Apple's U.S. Workforce Continues to Diversify Per Latest Federal Data

[unlinked]

Fill me in when Harvard, Yale, etc get rid of legacies, because that IS white affirmative action.

Sure, because only white people have money and all white people have money.
It isn't like both those statements are wrong.

 

[bpeeps]

I find it absolutely amazing that, according to outraged posters here, all the good jobs must be universally handed to minorities and females, just based on all the white guys who allegedly have not gotten jobs because of some sort of affirmative action. Yet, inexplicably, most technical, engineering, scientific, and executive ranks are filled by white males, and always have been.

But this one white dude and his white coworkers who worked for GM were fired because the company needed to hire more minorities! He even said so in this post! So that must mean its true for every company ever and is the status quo.

/sarcasm

 

[RobertMartens]

43% is "overwhelming?"

Yes, because white male in the US is less than 25%

 

[SarcasticJoe]

White people aren't suffering.
[doublepost=1453221790][/doublepost]
Notice how the article is tagged as opinion, in the opinion section of the website, with no sources besides their own. Seems pretty unbiased to me.

If you actually read the article, you'd see it was an opinion piece on a study that you could have looked up if you could be bothered. Seeing how you couldn't be bothered to look it up, here's a link to it (thou I doubt you'll still read it):
http://www.pnas.org/content/112/17/5360.abstract

 

[HenryDJP]

You should probably learn the difference between a conversation between 2 people and what is happening now. This is not a conversation between 2 people. If you expected privacy you should take it to pm. Not that I can remember if Macrumors even offers pm.

Like I said. You're only here looking for someone to pick a fight with. When I want a reply from the entire forum in regards to the thread topic I will ask for feedback from everyone. If you're name isn't called.....
Adios.

 

[iceperson]

To be frank... Because before affirmative action WHITE PEOPLE only looked at WHITE PEOPLE when it came to hiring

I could have been black as tar with multiple degrees from Harvard... Yet a white person with no education would have gotten the job because.. He was WHITE! Fact is fact!

The black guy probably would have been a educated janitor though lol

White powerful people had cultural and racial bias when it came to hiring a black man FOR DECADES, I have no sympathy for white who complains about Affirmative action

Strange. Looks like blacks had better chances to get a job 40 years ago...

 

[unlinked]

Yes, because white male in the US is less than 25%

Apple is overwhelmingly male. Once you factor that out whites are about right for the US adult population.

 

[Benjamin Frost]

Well, the most serious fallacy here is that people blindly assume that diversity will lead to innovation. My PHD is in technology and innovation and I can assure you that diversity in of itself is just a minor driver of product innovation success. However, I am sure that someone will discount about 30 years of scientific research with a few anecdotes.

Quite.

When one looks back at the 20th century, one could hardly say that there was a lack of innovation. Ditto for the 19th, 18th and 17th centuries. Overwhelmingly, that innovation was led by single white men, or small groups of white men, inspired by God.

So much for the benefits of diversity. In fact, there is a much stronger argument to say that it is desirable to encourage a monoculture, quite the opposite of diversity, if you want to create the best of anything. So says history.

 

[iceperson]

Yes, because white male in the US is less than 25%

White men are closer to 38ish% of total population. Once you've narrowed down candidates to CS or IT related education you'll find that significantly more than 43% of the candidate pool is white male...

 

[techwhiz]

Interesting. You appear to be as entrenched in your beliefs as those who claim discrimination is rampant / not rampant. Wow.

Actually, I'm not entrenched in my beliefs unless you are citing the belief that racism in America still exists.
The belief that Apple is overwhelmingly white men that tend to hire other white men that look like them.
That corporate America has a good old boy network.
That even after the Civil Rights Movement we are still trying to disband Jim Crow (Apartheid) in America.
That there is still not a level playing field.

you could go for a spray on tan and let it go orange. For race put in Other: Martian.
[doublepost=1453246342][/doublepost]

Oh, get off your high horse. I see qualification skepticism all the time - globally. It generally has nothing to do with bias of any type. It is generally driven by accomplishment disbelief. Having dealt with "minorities" of the AA persuasion from assembly lines to research labs to management, you, as self described, are a minority of minority and still feel you are entitled. Have you ever used a life coach?

Oh no, I don't feel entitled. I don't believe anyone owes me anything. Everything I have, I have worked for. What you talk about as "accomplishment disbelief" is more common when looking at black man and not a white one. White privilege exists and the deference to a white man, even if the other person is more qualified exists.

Sure, because only white people have money and all white people have money.
It isn't like both those statements are wrong.

You completely miss the point.
Harvard, up to the 1960's and early 1970's was mostly white and mostly male.
Harvard didn't admit people of color until the law said they needed to and even then Harvard and Yale went kicking and screaming.
So your argument is specious at best. So the possibility of a black legacy student at Harvard is pretty small.
Read this and get back to me:
http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2011/5/11/admissions-fitzsimmons-legacy-legacies/

So if 10-20% of Harvard students are legacies, let's do away with white affirmative action.
All in favor of a true color blind admissions policy raise your hand. Mine is raised!
I'm sure not all those legacy admissions are more qualified than the black folks that applied.

Quite.

When one looks back at the 20th century, once could hardly say that there was a lack of innovation. Ditto for the 19th, 18th and 17th centuries. Overwhelmingly, that innovation was led by single white men, or small groups of white men, inspired by God.

So much for the benefits of diversity. In fact, there is a much stronger argument to say that it is desirable to encourage a monoculture, quite the opposite of diversity, if you want to create the best of anything. So says history.

Racist diatribe from someone that has no clue about history.
Granville Woods (telegraphony) invention that sent telegraph and telephone on a single wire and other inventions.
Dr. Mark Dean part of the IBM team for personal computer. (Significant?)
Elijah McCoy with 57 patents related to automatic oiling of stem engines.
Also make no mistake, slave owners took credit for their slaves inventions.
To say or think that white men are the only innovators throughout the last couple of centuries is stupid AND racist.
We won't even go into the fact that Silicon Graphics had a black co-counder Marc Hannah. (PhD in Electrical Engineering)
Lewis Latimer invented/patented the water closet for railway cars, also the process to manufacture carbon filaments for lightbulbs. Edison was using paper filaments. I'd say improving the lightbulb so it could be usable was significant.

Anyway.....

 

[DUCKofD3ATH]

Exactly what I was arguing. People are getting bent out of shape because everyone assumes that every white person at Apple is the most qualified and that any new minority hire isn't the most qualified. Racism seems alive and well on this forum to me.

People are also fooling themselves in their fantasy land if they think-like I said in my previous post-that a panel full of whites and Asians aren't going to have some level of bias toward the white and Asian applicants.

Apparently as a black Civil Engineering Major myself, according to some people on the forum that I can only get a job with an unfair advantage like affirmative action. I want to hired for my skills, not for quota. With that said, I want an equal playing field.
[doublepost=1453243779][/doublepost]
I think you and techwhiz want the same thing.

I see where you're coming from and completely agree with your position, but this isn't a perfect world. I think this is point you are missing.

Hiring, in the real world, unfortunately isn't based purely on competence. There IS bias. This ISN'T a fantasy land.

You're not getting my point entirely, which isn't surprising since parts of it are spread over this thread. I'll tie it all together below.

Overt discrimination existed in this country for a very long time. Now it is illegal to discriminate openly when filling a position. That's great progress, but that does not mean discrimination has ceased.

Human beings are by nature generalizing animals. We categorize broadly based on experience. Hence, everybody is prejudiced against somebody: blacks, whites, fat, short, gay, straight, Polish, Irish, Jewish, Christian, Muslim, etc.

So discrimination has not, and will not cease. But overt discrimination is against the law, so candidates have fair opportunity to compete based on competence. That's as fair as it'll ever get.

Some people, however, want to set us back by using racial discrimination to address past wrongs. The problem being that they are favoring one race over another instead of relying on competence, so it's racism all over again.
[doublepost=1453259434][/doublepost]

People should be treated fairly and should not be judged by the color of their skin.
So fill me in when there is no white privilege in America.

You just got done ranting about loser white guys, you expect us to believe that if you were in a position of power, you wouldn't abuse your black privilege? Get real.

White privilege is just a distraction.

Fill me in when Harvard, Yale, etc get rid of legacies, because that IS white affirmative action.
So if you want to complain, complain about the injustice that still exists in hiring and housing.

Again, complaining about legacies is a distraction and unreasonable, given that:

At some schools, legacy preferences have an effect on admissions comparable to other factors such as being a recruited athlete or affirmative action. One study of three selective private research universities in the United States showed the following effects (admissions disadvantage and advantage in terms of SAT points on the old 1600-point scale):​

• Blacks: +230
• Hispanics: +185
• Asians: -50
• Recruited athletes: +200
• Legacies (children of alumni): +160

So legacies get less of an advantage than blacks under affirmative action.

I would rather there was no legacy preference (an desire held by 75% of Americans), no athletics preference, and no affirmative action preference.

Competence should be king.

So let's be clear we are not talking about slavery.
We are talking about the American Apartheid system that we are still trying to dismantle some 40+ years after we passed laws in housing and employment that still get violated. So tell what descendants are we talking about?

Also you have not indicated how you expect to rectify the wealth that was gained through means which tilted the playing field so far in the direction of whites that almost all access to good education and wealth building was denied for multiple generations. You say the playing field is level. I'll argue that.
But that is the equivalent of holding a marathon and letting everyone train, except for a few.
On race day you say, hey, the race is open to all and expect those you did not allow to train to compete.

I never said the playing field is level. I said the laws are such that discrimination can no longer be practiced overtly. A black candidate who is as competent or more so than a white candidate has a fair shot at getting a job.

Will there be some blacks who don't get hired because of prejudice? Of course, just as there are fat people who lose because of prejudice. But it won't be openly expressed, which is the most that can be hoped for.

Be honest, do you really think blacks or hispanics in a position of power won't try to help others that look like them? It's human nature.

At no time did anyone claim mistreating an innocent was okay.

Read the posts it this topic where people say it necessary for a few whites to be passed over unfairly to give a leg up to blacks.

You seem to have bought into the myth that diversity programs somehow deny positions to whites and give them to unqualified people of color.

Here you go:

UPenn law prof Amy Wax says that the evidence shows you can either hire for “diversity,” or you can hire for merit, but — to the horror of diversocrats and human resources departments everywhere — you cannot have both.​

You do realize Ghandi was a racist?
<snipped examples of Ghandi being racist>
Please Don't Quote Ghandi in this discussion.

Very well (next time I'll issue a trigger warning before quoting LBJ or Bill Clinton or Harry Reid or any of a host of Democrat racists so you can get into your safe space). I'll make the quote mine.

An eye for an eye will make everybody in the world blind -- DUCKofD3ATH​

Happy now? Care to address its sentiments that seeking payback for past grievances just ensures that healing never takes place?

 

[darcyf]

Quite.

When one looks back at the 20th century, once could hardly say that there was a lack of innovation. Ditto for the 19th, 18th and 17th centuries. Overwhelmingly, that innovation was led by single white men, or small groups of white men, inspired by God.

So much for the benefits of diversity. In fact, there is a much stronger argument to say that it is desirable to encourage a monoculture, quite the opposite of diversity, if you want to create the best of anything. So says history.

Such ignorance!

First of all, correlation is not causation.

Second of all, we have no way of knowing how much more innovation there could have been had there been more diversity amongst the innovators you speak of.

For all we know, it's white men leading the way that is why we still haven't cured cancer or solved world hunger or created limitless, free energy.

So says history.

Disgusting. This whole thread. It's despicable.

 

[DUCKofD3ATH]

Such ignorance!

First of all, correlation is not causation.

Such ignorance!

His argument was that there was a lot of innovation over the last few centuries and that the vast majority of such was done by white men.

Let's see...one variable (rate of innovation) was caused caused by the other variable (white men)...so correlation does imply causation.

Second of all, we have no way of knowing how much more innovation there could have been had there been more diversity amongst the innovators you speak of.

For all we know, it's white men leading the way that is why we still haven't cured cancer or solved world hunger or created limitless, free energy.

Interesting point. Is there anyplace in the world where diversity has progressed to that laudable state? Somewhere you can cite that has enjoyed a huge increase in innovation that can be credited to diversity?

I think the liberal-concept of diversity is a worthy goal to pursue:

The liberal concept recognizes equality of opportunity in practice when all individuals are enabled freely and equally to compete for social rewards. The aim of the liberal change model is to have a fair labor market from which the best person is chosen for a job based solely on performance. To support this concept, a framework of formal rules has been created and policymakers are responsible for ensuring that these rules are enforced on all so none shall be discriminated against. The liberal-change approach centers on law, compliance, and legal penalties for non-compliance.​

But diversity hasn't worked miracles on the order of the increases in innovation (1.9% annual rate) experienced between 1860 and 2007, in fact, innovation is facing obstacles that will cut the rate in half or less. Those reasons include:

demography, education, inequality, globalization, energy/environment, and the overhang of consumer and government debt
​

So in this case, diversity has come into the forefront right at the time innovation is stalling, but here, rightly, it's appropriate to say that correlation does not imply causation.

So says history.

If you say so.

Disgusting. This whole thread. It's despicable.

Oh dear, brother! Oldthinkers unbellyfeel diversity! Doubleplus ungood.

 

[Muscle Master]

Well because youre racist. time to put down those old ways.

How the hell does that make me racist... If trump can get away with "telling it how it is" then so can I lol

Seriously I love white people, all I see is my brothers and sisters. I see the counter argument of affirmative action I really do.. But it was put in place for a very good reason... And fact of the matter is Affirmative action has not run out of its usable life yet

 

[DUCKofD3ATH]

95% of the people posting here are so ignorant to reality that it boggles the mind they can even work a computer to write this muck.

Heal thyself.

Do you honestly not get that white men are still being favoured for jobs they are less qualified for? And that this is the reason we have to pressure companies to increase their diversity -- not so that they hire someone who isn't white and male but is less qualified, but so the more qualified non-white or/and female actually stands a chance at landing the job they deserve to be hired for in the first place.

Given that companies prefer to hire the best person for the job AND given that overt discrimination on the basis of anything EXCEPT competence is illegal, I'm requesting that you provide proof that unqualified whites are systematically getting jobs over better qualified non-whites and/or females.

 

[upnorth85]

I would like to see diversity at high school completion stage, diversity in teenage moms, diversity in STEM fields. Then we can have diversity at Tech companies. Anything short is just trying to placate the media. And, no, I am not a white male.

 

[Renzatic]

So in this case, diversity has come into the forefront right at the time innovation is stalling...

Wait. When did this happen? Did we hit some technological stall over the last couple of days, because last I heard, we were still screaming ahead at the forefront of the Great Acceleration.

 

[Mums]

Okay, I'm interested. As someone that grew up in East Oakland, I'd like to know how were you discriminated against?
Were you bullied by other kids? What?
Did you get followed in stores like I did?
Did you get picked up by the police for being "white" in the wrong neighborhood, like I did for being in a black kid in a white neighborhood where my relatives lived?
I grew up in a working class neighborhood in East Oakland with black, white, Asia, Filipino and Hispanic.
We all got along, played baseball/football, etc at the parks and school grounds, etc.

So tell me. I AM from Oakland.

Your demands are typically self-righteous, but I'll humor you:

Yes, I was bullied by blacks many times during my childhood. Does that surprise you lol?

Yes, I got picked up by police in Oakland (I'm from Berkeley but grew up in Richmond - which is even worse than Oakland) for being White in a black neighborhood - East Oakland, so your home town lol.

Yes, I grew up with blacks, Whites, Asians, Latinos, Filipinos, Jews, Laotians, and lots of mixed people - in that glorious melting-pot rainbow you so willingly celebrate. Whites get the butt end of that rainbow. You just didn't notice it because you were too busy worrying about blacks. Whites' hearts constantly bleed for blacks, but blacks never care about Whites - it just doesn't happen and it never will - as is evidenced by your response to my call for empathy.

See that's what White people need to wake up to: pandering is condescension. Truly non-racist people - like me - who truly see everyone as their equals - like I do (for better or worse) - recognise that black people and Asians and Latinos and everyone else are just as capable of oppressing White people as the converse. That is The White Man's Burden: only White people are capable of that kind of suicidal guilt.

Kipling was correct and was demonized for telling it like it is.

But I predict that you and your "people" (meaning blacks and only blacks) will just come back at me with further hate and vitriol - never for an instant acknowledging that you have equal agency.

 

[Max(IT)]

I really don't understand you americans .... Who cares about gender, race or sexual orientation of Apple's employees ?
I do care about their products, and Im quite sure Apple is moving the economy worldwide, creating a lot of jobs.

 

[FieldingMellish]

Apple is so involved with Hollywood, I'm surprised that Tim Cook didn't see the current fad of citing racism at the Academy Awards evolving and therefore opt to engineer a black actor to play the Steve Jobs role, such as that which played Ralph Kramden on a Honeymooner's remake, in the name of a diverse Apple.

 

[DUCKofD3ATH]

Wait. When did this happen? Did we hit some technological stall over the last couple of days, because last I heard, we were still screaming ahead at the forefront of the Great Acceleration.

Did you read the article I cited? Apparently the brakes are being applied. By 2034 we'll be at a level of innovation equivalent to the Dark Ages.

Yeah, I don't believe it either, but the original article on the matter has been substantiated a couple times.
[doublepost=1453293588][/doublepost]

I find it absolutely amazing that, according to outraged posters here, all the good jobs must be universally handed to minorities and females, just based on all the white guys who allegedly have not gotten jobs because of some sort of affirmative action. Yet, inexplicably, most technical, engineering, scientific, and executive ranks are filled by white males, and always have been.

Can't speak for others here, but I'm not saying all the good jobs are being handed to minorities and females. I'm saying jobs should be handed to the most competent. If that means minorities and females end up with the jobs, well and good.

 

[ctg7w6]

I won't shed a single tear if some white boy in America can't make it when the deck is stacked in his favor.
If you are white and in America and you can't make it.

YOU ARE A TRUE LOSER!

This is certainly one of the most racist things I've seen on MR. I have seen posts modded for stepping just a little bit out of line, but I would have hoped that a racist post would get the same treatment. But I guess his post was racist against the wrong group, so its all okay.

Oh yeah, post reported.

 

[Mums]

I really don't understand you americans .... Who cares about gender, race or sexual orientation of Apple's employees ?
I do care about their products, and Im quite sure Apple is moving the economy worldwide, creating a lot of jobs.

Us Americans have been brainwashed into submitting to political correctness and multiculturalism. It's something which you Italians have been spared up until now. However, I lived in Italy in 2013, and your country is being flooded with North African migrants, so you will potentially be blessed with political correctness and multiculturalism in the near future - so long as the mafia and church do not oppose it. Welcome to Hell!
[doublepost=1453304852][/doublepost]

This is certainly one of the most racist things I've seen on MR. I have seen posts modded for stepping just a little bit out of line, but I would have hoped that a racist post would get the same treatment. But I guess his post was racist against the wrong group, so its all okay.

Oh yeah, post reported.

You are so right. You can't mutter a word against protected groups. But White men are open targets.

 

[macduke]

I understand your point but the experience of growing up poor isn't limited to any race, you should visit south Georgia or West Virginia and see the poverty. Someone who grew up in poverty in an area with extremely limited opportunity shouldn't be discriminated against on the basis of them being white.

True, but the poor white people who pull themselves up by their bootstraps aren't likely to be questioned over and over about their qualifications and looked over for raises because nobody knows for sure what they came from. Humans are biased to favor people who look like them, so as a white dominated society we need to be cognizant of that and try to mitigate it. The same could be said about black people, except that we have prejudice against them and yeah, generally a majority of black people come from poorer areas since the deck is stacked against them.

--

Somewhat unrelated, but I wish a lot of black people would also realize that democrats aren't your friend. We've had a democrat focused society and president for some time now and if anything things have only gotten worse for our African American friends. Republicans aren't any better (good grief, Donald Trump is practically Hitler although he was a big Hillary supporter in the past so I don't even understand him or his supporters), but don't pretend that democrats love you to pieces. Hardly any politicians have the people's best interest at heart—much less any one specific minority group!

 

[ctg7w6]

Such ignorance!

First of all, correlation is not causation.

Second of all, we have no way of knowing how much more innovation there could have been had there been more diversity amongst the innovators you speak of.

For all we know, it's white men leading the way that is why we still haven't cured cancer or solved world hunger or created limitless, free energy.

So says history.

Disgusting. This whole thread. It's despicable.

Or we could equally say that without white men there would be hundreds of rampant diseases that were (historically) cured by white scientists, or that without white people there would be even more diseases, or that without white people the economy of the world would be much lower and poverty much higher (because, historically, the economy of the world grew through industrialization, something that white people made).

See, anyone can speculate. So why isn't your post disgusting? The person you quoted used historical facts. You used speculation that cannot be proven AT ALL, but is also illogical if one considers historical fact.