Apple Releases Employee Diversity Report, 7 out of 10 Workers Are Male, 55% White

[richimages]

I tried and tried to get my daughter interested in programming ... she's just not interested.

Likewise, I am not interested in makeup either.

Who cares ?

So the MAJORITY of those that gravitate towards TECH are white males ?

Who cares? Who cares? Who cares? Sometimes I am so sick and tired of a "Politically correct" world ... this is all ridiculous to me.

 

[NT1440]

Gosh, you really are irrational. 49 does not equal 51. You constantly prove my points for me.

...He's talking about matching gender equality in the workplace to the numbers in the population at large, which is 49/51.

 

[kingtj]

So... do you think they do, or they don't?

Honestly, everyplace I've ever worked in the tech field, I discovered the same sentiment. Everyone was more than happy to offer a 100% opportunity regardless of gender or ethnicity. The problem, though, is the same one the whole industry is struggling with. There are simply more white males who took a real interest in computing/I.T. and became really good at it than any of the other demographics.

So if you keep trying to "hire the best", you wind up with the imbalance.

I remember working at one company where my boss practically made it a mission to hire a female computer support person. He often said he felt a woman's touch would be a "breath of fresh air" in the department and help the team approach some things a different way. But time after time, the female candidates we got just weren't up to par. A couple of them would probably have done well as entry-level people, in a company able to provide more on-the-job training. But we were looking for (and paying for) someone who didn't need much hand-holding. And that just kept ruling out the women who applied for the job.

I agree with this, but the work place needs to give a 100% opportunity regardless of sex and ethnicity. Hire the best.

 

[CmdrLaForge]

I think company should try to hire the best person for the job.

 

[rdlink]

Gosh, you really are irrational. 49 does not equal 51. You constantly prove my points for me.

It was obvious that the poster meant accurate representation based on the percentage of females to males in the general population. Being intentionally obtuse does not make you appear smarter...

 

[Stridder44]

Sorry, but I found the idea of purposely hiring minorities for the sake of "diversity" ridiculous. Hire the best person for the job, not the one who'll improve your diversity report numbers.

Good God I couldn't agree more. Let the 0.1% of people who will be extremely offended by this go pound sand. But the real issue the media outlets will make a bigger deal of out such BS than anyone actually cares in the first place.

 

[bpeeps]

It's discrimination by definition, since a preferential treatment is being given based on being part of a group or ethnicity:

You are basing your decisions off the most literal observation of the definition with no context of history, culture, or societal norms. What the dictionary definition doesn't account for is that our society is one built upon white male privilege. Where discrimination against everyone else was the status quo. Was it positive discrimination when women and minorities were afforded the right to vote, the right to drink out of the same water fountain, the right to be treated as equals?

No, it was simply creating equality, affording rights that one group had to every group. And before you infer that I'm saying minorities and women have a right to a job (they don't), they have a right to not be discriminated against when applying for that job. As much as you don't think it happens, it does, currently and consistently. This is what things like affirmative action, diversity reports attempt to correct, our history and our societal norms. And while they are far from perfect systems, they're a start in the right direction.

If you observe the most basic definition of discrimination then I guess you are technically right. All in all, this is an argument of semantics and I don't think it's what not actually what we disagree on. (I could be wrong though)

What is open to debate is whether this particular kind of discrimination (meant to "correct" a supposedly pre-existing bias) is a good thing and ultimately effective.

This is the main part of our disagreement. The fact that you don't believe there is a pre-existing bias of discrimination when history tells you there was and there still is. And this is where our definition of discrimination differs, because you don't think there's an issue to correct. And I do.

It would also be nice to know which specific goal is this "preferential treatment" supposed to reach. It will stop at which ratio of employees of the different demographics? How is the supposedly "unbiased" target ratio calculated? Does it take into account number or quality of actual candidates? Does it take into account their expectations?

The goal will be reached when race and discrimination don't matter. And I'm not talking about Apple, I'm talking largely of our society. None of which we will see in our lifetime or the next two.

 

[SeattleMoose]

Sorry, but I found the idea of purposely hiring minorities for the sake of "diversity" ridiculous. Hire the best person for the job, not the one who'll improve your diversity report numbers.

Amen. Diversity just for the sake of "diversity" is a steaming pile....best person for the job. PERIOD!!!

This is what happens when an inmate ends up running the asylum.

 

[joejoejoe]

It's silly to call for diversity when Tim Cook himself continues to hide his homossexuality. Is this the kind of example he wants to set at Apple? "Stay hidden and don't tell anyone about it"?

He doesn't hide it, he simply doesn't make his personal life the business of the company, which is commendable and something the majority of successful CEO's out there do.

 

[Gasu E.]

It's silly to call for diversity when Tim Cook himself continues to hide his homossexuality. Is this the kind of example he wants to set at Apple? "Stay hidden and don't tell anyone about it"?

If he's hiding it, how did YOU know about it???!!!

DOH!

 

[joejoejoe]

The technically inclined (aka geek) workforce.

Look at the who the technically savvy people are.

You don't have to be tech savvy at all to work for apple, and that's not what they're looking for in every employee. There are operations managers, data nalysts, salespeople, sales reps, office managers, secretaries... the list goes on and on and on. all people who don't need to be a genius bar attendant to serve the company.

 

[tomtendo]

Who cares if the numbers are leaning towards white males... it's whomever qualifies for the job... and guess what... they're most likely white males. I'm sorry, but black guys are not as interested in this stuff as white guys. There is nothing wrong with that at all. It's just the way it is. Just like black guys are more likely to work at a sports shoe place or something like that.

I'm so sick of this diversity crap. You hire who is qualified. You don't hire because "Oh, I need a black guy or an asian to make this place better!".

 

[Kissaragi]

Hiring "minorities" just to improve your statistics is racist and sexist.

As long as theres no discrimination based on sex or race (or anything else) then just hire the best people for the job and who gives a **** what colour they are or if their reproductive organs are on the outside of the inside.

Im all for apple supporting causes but this is just pure BS.

 

[iolinux333]

It's not discrimination at all, it's leveling the playing field. And it only hurts white people in the sense that they now have more competition. The job isn't automatically theirs like it may have been in the past. But I understand wanting to hold onto privilege, it's a beautiful thing.

Yes it is important to use frueffy language like that to keep whites from figuring out what's going on.

 

[Piggie]

I think company should try to hire the best person for the job.

Indeed, though it's how you define best.

Women have been given equal rights, even though you may not want them working for you.

Employ young girls, spend time and money training them?
Why bother?
A fair proportion will probably get pregnant, want lots of time off, even decide they want a few years out to be a mother.
Best to focus on the males you know will be more reliable.

The fat ones, will probably move slower, so rule those out also.

Anyone disabled? No way, why have one when you can get an able bodied person instead?

Anyone over middle age, again, no point there. Be looking to retire by the time they get really good and know everything.

That the world you want to live in?

We can go back to adverts for Males only wanted if you like?

 

[Renzatic]

It's still not a race though. Native american is the dumbest made up name of all as anyone born in the us us a native american. People born here are native north american's.

No, it's not a race, and it's only kindasorta defined along racial features. It's more a grouping than anything. Like if I were to move to Mexico tomorrow, I'd be a caucasian, and probably always be considered a caucasian, no matter how long I stayed there. But my kids or grandkids would probably be considered hispanic, even if I married a straight up European descent white Mexican woman.

It's just a word referring to a group of people from a certain part of the world who predominantly speak a certain language and have a roughly similar culture.

----------

Yes it is important to use frueffy language like that to keep whites from figuring out what's going on.

Oh, we know.

...we know.

 

[Piggie]

Hiring "minorities" just to improve your statistics is racist and sexist.

As long as theres no discrimination based on sex or race (or anything else) then just hire the best people for the job and who gives a **** what colour they are or if their reproductive organs are on the outside of the inside.

Im all for apple supporting causes but this is just pure BS.

If I want a sexy young women on my reception desk to meet, smile, and most importantly look pretty for clients entering my building.

Can I say, young blonde women wanted, must be pretty, slim and have large breasts, for my customer reception area.

My visitors will love her.

 

[bpeeps]

I tried and tried to get my daughter interested in programming ... she's just not interested.

Likewise, I am not interested in makeup either.

Fostering open communication on their interests and relating how programming is more than likely involved in it's production, is better than writing it off with a sexist comment saying you have no interest in makeup. There's programming involved in the production of makeup, exploit that interest.

 

[joejoejoe]

It's silly to call for diversity when Tim Cook himself continues to hide his homossexuality. Is this the kind of example he wants to set at Apple? "Stay hidden and don't tell anyone about it"?

Seems like a lot of people have reacted to your comment. Anything you care to say in return?

 

[bpeeps]

Yes it is important to use frueffy language like that to keep whites from figuring out what's going on.

If you can't understand semantics, that speaks more to your education than anything else.

 

[LIVEFRMNYC]

All this misinformation about Apple using quotas, white men being shut out, and how the diversity of the company does match the real world.

Let's say all this is true ...... I don't see anybody talking about putting their Macs and iDevices for sale and staying away from Apple products.

So if some of you guys really believe that Apple's discriminating against the white man, doesn't that make you part of the problem? Enjoy supporting the discrimination of your own.

 

[bushido]

I am studying Business Informatic Systems (not sure thats the proper english translation) and we were about 110 students when I started. of those 5 were girls, 4 dropped out and ones been retaking java 1 (which is a first semester class) for the last 6 semesters. so i am not surprised, granted i havent passed java 2 yet either. programming is something i will never understand in my life and how someone was able to come up with it is beyond me, id rather learn mandarine lol

 

[TheHateMachine]

You are being illogical again. You previously stated that it would be good if women were the majority, now you mention equality?

Male feminists boggle the mind.

When did this person ever say this? They said that in a perfect world where numbers align with other numbers, an executive board would match our population data and mimic it.

It seems as if your fall back reply is to type out a few sentences with no substance, be obtuse, use the word illogical and then try to fit someone into some label. Are you just trying to get a rise out of people here? Can you try to offer counterpoints and argumentative data instead of just being hostile and dismissing a twisted version of what other people post?

Yes you need more "cultural enrichment". Goooood goys hehe

*rubs hands*

Looks like someone crawled forth from a fresh 4chan shekel lord thread.

 

[Renzatic]

Indeed, though it's how you define best.

Women have been given equal rights, even though you may not want them working for you.

Employ young girls, spend time and money training them?
Why bother?
A fair proportion will probably get pregnant, want lots of time off, even decide they want a few years out to be a mother.
Best to focus on the males you know will be more reliable.

The fat ones, will probably move slower, so rule those out also.

Anyone disabled? No way, why have one when you can get an able bodied person instead?

Anyone over middle age, again, no point there. Be looking to retire by the time they get really good and know everything.

That the world you want to live in?

We can go back to adverts for Males only wanted if you like?

It makes for a great circular argument. We only consider a small amount of people worth hiring, AND we get to gripe about all the people on welfare because they're too lazy to get a job! It's a win/win for everybod...er...US!

 

[sransari]

Sorry, but I found the idea of purposely hiring minorities for the sake of "diversity" ridiculous. Hire the best person for the job, not the one who'll improve your diversity report numbers.

Totally agree. I do, however, think that determining the "best person" is sometimes not all that easy. By "best person" you are probably thinking of the person that has the best skill level for a particular job. However, for a business like Apple, the "best person" is the one that will generate the most revenue. Sometimes the person with the best skill doesn't translate to the person that will generate the most revenue.

Basically, there is a business decision behind employee diversity. Many customers value a company with a high level of diversity. So having a diverse workforce is part of Apple's image, and Apple's image is part of their success. Another business reason for diversity, especially for Apple, is to create products that sell to a diverse people globally. One of the best ways to do that is to hire people of different backgrounds.

Anyway, bottom line is, you're right that the policy to hire minorities over non-minorities try to meet quotas is ridiculous on one hand. However, I assure you that this policy does increase profits for Apple, so there's really nothing wrong with it.

Besides, I am glad that social pressures to hire minorities exist to counteract governmental disincentives to avoid hiring minorities.