Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Businesses Stats Apple

Apple's Diversity Numbers: 70% Male, 55% White 561 561

An anonymous reader writes: Apple has released a diversity report on the genders and races of its employees. As is common in the tech industry, the majority of Apple's workforce is male — only three out of 10 employees around the globe are female. Broken down, males compose 65 percent of non-tech workers, 80 percent of tech workers, and 72 percent of Apple's leadership.

According to CEO Tim Cook, he's unhappy with Apple's diversity numbers and says Apple is working to improve them: "Apple is committed to transparency, which is why we are publishing statistics about the race and gender makeup of our company. Let me say up front: As CEO, I'm not satisfied with the numbers on this page. They're not new to us, and we've been working hard for quite some time to improve them. We are making progress, and we're committed to being as innovative in advancing diversity as we are in developing our products."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple's Diversity Numbers: 70% Male, 55% White

Comments Filter:
  • Why 'diversity'? (Score:0, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 13, 2014 @12:30AM (#47660357)

    How does everyone accept this practice of establishing "diversity quotas"? To accept this is utterly insane.

    It's a corrupt practice. For the sake of efficiency, jobs should go to the people that the management of a business believe to be the best. Asserting that 'diversity' must be increased implies that management discriminates against non-whites and/or non-males by criteria other than their talents and skills which are relevant to the business. There is no evidence that a 'diverse' work-place is more efficient than a homogenous work-place. Therefore seeking 'diversity' is illogical, and clearly intended for a purpose other than one of justice.

    There is no possible argument for 'diversity' that does not contradict itself. It's an idea that was not designed to benefit working class people. It's an idea that was designed to weaken the communities that worked to create our way of life. It's idea purposed to destroy our way of life.

  • It's easy to fix (Score:5, Interesting)

    by msobkow (48369) on Wednesday August 13, 2014 @12:46AM (#47660425) Homepage Journal

    Just break down all the employees into the smallest groups possible. Instead of "White" or "African", break it down to German, Swiss, Dutch, South African, Tanzanian, and so on. With everything down to a few dozen members per group, you'll have a nice flat diversity line. :P

  • Re:Stupid (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Noah Haders (3621429) on Wednesday August 13, 2014 @12:47AM (#47660429)
    it's clear that for a company of apple's wealth and reach, the solution isn't to hire diverse applicants, but to produce diverse applicants - invest in education opportunities, scholarships, other programs to bolster the pool of people.
  • Why the backlash? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by The Evil Atheist (2484676) on Wednesday August 13, 2014 @12:57AM (#47660481) Homepage
    How does this affect anyone here who is commenting negatively about this? Why are people taking it as a personal attack on their personal politics?
  • by unimacs (597299) on Wednesday August 13, 2014 @01:10AM (#47660525)
    How often does a company REALLY hire the best possible person for the position? I'd say the chances are pretty slim. They may very well hire somebody who ends up being successful, but that's not the same as the best.

    Usually the way it works is that the person that gets hired is the one that the hiring manager likes the most out of the people they've interviewed. The people that get interviewed are the ones that HR/hiring manager liked out of the pool of people that applied.

    There may have been highly qualified people that were eliminated at any step. I've seen managers throw out resumes because the name wasn't "American sounding". That's a more blatant case. Some of the more subtle cases occur because there is a tendency to hire people like yourself.

    For example, I was nearly turned down for a position because they wanted someone with a masters degree. Why? Because the people running the business unit and doing the hiring had MBAs, not because anything about the job required a masters.

    I would venture that in many cases where a white male is hired into a technical position, there are equally or better qualified non-whites out there some place. To find them, you may have to look in different places, - cast a wider net. My point is that making an effort to have a more diverse workforce DOES NOT mean you have to settle for less qualified people.

    On the other hand, there is a definite shortage of women CS and engineering grads. There are lots of complex reasons for this. But it's worse than it used to be, - which means it can be better than it is now. Companies like Apple are big enough to help make that happen, but not overnight.
  • Re:Stupid (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Maxo-Texas (864189) on Wednesday August 13, 2014 @01:28AM (#47660613)

    In my average IT class, we started with 20% females and finished with about 5% females.

    I.e. they dropped at a higher rate. Most were not obsessed with computers enough to excel.

    That creates a challenging pool to hire from.

    Perhaps if IT people were not expected to be as obsessed and asocial as they are, it wouldn't happen.

    There were zero IT parties in 4 years of collage. Heck my DND club had at least a couple parties a year.

  • by Nyder (754090) on Wednesday August 13, 2014 @01:51AM (#47660685) Journal

    For example, how many of that 30% women makes the same as males doing the same job?

    Same goes for the non white compared to the white workers.

  • Re:Stupid (Score:5, Interesting)

    by lisaparratt (752068) on Wednesday August 13, 2014 @02:12AM (#47660751)

    Or, another way of looking at it: they met their future colleagues, and bailed while the gettin' was good.

  • Or don't be... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by popo (107611) on Wednesday August 13, 2014 @02:23AM (#47660793) Homepage

    What's the percentage of white male computer-science and technical graduates?

    To do anything but hire according to that percentage would be an act of sexism or racism.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 13, 2014 @02:24AM (#47660799)

    "Apple's single white Christian male numbers: 70% male, 55% white"

    I think your rule needs some work.

    Of course, 55% white is significantly lower than the general population. Furthermore, Apple is one of the most gay-friendly companies in the world, making the "Christian" part dubious at best.

  • by Tom (822) on Wednesday August 13, 2014 @02:41AM (#47660851) Homepage Journal

    When you stop using key figures as a guidance to reaching your goal and use them as goals in themselves, you've got a problem.

    Frankly speaking, I don't give a fuck if a company is 5% white, 50% white or 99% white. While these numbers may be indicators of an underlying problem, they are just that - indicators. Just like running a company by consulting-think usually results in a bancrupt company, you have to go deeper than some numbers, and you should never make those numbers your actual goals. Many companies have been run into the ground by idiots who thought 4% profit margin is not enough and this consultant or that business insider says they need 5% and if it ruins the company to get that extra 1% then so be it...

    What should matter is if there's any problem for anyone getting hired or promoted in Apple (or any other company) because of gender, skin colour or whatever else you want. Statistical numbers can give you a hint on where you might want to check, but in themselves, they are meaningless. They're just statistics.

  • Re:Stupid (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mlk (18543) <michael.lloyd.le ... > on Wednesday August 13, 2014 @04:29AM (#47661199) Homepage Journal

    I come from the same camp, hire the best person for the role. Definitely.

    But best is not just "technically best" but also "team fit best" and "not a dick" and "can communicate with the team" and various other little things. What this can mean is that the team unconsciously equates "best team fit" as "same as the rest of the team". The management should step in if this happens and look at ways to fixing what is a problem and reports like the one performed by Mr Apple is one quick way to measure if this is happening.

  • Re:Stupid (Score:5, Interesting)

    by GuB-42 (2483988) on Wednesday August 13, 2014 @07:22AM (#47661715)

    This study is interesting as it doesn't show that affirmative action itself has a positive effect. The simple knowledge that affirmative action is in place is sufficient, like some kind of placebo effect.

    The idea is : women can win if they try but they don't try unless we tell them they have an unfair and in many cases unnecessary advantage.

  • Re:Stupid (Score:5, Interesting)

    by BitZtream (692029) on Wednesday August 13, 2014 @07:46AM (#47661807)

    The results of that 'study' are subjective and the study was biased from the start to show results that favor affirmative action.

    Your study is bunk. It starts off by finding qualified individuals, then claims because it puts a diverse group in competition that its emulating affirmative action, which is entirely not the case.

    Yes, I read the link.

  • Re:Stupid (Score:5, Interesting)

    by SecurityTheatre (2427858) on Wednesday August 13, 2014 @10:44AM (#47662883)

    1) This study assumed an equal pool of men and women (it breaks, badly, if there is an unequal pool)
    2) This study assumed or selected men and women who are very closely matched in terms of problem solving skill
    3) This study simply concluded that affirmative action does not impact "the ability of the group to cooperate".

    I hire for technical computer-related positions. I advertise in all the standard places, ranging from craigslist to the variety of job boards, as well as on our website. I will interview EVERY SINGLE woman who sends me a resume with even the most remote bit of experience. To contrast, I only interview about 5% of men who do.

    I have hired EVERY SINGLE women who has come through the door for an interview. EVERY SINGLE ONE. (That is 3 people in the last 2 years)

    I hire about 2% of men who apply. My standards for the men we hire are EXTREMELY strict.

    I still hire over 80% men.

    I'm not sure what kind of affirmative action would be required to rectify this, but it certainly isn't up to my HR department to go out and train more women, or convince them to look for jobs.

    My boss is female. Our CEO is an immigrant who is decidedly not white. But we end up with a bunch of white guys applying for positions. That's just the nature of it and Apple, being ONLY 55% white and 60% male has done something remarkable with their diversity... In my experience, that level of diversity is unheard of...

Time-sharing is the junk-mail part of the computer business. -- H.R.J. Grosch (attributed)