No, the employees signed up for a union which by law must do the negotiating. Apple even warned them this would happen. Apple does not want unions so there will be two classes of employees with different employment contracts/benefits/pay etc.
The union could negotiate a 4 year contract and Apple the next day could double all non union store pay and union employees would not be able to get that contractually. They have very little leverage. That is why most unions are in the supply chain (shipping/manufacturing) not at the end of it (sales/marketing/business jobs)
The negotiation needs to be done in "good faith" though and sanctions can be imposed if it's determined not to be so. Offering benefits to non-union workers and not offering similar benefits to the union for negotiation could be seen as "bad faith" bargaining, which is actually against the law.
Similarly, negotiating a contract with the union and the next day offering non-union workers much better terms can be dangerous for Apple as it can be interpreted as "bad faith" bargaining.
IMHO Apple is going to offer similar benefits to the union unless they have a pretty good reason to defend the decision not to, e.g. because the union already successfully bargained other kinds of benefits which Apple does not normally offer to its workers.
Most unions are in the supply chain because those positions tend to have much less bargaining power as individual workers. You don't need a union if you already have the bargaining power as individual: you need it if you lack individual bargaining power and need collective bargaining power to compensate.
Ideally, every worker should not need a union given their individual bargaining power being sufficient, but in reality it's not so.
