Trump Responds to Apple Keeping Diversity Policies

[kjvmartin]

Weird how you’re concerned about women and minorities getting one of those slots even though it’s far more common that they are shut out in favor of less qualified white men.

In my experience it has generally been the opposite. I have felt very uneasy after interviewing people for several days and being encouraged from above to change my pick to "consider diversity" in the decision making process.

We have ended up with underperforming employees.

 

[MJaP]

In my experience it has generally been the opposite. I have felt very uneasy after interviewing people for several days and being encouraged from above to change my pick to "consider diversity" in the decision making process.

We have ended up with underperforming employees.

In that case your company is implementing DEI incorrectly and HR should be informed. The best person for the job should always get the job, DEI is only there to protect qualified minorities from bigotry in mainly white corporate management from choosing a less qualified white/straight/able-bodied person over a DEI candidate as American employment protections are woeful when compared to somewhere like Europe and as we know American corporate (ie mainly Republican/religious) bigotry is rife.

Trump is trying to cause them vs us division by lying (surprise surprise) and misrepresenting what DEI is. A less qualified DEI person should never get the job over a straight white male person, and DEI correctly implemented would never sanction that.

 

[TroyBoy30]

I'm amazed that Trump has the time to focus on stuff like this. There must be other things that's more important.

yea lets go back to the last 4 years when no one cared about anything but the president's favorite flavor of ice cream. Or maybe the media pretending that the president's brain had turned to mush? DEI is racism and should be removed completely. you can't fight racism with more racism. even when there isn't any racism.

A less qualified DEI person should never get the job over a straight white male person, and DEI correctly implemented would never sanction that.

but they do. that's the point. not only did the democrats force jo out of the race, they also chose a die hire to replace him. one that was vice pres because of dei. well, that and 'putting her head down and going to work' as her husband so politely put it.

 

[Silverstring]

For those coming in late to the thread, a helpful primer:

tl;dr: those who fundamentally don’t understand DEI are against it and scapegoat it for things like Apple’s quality issues. No, of course they don’t have any data or evidence—just suppositions.

 

[Silverstring]

In my experience it has generally been the opposite.

So a personal, heavily biased anecdote playing into preconceived notions (notice a theme, readers?), described in very loose terms like “generally” and “…ended up”, then baselessly extrapolated to the macro level, then?

Nothing to see here, folks—the facts are IN…open and shut case!

It’s almost like there should be some sort of effort or something to address people who are uncomfortable with “diverse” perspectives and over-index their own biased, narrow view?

Except…what would we even call such a thing?!?

 

[Razorpit]

In any case, he did get $AAPL drop 3% today. I'm sure he'll attack again and then let some rich white guys but at a discount.

Don't know your race, color, sexuality, or economic, status, but you are allowed to buy some. Don't get mad at others if you didn't.

key word 'almost.' But you DID get the job and apparently did not bring anything different to it.

edit: is it a 'demand' if not met? Sounds more like a suggestion. Shrugs.

I'm not going to get in to the details but the hiring practice was pretty disgusting. I was absolutely one of the most qualified and what I have done over the last few years has shown it.

Translation - “nice company your running there Tim, be a shame if something happened to it”

Well, at least we're removed from the days of "10% to the big guy."

 

[G5isAlive]

I'm not going to get in to the details but the hiring practice was pretty disgusting. I was absolutely one of the most qualified and what I have done over the last few years has shown it.

Again with the qualifiers..., you started with an anecdotal story about 'almost' not getting a job, and end with being 'one of' the most qualified, shrugs.. and your performance has no control to measure against...what if the most qualified had gotten the job and perhaps did even better? we're going in circles here. Congrats on getting the job, congrats on being good at it, but if we are to accept your anecdote on why DEI is bad (though what you are actually talking about is a quota system not DEI, DEI was formed to get rid of the quota system that was discussed back in the 90's), then I have to accept all the anecdotes about the good ole boys club giving jobs to their own 'kind' versus hiring 'one of' the most qualified folks not part of the club that led to the formation of the DEI.

I don't think you know what DEI actually does if you are going to discuss only quotas.

 

[G5isAlive]

In my experience it has generally been the opposite. I have felt very uneasy after interviewing people for several days and being encouraged from above to change my pick to "consider diversity" in the decision making process.

We have ended up with underperforming employees.

I been directly responsible for not hiring a few, but a few hundred people to report to me over the years. I always picked the person most qualified. HR never tried to influence my decision based on diversity. Once or twice they did suggest someone was over qualified. I didn't care. I wanted the best. One of a person's qualifications that I considered was not just direct job experience, but indirect, diversity, because I found such people brought something new to the team. When I was first starting, I would look for people that could do what I could, figuring more hands meant faster. I was wrong. I quickly found and enjoyed building teams of people that thought differently from me. Those teams were fun and productive.

Did you speak up about your 'unease?' Because I would have. And people knew the about me. Maybe that's why I never had the problems you seemed to have had.

 

[kjvmartin]

I been directly responsible for not hiring a few, but a few hundred people to report to me over the years. I always picked the person most qualified. HR never tried to influence my decision based on diversity. Once or twice they did suggest someone was over qualified. I didn't care. I wanted the best. One of a person's qualifications that I considered was not just direct job experience, but indirect, diversity, because I found such people brought something new to the team. When I was first starting, I would look for people that could do what I could, figuring more hands meant faster. I was wrong. I quickly found and enjoyed building teams of people that thought differently from me. Those teams were fun and productive.

Did you speak up about your 'unease?' Because I would have. And people knew the about me. Maybe that's why I never had the problems you seemed to have had.

Speaking up would be career suicide where I work. I am frequently placed on interview panels because I’m one of the few non minorities left to do it and they want to appear diverse on said panels.

Our top level boss has stated openly, though not on record, what we are trying to accomplish.

 

[bgillander]

I don't follow. Appointing someone to a position because they are a likeminded individual is legal.

It also makes sense, if you have an agenda at your organization, to appoint and promote people that will further that agenda.

If Trump appointed people that would hinder his agenda, we'd think he was losing his mind.

The point was that every person I have seen talking about meritocracy in the Trump presidency would be unemployed in a true meritocracy, but are instead thriving through nepotism.

 

[SpaceJello]

The point was that every person I have seen talking about meritocracy in the Trump presidency would be unemployed in a true meritocracy, but are instead thriving through nepotism.

I have a nagging feeling nepotism and affiliations are today’s “merit”. Skills, knowledge, experiences, those are simply “wants” in a candidate now. Actually, isn’t that what Project 2X25 outlined? Rid competence and replace with obedience.

 

[Razorpit]

I have a nagging feeling nepotism and affiliations are today’s “merit”. Skills, knowledge, experiences, those are simply “wants” in a candidate now. Actually, isn’t that what Project 2X25 outlined? Rid competence and replace with obedience.

Project 2X25? Is that the next "Q thing" we'll be hearing about?

 

[turbineseaplane]

I have a nagging feeling nepotism and affiliations are today’s “merit”. Skills, knowledge, experiences, those are simply “wants” in a candidate now. Actually, isn’t that what Project 2X25 outlined? Rid competence and replace with obedience.

It's more than a "feeling" ... fealty to Trump is hiring criteria #1

 

[Ethosik]

Good thing that hiring people based on skin color is not, and has never been, what DEI is. 👍🏻

Bad DEI exists. I have first hand experience of getting told “we have too many white males here”.

 

[BaldiMac]

In my experience it has generally been the opposite. I have felt very uneasy after interviewing people for several days and being encouraged from above to change my pick to "consider diversity" in the decision making process.

We have ended up with underperforming employees.

Sure. That's why we look at data instead of personal anecdotes.

There are certainly bad diversity initiatives. Let's fix them. But it's disingenuous to pretend that DEI means quota-based affirmative action. Because that's not what it is. Good implementations are about opportunity for qualified candidates. Not promotions for unqualified candidates.

 

[WarmWinterHat]

Bad DEI exists. I have first hand experience of getting told “we have too many white males here”.

Check nursing. If you are a male, white, black or green, you will be moved to the front of the pack.

I'm not a nurse, but I work in healthcare, and in a department (and field) with 70% women. I've heard "we have too many women here", from more than one company.

 

[Ethosik]

Stop calling it DEI, spell (and say) the words out loud and follow up with which part you hate the most.

For example, "I hate diversity," "I hate Equality," "I hate Inclusion;" or have the balls to say you hate them all.

To those saying things like this and other things. The fact that a DEI program exists is the proof. I have heard and seen from my friend circles in hiring positions clear quota on diversity that needs to be met tied to DEI programs. So once they reach X white males, they cannot get X+1. They will interview sometimes to keep up the appearance.


I’m also not saying every company (Apple here) is like this. But I have seen first hand and second hand the “bad” side of DEI.

 

[Razorpit]

Sure. That's why we look at data instead of personal anecdotes.

There are certainly bad diversity initiatives. Let's fix them. But it's disingenuous to pretend that DEI means quota-based affirmative action. Because that's not what it is. Good implementations are about opportunity for qualified candidates. Not promotions for unqualified candidates.

But that's exactly what it is. Any smart management, business owner, etc. is going to hire the best person for the job. This is not needed. And who would want to work in a business that "needs DEI" to fix itself? No qualified person wants to be a token employee.

Kill DEI. Stop asking a person's skin color/ethnic background on job applications. It's information that should not be shared at any point during the interview process. Problem solved.

Next problem, find something else for the grift.. I mean DEI officers to do. Getting coffee, arranging office parties, etc. might be right up their alley.

 

[turbineseaplane]

But I have seen first hand and second hand the “bad” side of DEI.

There is "bad side" of every policy ever conceived
It's not necessarily ever justification for fully scrapping something, let alone going hard in the opposite direction

 

[tdar]

For the people in the rest of the world, I am sorry but our new president is an idiot. Along with being a criminal. He doesn’t understand how Apple works. But he doesn’t understand most everything.

 

[BaldiMac]

But that's exactly what it is.

Please provide a source showing that women and minority employees make the same or more than similarly qualified white males.

Otherwise, you're still just making stuff up. I've already provided a source that shows that the opposite is true.

 

[Ethosik]

The anti-DEI crowd here keeps shouting that the quality of Apple's products are somehow deteriorating due entirely to "unqualified DEI" hires. Where they get this idea from is anyone's guess since they never cite any data to back up such bigoted claims.

When you look at the actual data, we find that in the technical and leadership areas, those which affect product design and construction, these areas are overwhelmingly dominated by white males and asians. So the baseless claims by these MAGAs are dastardly lies.

Check out the Apple Workforce statistics tool below --->

Apple Inclusion & Diversity Measurement

Its extremes on both sides and it is exhausting. I don’t know why things are so heavily polarized these days. I have seen the “bad” DEI and one of the reasons why I voted how I did. But to say things like Apple quality is the result of DEI without proof is just wrong.

 

[Ethosik]

For those coming in late to the thread, a helpful primer:

tl;dr: those who fundamentally don’t understand DEI are against it and scapegoat it for things like Apple’s quality issues. No, of course they don’t have any data or evidence—just suppositions.

Yep agreed. I have seen the “bad” DEI. I have not seen one set of evidence that Apple is in that camp.

 

[Ethosik]

Check nursing. If you are a male, white, black or green, you will be moved to the front of the pack.

I'm not a nurse, but I work in healthcare, and in a department (and field) with 70% women. I've heard "we have too many women here", from more than one company.

Yes that is just as bad. People should get hired for merit no other basis like skin color or sex or gender etc.

 

[Ethosik]

But that's exactly what it is. Any smart management, business owner, etc. is going to hire the best person for the job. This is not needed. And who would want to work in a business that "needs DEI" to fix itself? No qualified person wants to be a token employee.

Kill DEI. Stop asking a person's skin color/ethnic background on job applications. It's information that should not be shared at any point during the interview process. Problem solved.

Next problem, find something else for the grift.. I mean DEI officers to do. Getting coffee, arranging office parties, etc. might be right up their alley.

Yes that is what I’m saying. We already have discrimination laws so the existence of DEI is either pointless, or taking things too far.