Apple Makes Slight Progress On Diversity While Its Rivals Are Making Practically None (macrumors.com) 241
The workforce at Apple is still predominately white and male, reveals the diversity report the company released Wednesday. But that doesn't mean that its efforts to improve diversity haven't yielded improvements. This is the third year that the Cupertino giant has released its diversity numbers and the balance is improving, although a bit slowly. From a MacRumors report: Its overall workforce, including tech, non-tech, and retail jobs, is 68% male and 32% female as of June 2016, a slight change from a 69%-31% split in 2015. Apple's race and ethnicity breakdown among U.S. employees is 19% Asian, 9% Black, 12% Hispanic, 2% Multiracial, 1% Other, and 56% White, representing a 2 percent increase in White employees and a 1 percent increase in both Asian and Hispanic employees compared to last year's data. Females represent 37% of Apple's global new hires, while U.S. underrepresented minorities represent 27% of global new hires. Apple defines underrepresented minorities as "groups whose representation in tech has been historically low -- Black, Hispanic, Native American, Native Hawaiian, and Other Pacific Islander."Washington Post compares Apple's progress to other Silicon Valley giants, claiming that rest of the industry is mostly sitting idle. (Alternate source: Reuters) From the report: At Facebook, black and Hispanic employees make up 2 and 4 percent of the employee base. Despite commitments to diversity, neither Google nor Facebook have made a dent in those numbers since they first announced them in 2014.
So (Score:4, Insightful)
What
Re: (Score:2)
If nothing else it debunks a few commonly made claims I read in Slashdot comments. 95% Asian with only a handful of white guys left? Seems not.
No (Score:2)
Was that the shortest totally appropriate comment ever ?
No
It's not a bad thing (Score:5, Insightful)
It's only a bad thing if they're excluding better qualified people. If they're hiring the best person for the job regardless of what they have between their legs and the color of their skin, and it turns out to be a bunch of white guys, then that's just an artifact of the talent pool.
Re: (Score:2)
The myth of hiring the best qualified person. Here's the thing, you aren't going to get a rockstar coder on a phone number salary to write that internal process management app. You actually want someone qualified but not overqualified. Someone who can do the job, and who can fit in and grow in the job, someone suited to that level of work.
And you want lots of them. These companies employ tens of thousands of people. They can't all be the best, the most qualified in every single role. And qualification isn't
Re:It's not a bad thing (Score:5, Insightful)
That's not my job as a business owner to fix.
Re: (Score:3)
It can be an opportunity. It's not as if everyone in the talent pool has a talent score burned into their left arms with divine lightning. Measures of talent are imprecise, and frequently favor the dominant racial/sexual/whatever group, so if you select a black woman over a white man with higher scores you might well be hiring the better candidate. If the talent pool is 95% white male, that other 5% will include some very good people (and frequently some very bad ones).
Looking for talent among minorit
Re:It's not a bad thing (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually it is, because diversity brings new opinions and viewpoints. If all you hire are white men you're only going to ever have the viewpoints of white men.
Right, because white men all have the same viewpoint with regard to technology products. "Diversity is a good thing" refers, for example, to diversity in approaches to of problem solving, not in getting the LGBT slant on circuit design or software implementation, whatever that might mean.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually it is, because diversity brings new opinions and viewpoints. If all you hire are white men you're only going to ever have the viewpoints of white men.
Right, because white men all have the same viewpoint with regard to technology products
Ted Nugent fans also have different viewpoints. Some like deer hunting, others duck hunting. Yet you will probably not find any interested in knitting. People fighting over what to hunt doesn't make a group diverse.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually it is, because diversity brings new opinions and viewpoints. If all you hire are white men you're only going to ever have the viewpoints of white men.
Right, because white men all have the same viewpoint with regard to technology products
Ted Nugent fans also have different viewpoints. Some like deer hunting, others duck hunting. Yet you will probably not find any interested in knitting. People fighting over what to hunt doesn't make a group diverse.
... which has what to do with tech companies, again?
Re: (Score:3)
If all you hire are white men you're only going to ever have the viewpoints of white men.
So you're telling me that all white men have the same viewpoints?
When people talk about diversity these days, they tend to be referring to someone's skin color and cultural background. They are generally not talking about a diversity of ideas or viewpoints.
When people talk about improving the diversity of an organization they're talking about meeting arbitrary racial quotas. That's why, for example, the City of Chicago has been promoting Hispanic fire fighters ahead of more qualified Caucasian candidate
Re: It's not a bad thing (Score:4, Insightful)
So a Slovenian farmer has exactly the same world view as a US CEO because they're both white?
Re: (Score:2)
So a Slovenian farmer has exactly the same world view as a US CEO because they're both white?
How many of the many, many white man employed by, say, Google are Slovenian farmers? Likely one less than CEOs. So even on that account Google is far to un-diverse.
And would those two people have similar viewpoints compared to a lesbian, one legged, Inuit whale huntress?
Re: (Score:2)
No, it's not obvious at all.
We're talking about viewpoints related to work, not PMS.
At work, you want a limited set of viewpoints...those that _understand_. Diversions are just that.
Re:It's not a bad thing (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually it is, because diversity brings new opinions and viewpoints. If all you hire are white men you're only going to ever have the viewpoints of white men. And if the talent pool is heavily biased against non white men you need to go out of your way to choose diversified talent to make your company better.
You're making a grave and extremely patronizing mistake, whether you know it or not. The whole concept of diversity is based around the concept that people of different ethnicities have had significantly different life experiences, and this assumption is flawed in two ways; for starters, people who grow up in the same country, with the same economic and educational backgrounds, do actually tend to think alike. Take a black person and a white one from Seattle; notice that both are pretty likely to support gay rights. Take a black person and a white one from smallsville Idaho, and notice that both are pretty likely to vote against it. The point is, social class and physical location forms one's opinion far more than skin color. You would get significantly different viewpoints if you hire two white (or two black) people from two different cities than if you hire one each from the same city.
Second off, the whole concept is incredibly degrading, for everyone involved. You assume white people come from one well off background and are incapable of imaging what being poor or discriminated against is like. You assume that people with minority skin color can't handle the work, and so we need special accommodations for them. And you assume that quality of work is no longer the only criteria you should be using to judge employees. This whole movement is largely based on assumptions , and blatantly racist ones at that. Yes, there are plenty of white people who are the minority ethnicity where they live. I myself have lived in Japan for years, being the only white european person for miles when I walk on the streets, so you can cut the judgmental crap about not understanding being a minority. Furthermore, just because I am white skinned, does that automatically tell you my upbringing? How about a person from France? Do you think we have the same opinions, philosophy, and views on life, despite coming from entirely separate cultures, just because our skin color and gender are the same?
I don't know if you intend diversity to be kind or something, in a really twisted and demeaning version, but racism is still racism even when you say it with ("good") intentions. You should judge employees by the quality of work, and ideally nothing more (you're being paid to help the company, not fix society at the expense of it). If you really want to get different perspectives, sit down with a cup of coffee in a cafe with your employees, ask a few philosophical questions, and see what happens. You will get a far, far better answer than looking at a checkbox or groping their genitals ever will.
Re: (Score:3)
The flaw here is that minorities do often have a shared perspective and subculture, even if they're displaced by long distances and other trappings of the greater culture.
I don't have the experience of being a black man in America. But one in the north and one in the south do. They both know what it's like to be underrepresented in media, and to distrust police, and probably to be pulled over for no reason at all. Indeed, Chris Rock and Levar Burton have talked about those experiences too. Rich black men an
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:It's not a bad thing (Score:4, Insightful)
2) You're mistakenly concluding that having an employee composition which doesn't reflect society means you don't care about diversity. It's the talent pool which is relevant to a business, not society overall. If your employee composition doesn't reflect the talent pool, then all you're doing is depriving qualified people of jobs so you can give them to less qualified people.
The proper way to measure whether a company is acting responsibly would be to compare the gender and ethnic makeup of all the people who apply for a job, and compare to the gender and ethnic makeup of all the people who are hired. If there is no statistical difference between these two groups, then the company is hiring responsibly. Unfortunately, the Equal Employment Opportunity ordinances make it illegal to ask job applicants their gender or race. So the government makes it impossible to ascertain just how responsibly companies are hiring.
3) You're again assuming that not having an employee pool which reflects society means you're discriminating. As I said, it's the composition of the talent pool which matters. If you ignore the composition of the talent pool, you can set up impossible-to-achieve standards. If I need to hire 10 programmers, get 100 applicants, and only 4 of them are women, it is mathematically impossible to make sure 50% of your hirees women.
As for lack of qualified non-white applicants, what can I as a business owner do? I cannot force non-whites to stay in school. I cannot force non-whites to study harder. I cannot force non-whites to get a STEM degree. I suppose I could set up a charity scholarship open only to minorities, but I'm in California. Whites are only 42% of the population here. So if I tried to set up a scholarship for only non-whites, I could be sued for discriminating against the white minority.
These problems need to be addressed at the educational and government level, not the business level. Trying to address it at the business level is like trying to address poor kids growing up shorter in height by lopping off the feet of non-poor kids, instead of instituting a program to feed poor kids better.
This in particular is especially troublesome. The economy doesn't work off of good intentions. It works off of productivity. The more productive an employee or company is, the more economic activity it creates, and the wealthier people become.
Certain hits to productivity, we as a society have decided to accept. The ADA requires everyone to go to extra expense to make sure handicapped people are given the same opportunity as abled people. But this is a decision we as a society made together, using the democratic principle of majority decides what laws to make.
You can argue diversity is also important enough that we as a society should require it despite the economic hit it creates. If that is your argument, then you need to get a majority of legislators to make it a law. Without that process, coercing unwilling businesses to conform to your ideals by arguing it is good public relations is just that - coercion.
Re: (Score:3)
No, I'm concluding that the GP post's assertion that, "I'm a business owner, why is it my problem?" means he doesn't care about diversity. He's stated he doesn't give a shit, and doesn't feel he has to give a shit.
Heh. You dumb fuck can't even properly copy and paste his "That's not my job as a business owner to fix." Seeing something as a problem and assuming responsibility for fixing it are two completely different things. Additionally, admitting that there's something to fix is the opposite of not caring. You seem to have comprehension problems in that area.
So, let's frame the discussion, and see if we can agree on some fundamentals. Would you agree that, when hiring for a job, it would be reasonable to expect that the composition of the group of people hired to do that job would be *generally* reflective of the composition of the society the employers are drawing from?
No, it's not reasonable. Lots and lots of things can influence which people get which qualifications and into what talent pools they get. Unless by "society" y
your argument is BS. (Score:5, Insightful)
1) You're a member of the society you're doing business in.
Read the grandparent post. It simply asserted that a business should hire the best people regardless of sex or ethnicity. That's the society I want to live in, and I suspect most people would agree.
2) Building a reputation as somebody who doesn't care about diversity and inclusion is a good way to find yourself ignored or excluded by the portions of the population you've stated you don't care about. (See: boycott, negative public relations) You are shrinking your pool of available customers.
So you're arguing that Apple should base their hiring practices on meeting some quota of racial hires and gender hires for PR reasons? Sounds pretty messed up to me.
3) Ignoring other parts of the population who could be working for you limits your access to the best thinkers and workers, unless you really care to assert that the lack of minorities in the labor pool are *actually* a reflection of those minorities being dumber and lazier than all of your majority-hire candidates. You are shrinking your pool of available labor.
Read the grandparent post. It says nothing like what you are saying.
Building diversity in your business can be a competitive advantage because it's good public relations, and it's also going to give you access to a wider array of thoughts, ideas, and perspectives - all of which can make your business stronger.
But it's fine - if you don't make it your business, you can be sure your competitors will find a way to make it a competitive advantage. Eventually, you'll be faced with the choice of caring about diversity, or failing and shutting your doors.
Did you read the actual article summary? The breakdown was: "68% male and 32% female as of June 2016, a slight change from a 69%-31% split in 2015. Apple's race and ethnicity breakdown among U.S. employees is 19% Asian, 9% Black, 12% Hispanic, 2% Multiracial, 1% Other, and 56% White." To compare, the racial distribution of the US is 5% asian, 12% black, 16% hispanic, 2% multiracial, 1% other, and 64% white. So what exactly are you so upset about? Is it that Apple has slightly more asians and less hispanics? Fewer whites? Are you planning to complain until Apple's demographics match the US demographics exactly? What do you want?
Re: (Score:3)
Building diversity in your business can be a competitive advantage because it's good public relations, and it's also going to give you access to a wider array of thoughts, ideas, and perspectives - all of which can make your business stronger.
There are already different people in every single company that has more than a single employee. Unless you think that everyone gets the same thoughts, ideas, and perspectives, of course.
2) Building a reputation as somebody who doesn't care about diversity and inclusion is a good way to find yourself ignored or excluded by the portions of the population you've stated you don't care about. (See: boycott, negative public relations) You are shrinking your pool of available customers.
Are you seriously saying that, e.g., blacks won't covet iPhones for the sole reason of Apple's employee breakdown? That's like saying that I won't buy, e.g., Jamaican rum merely because my European compatriots weren't involved in its production. In reality, I don't fucking care who made it.
3) Ignoring other parts of the population who could be working for you limits your access to the best thinkers and workers, unless you really care to assert that the lack of minorities in the labor pool are *actually* a reflection of those minorities being dumber and lazier than all of your majority-hire candidates. You are shrinking your pool of available labor.
And of course you can present evid
Re:It's not a bad thing (Score:5, Informative)
Hire a moron today, to promote intellectual diversity. Make sure (s)he has lots of responsibility.
Re: It's not a bad thing (Score:4, Insightful)
I like how how because I'm white and another guy is white we don't offer two different diverse perspectives... As if all white people are the same. I'll just give you all a hint "white" isn't one group, it's full of a bunch of "diverse" groups. If I hired a South African white guy people would still complain I hired a white guy. We would be incredibly different with different points of view, culture, upbringing, and offerings but your narrow minded check box diversity gauge would explode. Bunch of freaking hypocrite racists.
Re: (Score:3)
Other things being equal, the amount of experience and viewpoint I share with a random white man is probably a lot larger than with a random black woman. It may not be, but if I had to bet on diversity of thought and experience I'd go with the black woman.
Re:It's not a bad thing (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe not but I think you just provided an example of what happens with more or less equal opportunity.
The NBA is interested in the highest possible basketball talent. In the US, if you're good at sports, chances are you'll be noticed by the time you hit your teens. If your background is disadvantaged you have a pretty good shot of "making it out" as an elite athlete because colleges will notice you in time to avoid falling into the stereotypical poverty traps (gangs, drugs, etc). Basically, pro sports has
Re: (Score:2)
Google can also help our society transition away from the contemporary university system and into computer based learning / IA teachers / individual learning / wh
Re: (Score:3)
The NBA is interested in the highest possible basketball talent. In the US, if you're good at sports, chances are you'll be noticed by the time you hit your teens. If your background is disadvantaged you have a pretty good shot of "making it out" as an elite athlete because colleges will notice you in time to avoid falling into the stereotypical poverty traps (gangs, drugs, etc). Basically, pro sports has a pretty good system in place to find the best candidates no matter where they come from so it's likely black men aren't over represented, they are mostly the best possible candidates out of the entire US.
There's also the point that, for some cultures, "making it out" due to becoming a sports pro, is seen as cool. Trying to "make it out" by actually working hard in school, getting a job early, gaining experience, etc.. is looked down upon. In fact, for the latter, in some cases the person will be bullied and derided for doing that.
It's not just on the colleges/businesses to recruit. These kinds of attitudes need to change.
It's part of why you also never hear cries to diversify or balance out things like p
Re: (Score:3)
Sadly, Chris Rock said it best when he pointed out how fucked up it was that, in the neighborhood he grew up in, you got more respect coming back from prison than you did coming back from college.
That's a problem that can't be fixed from the outside, no matter how many scholarships you offer.
Re: (Score:2)
Sport is dominated by people with unusual biology, and in the case of the NBA the nature of the game happens to favour very tall people. That's not negatively discriminating against anyone based on their race, only their ability to do the job.
Unless you are saying that white males are simply more intelligent or somehow more suited to working at Apple (not just in engineering, in all parts of the company) I don't think you can really argue that there is a reason other than bias for the numbers. Of course, th
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But why is that a problem for Google to solve? Is it the NBA's problem to ascertain and to solve the problem regarding the over representation of black males in the NBA? Should teams start hiring less qualified under-represented populations to make up for the disparity?
Hilarious. I bet you are the guy who always picks the black guy first to play basketball on your team - unlike the NBA, who picks based on ability.
Re: (Score:3)
Its good if a business gives something back to society. But they shouldn't be obliged to. They are obliged to pay taxes, that's their part of helping society. The taxes then are used for things like keeping the country safe or building/maintaining roads etc.
Also, why is a company that employs less white men more "giving back to society" than one that employs more white men? I mean the number of employees is still the same. Or do you indicate that in order to have the same level of quality for their product,
Re: It's not a bad thing (Score:3)
Roads are economically stupid. Got it.
Re: (Score:2)
They should give back to the society by funding black americans scholarships in tech schools (or just encouraging black students), not by hiring underqualified black men and women.
Re: (Score:2)
It's irrelevant.
I only care about if everyone had the same opportunity as everyone else. If there's a broken piece there, great; let's fix it and make sure everyone has the same opportunity to excel. I'm not seeing any system bias, btw. Sure, I see the symptoms all over the place, but I don't see the cause. It's beyond absurd to attempt to craft a fix to a symptom; it's the economic equivalent of homeopathy.
That the opportunities exist but are not being exploited does not indicate any action on my part
Re: (Score:2)
The factors that affect that talent pool are further up in the pipeline than the point where Apple, Google, or the like draw, upon it or have control. Even as a freshman, my computer science classes were probably about 80% male and mostly white and asian. And those were the 100-level classes that people in other majors took as electives. At the 300 and 400 level, where it was all CS and engineering majors, it was probably 90-95% male, and all white and asian with about a 50/50 split. That's the talent p
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, I ask: Why is that? I didn't see the "no girls allowed" sign in front of my university, and while some profs were quite the oddball, I don't remember one saying he doesn't want non-crackers in his lecture. So what keeps them from studying computer science? I know for a fact that there is no law that dictates only white male people may enroll.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:It's not a bad thing (Score:4, Insightful)
This just in: People are assholes. Guess what, happens to men too. Suck it up and learn to deal with it, because it will happen to you a lot of times in your lifetime. You're too tall, too small, too fat, too skinny, too ugly, too beautiful... it doesn't matter, there will always be someone who will think differently of you just for what you look like, how you walk or talk or just how you're standing on the corner. Welcome to the real world. Just today I had to "endure" that I was told to my face by a woman that she doesn't want to stand near me 'cause men with beards make her uncomfortable. So I should now complain about "microaggression"? Maybe force her to stand next to me to make a point?
What the FUCK is going on here? When did we turn into a bunch of crybabies who throw a tantrum because someone said a bad word?
Re: (Score:3)
I'm a white man, and according to recent developments I'm in the ONLY group that you may make fun of anymore. And it's ok. It's ok to be racist towards me, it's ok to be sexist towards me. That's socially acceptable, because I'm "privileged". Every time I'm asked to check my privilege I try but for fuck's sake, I can't find it! What's that privilege? To be in the last group that may be the butt of a joke? If so, you can have it back.
And by the way, I actually do belong to a minority. Two, to be exact. And I
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have come to a similar conclusion.
I discovered long ago that only a fool learns on their own dime. Also, every company has different needs, culture, procedures and technical requirements which need to be learned on the job anyway.
Though, knowing this, it does beg the question, why isn't there more diversity?
Re: (Score:3)
That is not to imply that racist people don't exist
On the contrary, I see lots of racist people in this thread alone - like all the ones who are insisting that white men only get hired because they're white men and never because they're actually qualified.
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe they should have good prospects of benefiting from working hard and studying more. Anyone remember the story about the rich guy who had an impulse and told a bunch of minority students that he'd pay their way through college and set them up for success? Grades went up pretty much immediately.
Re: (Score:2)
White dudes more often than not get chosen over women and people of color more often than not because they are white.
White dudes are the only people who legally cannot be chosen just because of their race or gender. There are outreach, quota, and affirmative action programs whose explicit, specific goals are choosing non-white, non-male people in every single aspect of American culture.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Eliminating oppression is indeed the goal. The real problem is to find out what is de facto oppression and how to end it. It turns out to be awfully difficult, and more privileged people will argue hard that they got where they were by their own efforts and there is no discrimination. Privilege is no guarantee of anything, but I suspect that a black woman with my drive, determination, and intellect would still wind up worse off than I am.
Applications? (Score:3)
I'm curious what percent of applications come in from minorities comparatively, and what the reasons are for declining those who are declined. I think it's important for the debate/argument (in either direction) to know how many people of each minority are TRYING to work there, compared to which are accepted, as well as the reasoning behind those decisions and the qualifications of each.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's also important to know what Apple is doing to encourage people from minorities to apply, e.g. by having flexible working and good policies towards women (think maternity leave), and by sending reps to colleges in disadvantaged areas rather than just MIT and the other top ranking ones. They need to spread the net as widely as possible.
Re: (Score:2)
Lucky you. I washed dishes for my first computer and did the modem thing at 2AM when the rest of the family was asleep.
Complete non-issue today. You can get decent computers for free as well as fat bandwidth wireless phone plans. No excuses left and the demographics haven't changed, it's cultural.
I think (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
What evidence do you have that they are hiring under qualified (generally) minorities?
Did you notice that they are putting very large amounts of money into education?
Does Apple have a quota?
What would be considered diverse (Score:3)
I am just curious, but according to the census blacks make up 9.5% to 13% depending on which survey you use. So at what point will a company be considered diverse ? When the % of blacks they hire exceed the national % present or when they are equally represented with all other ethnicities, which would put them at a much greater than national average representation.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if people are advocating busing in people from remote locations to "fix" the balance?
That's next.
Re: (Score:2)
The other creative policy idea is to mandate affordable housing in any new redevelopment or larger building project in all wealthy areas.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Poverty will just take over as ever more people get full gov support to move in.
Re: What would be considered diverse (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Either way people will complain that it isn't representative.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not about hitting any particular numbers, at most they are just an indication that there is a lack of bias in hiring. In that sense Apple is one of the better ones, approaching the make up of the general population. Facebook is pretty far from it though, so they know that there is some issue there.
And the issue can't be just that there are no qualified or good black candidates available, because Apple is managing to hire them.
Job security (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I knew a guy who did something similar, tried to get laid off so he could get his 15 years severance pay. They just kept refusing until he quit out of frustration and they didn't have to pay anything out. Anecdotes like that are meaningless.
Also, Apple's software was shit long before they started trying to improve diversity. Look at iTunes. If anything, it's got slightly better in recently years, and they killed off some of the worst bits like QuickTime.
Re: (Score:2)
Improvements (Score:2)
err..or were you saying that Apple has become a little better at hiring people that will make it look more Politically Correct?
Asians remain massively over represented (Score:2)
So we are forced to conclude that it's not a diversity issue, it's a failure to find enough of the candidates to tick the boxes to keep the social justice warriors off your backs
In 2010 David Cameron appointed a lot of female cabinet ministers in the UK. A year later a lot of them were sacked in his first reshuffle, and the papers were strangely quiet because they KNEW that they'd proved incompetent...
All in Retail? (Score:4, Interesting)
Hmm. I wonder what Apple could have that neither Facebook nor Google possess in the US? What might possibly account for the discrepancy between Apple and other big tech companies? Oh yeah, probably the 30,000 retail workers (out of a total of 43,000) [wikipedia.org] in their Apple stores. I wonder what the breakdown would be for the technical jobs that Apple relies upon for the products those retail workers are hawking? I'm guessing that it'd probably be in line with what Facebook and Google are posting.
Good for Apple for being more diverse that Google, I guess, but I'd bet it's a hell of a lot easier to broaden overall diversity when you essentially require a Starbucks level of skill for the majority of your workforce.
Re: (Score:2)
No need to wonder, just go to the actual report [apple.com] and they break it down into tech, non-tech, leadership, retail and retail leadership. Tech is by far the worst for gender equality, but at least non-tech and leadership are improving quite a bit. Seems like there are very few people of colour in leadership roles though.
Their claim that they have achieved pay equality is interesting but not backed up by numbers.
If diversity (Score:2)
Diversity is valuable (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not seeing any proof that the feel-good things you are saying are true.
It seems to me that hugely successfu tech companies here in USA have whites and 20% asian (or so) working on the ideas of a "lone wolf" type. Where is the need for this "diversity" of which you speak? Why upset winning strategy? Because it makes you feel good?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Racism is institutional use of race to limit certain demographics access or equal treatment under the law.
Incorrect. Here's the definition:
Racism: noun - The belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
This is what you said:
[Non-white diversity] can benefit a corporation more than having a large group of cookie-cutter [white] people who have all had nearly identical life experiences and all come from very similar culture.
You've rejected a group of people from a particular race under the assumption that they have less to offer than other races. That's very much in line with the actual definition of racism -- you know, the whole "especially so as to distinguish [a specific ra
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not negative. You are a racist.
Racism doesn't require a particular result, it requires a mindset -- which you quite clearly possess. Now, I can agree that whites have not been rejected, by and large, from most companies, probably because those companies aren't controlled by people like you. That's not relevant to the position you're advocating, though, which is a racist position to take. You racist.
Re: (Score:2)
I disagree.
First of all, you're splitting hairs between racism, bigotry and prejudice. Confining "racism" to institutional environments is far too narrow a definition. Furthermore, ALL of those practices are fundamentally based on stereotyping. Why would anyone think ill of or judge a person they never met unless it was based on stereotyping?
Describing a group of white employees as "cookie cutter" and assuming your work force is not "diverse" because they share a common skin color(and gender?) is entirel
That's not "progress" (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple Makes Slight Progress On Diversity...
Any time ethnicity is a factor in hiring decisions, it's not "progress," it's a social regression. It's the opposite of what Dr. King wanted; namely, a society where people "will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
It's time to take back the work "progressive" from those who use apply it to regressive policies.
Just combat poverty and bad education in general. (Score:5, Insightful)
Any sort of "quota" is awful and racist, because it paints the worker as "a guy that needed a hand from the HR to be hired", and his actual merits get downplayed in the process.
Now if you for example subsidie GOOD schools on the poorer cities/neighbors, you give em an equal chance to get the jobs fairly.
Also if there was any sort of systemic racism in place, it would be favoring asians rather than white people.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, asian people generally get paid more and have better jobs than white people.
So if that social justice bullshit of "an invisible hand manipulating everything to make sure minorities get shafted" was a thing, it would be favoring the asians over whites as well.
Argh. (Score:2)
Fuck putting "diversity" ahead of reality.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
At least in the South, there has traditionally been a "one drop" rule, wherein anyone with "one drop" of non-White in them was considered not white. In Virginia, we had the Pocahontas Exception for those descended from the marriage of John Rolfe and Pocahontas.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously not an academic or even really an opinion source, but a funny commentary on that...
College Humor video for you. [youtu.be] Enjoy
Re: (Score:2)
I couldn't help but instantly think of this [wikimedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hiring Indians might be good for diversity
No, actually when you read diversity reports like TFA, Indians and other Asians are counted as "white" to make sure that the diversity numbers appear low.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it's the ONLY class of people left you can mock, belittle and make fun of. We just have to find a stereotype that can be exploited.
Re: (Score:2)
But with no marketable skill. Though, I think that's not relevant in this time and age.
Any chance we can turn him into a woman? Ohh, he would be a trans-woman, that would be perfect!
Re: (Score:2)
Where have you been hiding those past 5-10 years?
Talent, marketable skills or an education that prepares you for the job you're trying to get is so last decade. Today, what matters is that you belong to a disadvantaged group. Or rather, to a group that perceives itself as disadvantaged and is loud and obnoxious.
Seriously, if you have enough money to dye your hair in some neon color and have enough money to blow on a vanity degree in something as marketable as "gender studies", your claim to being disadvanta
Re: (Score:2)
Michael J. Fox tried that [youtube.com].
Re: (Score:2)
What? You nuts, who in their sane mind would wanna get rid of their customer base?
Re: (Score:2)
> Why are we limiting ourselves to just skin colors and ethnic background. Are other
> species really being represented in high tech? I mean why are we not hiring Chimpanzees.
> Studies have actually shown the Chimp mind actually has better problem solving
> abilities than the Human brain. Sure they are 7 times as strong as we are and
> can easily rip a human into shreds. That's not the point: it's all about the diversity.
I'm glad you asked. Consider "Primate Programming Inc". http://www.newtechu [newtechusa.com]