Apple to pay female employees up to $20,000 for new egg freezing fertility benefit

Posted:
in General Discussion edited March 2015
Female employees working at Apple will soon be offered a fertility benefit of up to $20,000 to put toward freezing their eggs, which advocates say gives women the freedom to seek career advancement without worrying about future family plans.



Apple's program, which starts in January, will join a similar initiative already in operation at fellow tech giant Facebook, reports NBC News. The two companies are thought to be the first major corporations to offer such benefits packages for non-medical reasons.

Both perks offer up to $20,000 for egg-freezing procedures, but Apple will mark the cost as a fertility benefit, while Facebook classifies the money as a surrogacy benefit. In either case, advocates say egg freezing allows women to "level the playing field" with men by relieving pressure put on by a constantly ticking biological clock.

According to San Francisco-based fertility specialist Philip Chenette, Apple and Facebook's new female-focused coverage can be thought of as "payback" for commitment in the work place, where some women may forego a family life in search of career mobility.

Egg freezing is an expensive procedure that, on average, costs around $10,000 per round. Many doctors recommend storing 20 eggs, which means two rounds of harvesting, plus an extra $500 per year for storage.

The move appears to be a step toward gender equality. Silicon Valley companies are being criticized for their lack of diversity, especially when it comes to women in executive positions. The industry, including Apple, is largely composed of white males, though steps are being taken to rectify the so-called "gender gap."

Most recently, Apple joined a host of big-name tech firms at this year's Grace Hopper Celebration of Women in Computing conference in hopes of recruiting female students looking to get into the industry.

Apple's new fertility perk may give it an extra edge in wooing top female talent and keeping current employees on board for longer periods.
«13456789

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 173
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,718member
    That's COOL! Well done Apple.
  • Reply 2 of 173
    aaronjaaronj Posts: 1,595member
    Seems like a good idea. Makes sense.
  • Reply 3 of 173
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    That still leaves one question unanswered: How much will cost male Apple employees to be allowed to masturbate at work? :err:
  • Reply 4 of 173
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,718member
    solipsismx wrote: »
    That still leaves one question unanswered: How much will cost male Apple employees to be allowed to masturbate at work? :err:

    If he's in the freezer he should get a fee surely? ;)
  • Reply 5 of 173
    This is not good news.

    So basically, we're now giving women the opportunity to do that WRONG thing that men have a physiological capability to do, make babies at an age where they're likely to not be healthy enough to take them into adulthood with all their educative abilities?

    Think of becoming a father at 50. That's getting your kid to adulthood around 70.

    Why the hell would that be a good thing for women either?

    I wish big companies with lots of cash would instead help foster long-term perspectives of families/single parents, in order to allow young people to start a family longer rather than having to try and build a career. This is a clear case of using science to solve a consequence rather than a cause.
  • Reply 6 of 173
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,926member
    I don't see an issue with it. Do they have a similar program for sperm bank deposits?
  • Reply 7 of 173
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    And this is a good idea because? Encouraging women to have babies later in life doesn't seem like s good thing to me. How about providing better work/life balance so employees aren't stuck working nights, weekends or being on call 24/7.
  • Reply 8 of 173
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    rogifan wrote: »
    Encouraging women to have babies later in life doesn't seem like s good thing to me.

    Why not?
  • Reply 9 of 173
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,926member
    rogifan wrote: »
    And this is a good idea because? Encouraging women to have babies later in life doesn't seem like s good thing to me. How about providing better work/life balance so employees aren't stuck working nights, weekends or being on call 24/7.

    Sorry, that's the nature of IT: Nights, weekends, on call depending on role.

    I'm sure the women won't get pregnant at 50 but it gives them some wiggle room at the beginning of their career.

    My mom was 38 when I was born and 43 when my younger brother was born.
  • Reply 10 of 173
    dacloodacloo Posts: 890member

    Gender equality is bullshit.

    Males and females aren't equal.

     

    Females have a vagina.

    Males have a penis.

     

    And there are more differences, hell yeah, there are.

     

    Females are not 'designed' to get babies at the age of 45.

    It's wrong. Recent studies showed that sperm quality degrades with age as well.

     

    So.... let's focus on gender racism instead, which is something else.

  • Reply 11 of 173
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by lightknight View Post



    This is not good news.



    So basically, we're now giving women the opportunity to do that WRONG thing that men have a physiological capability to do, make babies at an age where they're likely to not be healthy enough to take them into adulthood with all their educative abilities?

    I don't doubt Apple's motives but I agree with you - raising kids is best done earlier in life.

  • Reply 12 of 173

    Yeah, hi, this is insane.

  • Reply 13 of 173
    Originally Posted by dacloo View Post

    Gender equality is bullshit.

    Males and females aren't equal


     

    There’s an interesting point to be made here, using an old phrase.



    “Separate, but equal.” Men and women are utterly different, but who’s to say they’re not equal in their differences?

     

    We need to stop treating men and women as the same, not stop treating them as equals. There’s a big, BIG difference in those two words with big consequences. 

  • Reply 14 of 173
    As someone who became a Dad at 50 I would argue with you that it's not the worst thing in the world. Generally I would agree with you though that I don't think younger people should aim to be putting their lives on hold for a career. And there's no doubt in my mind that a younger parent is a better target. This is mostly Apple wanting to make a PC statement.
    This is not good news.

    So basically, we're now giving women the opportunity to do that WRONG thing that men have a physiological capability to do, make babies at an age where they're likely to not be healthy enough to take them into adulthood with all their educative abilities?

    Think of becoming a father at 50. That's getting your kid to adulthood around 70.

    Why the hell would that be a good thing for women either?

    I wish big companies with lots of cash would instead help foster long-term perspectives of families/single parents, in order to allow young people to start a family longer rather than having to try and build a career. This is a clear case of using science to solve a consequence rather than a cause.
  • Reply 15 of 173
    errr, thats not fair for man... wth... where is our semen freezing fertility program....
    LoL
  • Reply 16 of 173
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,718member
    command_f wrote: »
    I don't doubt Apple's motives but I agree with you - raising kids is best done earlier in life.

    I don't think it is possible to generalize that adamantly. It varies on circumstances and at least the eggs will be the healthiest possible if taken when younger. If men were the ones that got pregnant, like so many other 'birth related issues', there would be a totally different attitude to many of them.
  • Reply 17 of 173
    rot'napplerot'napple Posts: 1,839member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jungmark View Post





    Sorry, that's the nature of IT: Nights, weekends, on call depending on role.



    I'm sure the women won't get pregnant at 50 but it gives them some wiggle room at the beginning of their career.



    My mom was 38 when I was born and 43 when my younger brother was born.

     

     

    Sorry, that the nature of a lot of jobs...  military, yucky politicians, police, fire, rescue, long shore men, fishermen, heck even waiter/waitresses, et.al....

     

    Was your mom employed?  Mine was when she had me at 35.  Not sure of the length of maternity leave she had from work, but she managed to have a successful career and family without either her company or the government using "their" funds for the mere fact that she existed nor did my mother expected either her business or the government to be culpable to her needs.  You won't find too many people like that now a day!

  • Reply 18 of 173
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    solipsismx wrote: »
    Why not?

    Because I think people having children later in life is selfish (and in some cases can have health risks). But anyway this benefit was never mentioned in the recent leaked email from Apple's HR chief. So while it might be a benefit offered to employees it sure doesn't seem like something Apple is making a big deal about. Of course it makes for the perfect click bait headline. I'm sure Business Insider jumped on the story the minute they heard about it. :)
  • Reply 19 of 173
    I think the idea is dumb if the purpose is to encourage more female employees in the company.

    Why not just let their female employees be told that getting pregnant will not hurt their careers while the company invests in daycare and parent support of any kind?

    In addition, if you're going to freeze eggs then freeze the husband's sperm too.

    This perk is way too geeky and lacks true organic family building. You probably have to consider who are the CEOs of Facebook and Apple to make any sense of this.
  • Reply 20 of 173
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    jungmark wrote: »
    Sorry, that's the nature of IT: Nights, weekends, on call depending on role.

    I'm sure the women won't get pregnant at 50 but it gives them some wiggle room at the beginning of their career.

    My mom was 38 when I was born and 43 when my younger brother was born.

    Do a search on Apple on glassdoor.com. #1 complaint (outside of typical things like pay) appears to be work/life balance. I'm sure the current (or former) employees lodging this complaint are well aware of "the nature of IT". Companies lose good people when they don't offer a healthy work/life balance.
Sign In or Register to comment.