weeding out sales staff who have no moral and ethical compasses. I will have more faith that the Apple Store sales person I'm dealing with will be honest and ethical and not the type you'd more likely find in an auto dealership,
no, I don't see it because I haven't seen anything where Fred said Steve asked him to break the law or even where Steve asked him not to record the expense. He simply said, according to the quote, that it "could force Apple to record an expense." Doing that was Fred's job. Have you seen anything to indicate that Fred claims Steve ordered him not to record the expense if it was required? And even if that happened, which from what I've read has not been claimed, wasn't it still Fred's responsibility as CFO to follow the law?
I think that we'll know more if and when the Feds get around to laying down some serious subpoenas.
'til then, its my strong suspicion that Anderson didn't act alone, though they certainly are hoping to scapegoat him. That's usually the way these things tend to work. \
Btw, why do you keep calling him Fred? He's hardly famous. Did you used to work there?
I cannot disagree with you more vehemently. Because a bunch of thieving employees succumbed to an unintended temptation it's the fault of the tempter?...
Well... perhaps it came out wrong... I totally agree it was unacceptable of the employees, that's not the issue here. We agree on that. But I mean that in a leader position you should take in account that there are probably a significant percentage of "weak" people in your company, and create a robust system from the start. It was easy to prevent this. A good model should help weak people do the right thing, not tempt them to be bad and then punish them. If Apple cares about its employees, which I'd like to think it does, it would care more for them. A hard punishment is probably never gonna make bad people good.
Claiming a rebate on something that you haven't paid for is not the intention that Apple had when they offered the store credit. Whether or not claiming the rebate was dishonest is open to debate. The action may have been dishonest, but the intention may not have been.
I would also like to ask do Apple offer staff a discount? (I have work in retail and have always received a discount, with strict conditions attached.) If Apple offer a discount and staff have tried to obtain further discount on top of what they are given seems foolish
Comments
With the biggest holiday season upon us? That makes no sense.
It makes perfect sense - an employee that starts stealing from you needs to be terminated. This type of employee has shown you that your trust in them is misplaced, and it also means that they are fairly likely to increase the size/scope of their theft at some point in the future.
#1 - It's already been disclosed that Steve knew about the backdating
Yah, but as you said, the accounting was the problem. And what was Apple's position on that?:
All along, Apple maintained that Jobs was not aware of any accounting issue. But Anderson says he told Jobs that selecting option grant dates other than the actual date approved by the board of directors could force Apple to record an expense.
http://www.news.com/2010-1047_3-6179713.html
Far as the rest of it goes, it seems to be a gigantic 'he said, he said' of Fred Anderson vs the Apple higher ups. Who's lying? One of 'em is. But why lie unless someone did something they could get in trouble for, eh?...
...
All along, Apple maintained that Jobs was not aware of any accounting issue. But Anderson says he told Jobs that selecting option grant dates other than the actual date approved by the board of directors could force Apple to record an expense.
...
And wasn't it Fred's job to record that expense?
And wasn't it Fred's job to record that expense?
Sure. But would Anderson do something illegal on his own, or was he ordered to? And did he inform Jobs of said possible illegality before the fact?
See? This is the 'he said, he said' I was referring to.
.
Sure. But would Anderson do something illegal on his own, or was he ordered to? And did he inform Jobs of said possible illegality before the fact?
See? This is the 'he said, he said' I was referring to.
.
no, I don't see it because I haven't seen anything where Fred said Steve asked him to break the law or even where Steve asked him not to record the expense. He simply said, according to the quote, that it "could force Apple to record an expense." Doing that was Fred's job. Have you seen anything to indicate that Fred claims Steve ordered him not to record the expense if it was required? And even if that happened, which from what I've read has not been claimed, wasn't it still Fred's responsibility as CFO to follow the law?
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.
I agree it's totally lame of the employees leeching like this. BUT a system with glitches will be exploited, and I think it's the instance responsible for creating the system that has to take the full responsibility for what happens. They should have been aware of this prior to pulling it off, and in advance have sent out an e-mail to its employees warning them that Apple didn't have the authority to track down individuals to do this refund, but would appreciate if Apple's employees showed good karma and stayed off the bate.
But... booting them... that's kind of harsh. Perhaps it's the whole QA section at Apple.. I don't mean to be an ass, but this is a typical exploit that would be found and spread through a QA team
It's interesting that everyone is so exercised about the firing of staff that stole $100 from the company and only one person has mentioned the far more interesting news that there will be official unlocked phones in France.
lol - see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll
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.
lol - see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll
If you got the iphone as a gift, the person that bought it is entitled to the refund!
If you got the iphone as a gift, the person that bought it is entitled to the refund!
oh leave it out, it's only funny the first time
Now we see people who actually think that unless Apple explicitly prohibited it, it should've been okay. Even though the credit was clearly meant for people who paid for their iPhones at the original release prices.
Sad commentary on our times.
Now we see people who actually think that unless Apple explicitly prohibited it, it should've been okay. Even though the credit was clearly meant for people who paid for their iPhones at the original release prices.
Gargh! No! /Nobody/ really thinks this - the post you're referring to (quoted above) is a superb example of a troll post - carefully crafted to provoke as long a thread of replies as possible. And we're all being reeled-in beautifully
"Fun game: Try to post a youtube comment so stupid people realise you must be joking.
Hint: this is impossible."
Anyway, back to those Surrender Monkeys getting unlocked iPhones. I hope that the price is announced around Nov 9th when the iPhone is released in the UK. That way I can decide whether it's worth jumping on the train and stocking up on French unlocked iPhones instead of signing up to an 18th month contract with O2.
I agree it's totally lame of the employees leeching like this. BUT a system with glitches will be exploited, and I think it's the instance responsible for creating the system that has to take the full responsibility for what happens. They should have been aware of this prior to pulling it off, and in advance have sent out an e-mail to its employees warning them that Apple didn't have the authority to track down individuals to do this refund, but would appreciate if Apple's employees showed good karma and stayed off the bate.
But... booting them... that's kind of harsh. Perhaps it's the whole QA section at Apple.. I don't mean to be an ass, but this is a typical exploit that would be found and spread through a QA team
I cannot disagree with you more vehemently. Because a bunch of thieving employees succumbed to an unintended temptation it's the fault of the tempter?
Is it okay now for adults to act like a bunch of kindergartners who have no impulse control and no notion whatsoever of ethics and morality and will only behave properly if an adult is watching them?
Apple is right to fire these employees. As an Apple customer I like hearing that they're weeding out sales staff who have no moral and ethical compasses. I will have more faith that the Apple Store sales person I'm dealing with will be honest and ethical and not the type you'd more likely find in an auto dealership,
no, I don't see it because I haven't seen anything where Fred said Steve asked him to break the law or even where Steve asked him not to record the expense. He simply said, according to the quote, that it "could force Apple to record an expense." Doing that was Fred's job. Have you seen anything to indicate that Fred claims Steve ordered him not to record the expense if it was required? And even if that happened, which from what I've read has not been claimed, wasn't it still Fred's responsibility as CFO to follow the law?
I think that we'll know more if and when the Feds get around to laying down some serious subpoenas.
'til then, its my strong suspicion that Anderson didn't act alone, though they certainly are hoping to scapegoat him. That's usually the way these things tend to work.
Btw, why do you keep calling him Fred? He's hardly famous. Did you used to work there?
.
I smell another lawsuit coming in for unlawful firing...
its just sad...
Yes, this nonexistent lawsuit is sad.
I cannot disagree with you more vehemently. Because a bunch of thieving employees succumbed to an unintended temptation it's the fault of the tempter?...
Well... perhaps it came out wrong... I totally agree it was unacceptable of the employees, that's not the issue here. We agree on that. But I mean that in a leader position you should take in account that there are probably a significant percentage of "weak" people in your company, and create a robust system from the start. It was easy to prevent this. A good model should help weak people do the right thing, not tempt them to be bad and then punish them. If Apple cares about its employees, which I'd like to think it does, it would care more for them. A hard punishment is probably never gonna make bad people good.
I would also like to ask do Apple offer staff a discount? (I have work in retail and have always received a discount, with strict conditions attached.) If Apple offer a discount and staff have tried to obtain further discount on top of what they are given seems foolish
Seriously, "riggamaroos"?