Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Apple

Apple Bans Pay Equity Slack Channel (theverge.com) 84

Posted by BeauHD from the employee-activism dept.
Apple has barred employees from creating a Slack channel to discuss pay equity. The Verge reports: A member of the employee relations team, Apple's version of HR, said that while the topic was "aligned with Apple's commitment to pay equity," it did not meet the company's Slack Terms of Use. "Slack channels are provided to conduct Apple business and must advance the work, deliverables, or mission of Apple departments and teams," the employee relations representative told employees. The company's rules for the in-office chat app say that "Slack channels for activities and hobbies not recognized as Apple Employee clubs or Diversity Network Associations (DNAs) aren't permitted and shouldn't be created."

But that rule has not been evenly enforced. Currently, Apple employees have popular Slack channels to discuss #fun-dogs (more than 5,000 members), #gaming (more than 3,000 members), and #dad-jokes (more than 2,000 members). On August 18th, the company approved a channel called #community-foosball. The cat and dog channels are not part of official clubs, and all of these channels were specifically created to talk about non-work activities. "Discussing pay equity is a protected activity under federal, state, and local law," says employment attorney Vincent P. White. "Everyone agrees on that. For them to try and impair employees' ability to discuss pay equity and diversity in the workplace is a clear cut act of retaliation."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Bans Pay Equity Slack Channel More

Apple Bans Pay Equity Slack Channel

Comments Filter:

  • big union issues and if you get fired you can sue (Score:3, Informative)

    by Joe_Dragon ( 2206452 ) on Tuesday August 31, 2021 @07:23PM (#61750113)

    big union issues and if you get fired you can sue apple.

    • They aren't a union shop. Also, Apple uses slack? It isn't end-to-end encrypted. Slack can probably read those messages.. Insane, given their secrecy...

      • They might be big enough that Slack let them purchase / spin up their own instance in house. I'm sure they could funnel a few million at them each year to keep a private Slack server.

    • Those laws have been gutted (Score:4, Informative)

      by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Tuesday August 31, 2021 @09:28PM (#61750425)
      they might exist on paper but they don't exist in practice. If all else fails the lawsuit will go up to SCOTUS where the pro-corporate majority will declare whatever they have to to hand Apple a win.

      Moderates & the left really don't realize what happened when Trump won. We got 3 rather extreme Supreme Court justices. One of which, Barret, literally couldn't name the 5 freedoms gauranted by the 1st amendment but is somehow sitting on the highest court in the land. Give her staggering incompetence you've got to ask how/why she was seated. And if the answer isn't corruption you either haven't been paying attention or you purposefully blinded yourself.

  • I know how this works (Score:3)

    by Len ( 89493 ) on Tuesday August 31, 2021 @07:25PM (#61750115)
    As soon as the company closes down a Slack channel, an employee creates a Discord server for them to discuss whatever they're not supposed to discuss.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by PPH ( 736903 )

      an employee creates a Discord server

      A Usenet group.

      [ducking and running]

    • Now *there's* a phrase for the social media age: "When God closes a Slack channel, his flock creates a Discord server."

      • Now *there's* a phrase for the social media age: "When God closes a Slack channel, his flock creates a Discord server."

        God is dead. I assume he was buried in one of his famous black turtleneck sweaters.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Cederic ( 9623 )

      Which is perfectly fine and indeed the correct way to do things.

      Conspire against your employer using non-work resources.

      If Apple retaliate against people using external resources to discuss pay at the company then there would be an issue.

    • I wonder why Apple has a policy on what channels can be created? - they don't pay per channel after all. Saying you can't have a channel means people talking on a server you can't control, can't look at and are not invited to, and doesn't have all the same "keep it respectful" rules you have on your own services.

    • I don't know what Apple's policy is, but I've worked at far less secretive companies that handed out reprimands for violating anything in the employee handbook. One of those was using an external chat service that IT did not approve was a risk to "security".

    • Still a win for apple. It's off the easily-discoverable central chat service that every employee has to have access to, and devolves to being word-of-mouth (which for the most part must be in person, if they censor mention of it on slack and everyone's at home).

    • IRC! (Score:2)

      by antdude ( 79039 )

      And then Element, IRC, etc. ;)

  • Against the law? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by idontusenumbers ( 1367883 ) on Tuesday August 31, 2021 @07:29PM (#61750125)

    "I'm no lawyer but..." Isn't this against the law? Isn't discussing working conditions and pay a federally protected action? https://www.worker.gov/concern... [worker.gov]

    • Re:Against the law? (Score:4, Informative)

      by HanzoSpam ( 713251 ) on Tuesday August 31, 2021 @07:33PM (#61750141)

      I don't see where they're telling them not to discuss it. They're just telling them they aren't going to use the Slack account Apple is paying for to do it.

      • If folks are working remote, then slack is the 'break room'. Apple pays for the office folks might normally work in, discussing there would definitely be protected.

        • No, it is not. Slack is a work tool.
          • Comment removed based on user account deletion

            • Re: (Score:3)

              by Lehk228 ( 705449 )
              it would come down to a determination of fact, applying the "softball" rule, if the employees could otherwise talk about non-work thingsa like their kid's softball team, then the company cannot prohibit discussion of employment conditions and other concerted activity. if it is legitimately restricted to use for business proposes they don't have to allow non-work discussions just because they are concerted activity.

          • Re: (Score:3)

            by msauve ( 701917 )
            Uh. OK. They have channels about work dogs and work foosball.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by rossz ( 67331 )

            They allow channels that are clearly not work related, so your argument is invalid.

      • Though they can't discuss it in person either since everyone's at home. And if Apple is displaying a willingness to kick talk of non-work topics that might be related to working conditions off slack, there's no guarantee it'll be possible to even communicate that there's another way to communicate (an unofficial discord/signal/telegram group say)

    • "you have a right to organize", means you have the right to create a union. Apple is NOT unionized, therefore workers have zero union worker protections. People, this is exactly why you should create and join unions. Worker protection, pay, benefits, are all things you enjoy with unions. There's a reason corporations have been attacking them over the past 100 years.
      • Apple and itâ(TM)s products would not exist if unions were destroying the company. Just look at GM and Ford compared to Tesla. Unions destroy shareholder value and limit innovation.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by dgatwood ( 11270 )

          No, unions have approximately nothing to do with innovation, at least so long as your union doesn't have strict rules about who can do what (which prevents the sorts of cross-functional learning that can be a major source of innovation).

          What does kill innovation is being an established player in an oligopoly. That's why Apple basically stopped innovating after about 2007. The changes they've made to the iPhone line have basically been just keeping up with the rest of the industry, and they've done almost

    • It is, and I think it's good that it is happening. However, I doubt the law requires the company itself to provide the platform for the discussion.

      • I believe the law is that the employer can't prevent employees discussing it within the office, and for a company with remote workers, Slack is close enough to 'the office' that it's at least in the gray area if not solidly in the protected area.

    • You can't punish employees for discussing it. But you're not obligated to provide them a platform for their discussion.

  • Just Need a Better Euphemism (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Kunedog ( 1033226 ) on Tuesday August 31, 2021 @07:36PM (#61750155)

    The company's rules for the in-office chat app say that "Slack channels for activities and hobbies not recognized as Apple Employee clubs or Diversity Network Associations (DNAs) aren't permitted and shouldn't be created."

    Just come up with a fancier name for "pay equity" and maybe they'll approve it, like they've already done here for segregation.

  • Apple is orders of magnitude more controlling and enforcing its walled garden doctrine. As long as it is not blatantly provably illegal Apple will commit any act. And all these employees are actively benefiting by the pay and benefits that come from that kind of ruthless pursuit of profits.

    Now suddenly they want to be exempted from the very same draconian system of controls they help enforce over rest of the world? Live by the sword, die by the sword.

  • Hmm... Interesting. (Score:3)

    by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 ) on Tuesday August 31, 2021 @07:38PM (#61750167)

    while the topic was "aligned with Apple's commitment to pay equity," it did not meet the company's Slack Terms of Use. "Slack channels are provided to conduct Apple business and must advance the work, deliverables, or mission of Apple departments and teams,"

    So, equitable pay, and/or discussions of, doesn't help/advance *any* of those things?

    • If they have a commitment to pay equity, then just fucking do it. There is nothing preventing them from actually implementing it. It turns out they just say that for the PR (surprise surprise).

      And the vague slack policy is another Apple forte. They absolutely love selective enforcement.

  • The last sentence, that it's an act of retaliation, is just bizarre and unfounded.

    That discussing the topic is a protected activity under labour laws should not mean that Apple has to provide (or even allow) a place on Slack to do it.

    • I think Mr. White is trying to get famous. And is an asshat. They have to do something to the employer in order for it to be possible for the employer to retaliate. Complaining to a peer doesn't count, it has to be lodged with management or the EEOC before there's something retaliable.

  • Don't Use Company Resources... (Score:3)

    by eepok ( 545733 ) on Tuesday August 31, 2021 @08:00PM (#61750219) Homepage

    Pro-tip guys: Don't use company resources to discuss, scheme, plan, or otherwise encourage any actions that could be seen to be detrimental to the company. They will always find a way to legally shut it down.

    • But didn't you see Apple's official statement that they are committed to pay equity? How could that be detrimental to the company? :-)

  • Every one of those employees have ample opportunity to post and discuss whatever they want elsewhere. They should do so, rather than expecting Apple to provide its resources for them to do so.

  • It's ok (Score:2, Informative)

    by theendlessnow ( 516149 ) *
    When we found out the channel was created by a woman, we figured it was ok to shut it down.
  • I honestly don't blame Apple for doing this. Try to remember that it's so "in" to the point where you'll anger people if you don't officially support it, but actually means you should pay people the same regardless of their skills, experience, responsibilities and education. Under it you you either have to over-pay less skilled workers or under-pay skilled workers.

    It's totally antithetical to the concept of equality that you have to at least pay lip service to if you want to come off as a progressive com
  • "For them to try and impair employees' ability to discuss pay equity and diversity in the workplace is a clear cut act of retaliation."

    Well, here are definitions of "retaliate".

    Make an attack or assault in return for a similar attack.

    Like for like; especially evil for evil

    Repay (an injury or insult) in kind.

    "The EEO laws prohibit punishing job applicants or employees for asserting their rights to be free from employment discrimination including harassment" https://www.eeoc.gov/retaliati... [eeoc.gov]

    The EE

  • I'm surprised Apple didn't just leave it running and monitor the conversations to figure out who to sack.

      Shutting down the server did not do anything but cause all of the 'wrongthink'/'crimespeak' to move to where the overlords can't see.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by ebvwfbw ( 864834 )

      I'm surprised Apple didn't just leave it running and monitor the conversations to figure out who to sack.

        Shutting down the server did not do anything but cause all of the 'wrongthink'/'crimespeak' to move to where the overlords can't see.

      They're Apple! They can track you anywhere! Your attempts to get around it are futile! (Sound of Vicent Price laughing)

      • I'm sure Apple, and other big companies have paid informants (employees) who participate in forums like the one in question.

        What did Apple really accomplish here except making themselves look bad?

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close