Apple Separates Human Resources Role From Retail, Adds New Chief People Officer

[anthogag]

Why do I get the feeling that you did last Sunday's NYTimes crossword?

Learn a new word and use it in a sentence. 😂

 

[Rafagon]

Why don't you go to entomology online and search for the word like I did.

Don't drag insects into this!

 

[smithrh]

Chief = Head Boss
Chef != Cook; but Chef = Restaurant Head Boss

There's a lot more to that word than apparently many of you know.

 

[coolfactor]

In response, Microsoft has hired Carl iPad as Head of Persons.

My thoughts exactly! 🤣

 

[klasma]

I'd assume it only becomes an issue if it is used in a derogatory way aimed at Native Americans/Indigenous peoples since the word itself was not (as far as I know) coined for racist or offensive purposes.

It’s used as an adjective here, not as a noun. Otherwise it would have to be “chiefess”.

 

[chouseworth]

In the old days, of which I was a part, Human Resources used to be called Personnel. I'm reminded of Clint Eastwood playing the Harry Callahan role in a 70s movie of the Dirty Harry series. He was being suspended from active duty and sent to Personnel until further notice. His reaction? "Personnel? Personnel is for a__holes." My sentiments exactly, as if anything, it has gotten even worse since then. Good luck to Ms. Surface. Tim will have her on speed dial.

 

[coffeemilktea]

I'm so glad this Carol person got a job at Apple and not Microsoft, since considering her last name... I feel like that could have led to some confusion 🤭

 

[klasma]

She will be hot then.

Also multitouch.

 

[coolfactor]

Nope. It's racist to use the word if it's not related to indigenous groups - English has other perfectly good words to use. Derogatory is in the eye of the beholders too. In this case, it's low key appropriation. Chief isn't meant to be used in a business sense - it has a reeeeeal specific meaning to the people the word was taken from. And when I say 'taken', I mean 'murdered'. This is why it's just the done thing now not to use the language. Apple are dumb.

I'm chiefly concerned about your narrow, limited viewpoint on this topic. The word wasn't "taken" from anyone. It originated from Old French "Caput", which means "head", and evolved over hundreds of years.

Indigenous groups didn't speak English, so how could they have had the word "Chief"? That name was given "to" them.

 

[ThunderSkunk]

We can still use the word “Chief”? Just askin

You can do anything you want. There might be some consequences downstream, but, sure.

I havent heard anyone in our small band or in our greater tribe ever raise an objection about anyone using the word chief to describe a chief ever. Some other uncool slurs, sure, but this isn’t one & doesn’t belittle or demean anyone. Nor is anyone upset that parts of the Great Law Of Peace got written into the Constitution of this land, nor that people all over 7 continents also like to go Canoeing, or, you know, live here too. The world is just always in a state of flux, that’s the way the life is.

…just read the rest of the thread. Looks like someone didn’t scrape their boots off before they entered this discussion & now there’s $#!+stains everywhere. I’m out.

 

[lairdo]

Why does MacRumors always use the exact same image for anything store related? (And this article is not only about the store come to think about it.) Sorry, slightly sidebar complaint, but if no one complains, nothing changes!

Probably a better question is why MacRumors takes 10% of a MacBook Pro's CPU in safari?

 

[JapanApple]

meaningless news. Nobody cares about how PC workers' skin color they are. I buy what I like! It Is not based on who they look like or what they are. To me, the money makes from investment The apple stock..........Irrelevant BS.

 

[BorderingOn]

Nope. It's racist to use the word if it's not related to indigenous groups - English has other perfectly good words to use. Derogatory is in the eye of the beholders too. In this case, it's low key appropriation. Chief isn't meant to be used in a business sense - it has a reeeeeal specific meaning to the people the word was taken from. And when I say 'taken', I mean 'murdered'. This is why it's just the done thing now not to use the language. Apple are dumb.

ORIGIN OF CHIEF
C13: from Old French, from Latin caput head

I know we’re rewriting the dictionaries, but…

 

[BorderingOn]

Very sad to see comments like this. Is this some sort of knee jerk response?
1) This is not a Native American word. So far as I know it has not even been adopted widely into Native American languages. The word has etymology in Latin and French and had been in use in the English language for at least 200 years before English speakers arrived in the americas.

2) You know there is a related adverb as well, "chiefly"- how does that fit into your linguistic view?

3) If anything, it could be racist to use it /IN/ a Native American contexts. For instance, it would be wildly inappropriate to call a Native American person you just met (or even knew well) "Hey, Chief..." Just as it would be very suspicious to say "hey, Jew" or "hey Sheik" - It's not necessary (to call out one's ethnicity or culture) and it would be hard to envision a context in which that conveyed positive intentions. But at the same time, if Native American communities accept the use of the word "Chief" to describe tribal leaders, then that is an appropriate English word to use in that specific context.

4) It is without a doubt ok and advisable to continue to use the English word "chief" within all the original and ongoing definitions and meanings of the word- Such as in "Chief of Operations at...", or "CEO", or even "OK Chief" (to a boss figure). This has nothing to do with anything Native American or any ethnicity.

Ultimately, I really don't understand these lazy attacks on language. While many, many words can be used in a way that is intended to be purposefully hurtful or derogatory, far fewer are inherently so. It is really important to understand the etymology and all modern use cases of specific language. I consider myself very liberal minded, and I find this /specific/ type of "wokeness" really troubling. There are so many things (which often take real effort) that we could be doing to improve societal or systemic issues related to racial bias, and socio-economic disparities, but we have people who pat themselves on the back for things like "banning" non derogatory words. It creates distracting noise and a false sense of participation on the issues at hand- all energy and effort which could instead be doing actual good. I have a friend who tried to tell me the word "master" was banned. It's wild. Of course we shouldn't use that word in context of a "master-slave relationship", but this friend, whom I still love, really thought we could no longer say someone was a "master painter" or had "mastered a skill" or label a "master hard drive" in context of multiple copies- it is misguided and destructive and distracting. Look at all the time I wasted writing this thing -which I think should be pretty common sense! I could have been doing something much more useful and progressive with this time spent!

g\

This brand of “wokeness“ is infiltrating HR at large companies. I can tell you that the word “master” is indeed banned where I work. It’s an IT shop. There is an entire list of words that need to be changed in documentation. Insanity.

 

[aperfectcircle]

This brand of “wokeness“ is infiltrating HR at large companies. I can tell you that the word “master” is indeed banned where I work. It’s an IT shop. There is an entire list of words that need to be changed in documentation. Insanity.

Reminds me of one of my colleagues suggesting it would be offensive to say “Merry Christmas” in our company communications. He shut his mouth rather quickly when I brought up the comms we’d sent out celebrating Ramadan, Diwali, Hanukkah and the Lunar New Year. I’m glad to out of corporate HR now.

 

[zachz]

This brand of “wokeness“ is infiltrating HR at large companies. I can tell you that the word “master” is indeed banned where I work. It’s an IT shop. There is an entire list of words that need to be changed in documentation. Insanity.

It’s really crazy hearing things like this… unbelievable almost (I 100% believe you, but who would’ve thought we’d come to this).

I once said to a coworker that we’re treated like slaves and oh boy did I get yelled and lecture at about how offensive, rude, and racist I was. Maybe it wasn’t the most appropriate thing to say, but when management is expecting you to work hours after your shift without pay while they have no issue taking multiple vacations, days off, short days, etc and then subsequently yelling at us regular employees that we are the reason sales quotas aren’t met… it sure feels that way

 

[lairdo]

Look at all the time I wasted writing this thing -which I think should be pretty common sense! I could have been doing something much more useful and progressive with this time spent!

g\

Actually, I think your response was extremely well written and clear and addressed the points raised earlier either in true concern or quick reaction without a full picture. So, if this counts for anything, thank you for your time in writing it up. I found the framing useful and one I will emulate as needed.

Healthy dialog and discourse. Remember when that was common?

 

[SSDGUY]

Apparently so, since they are in the Super Bowl. And the one thing that bugs me is why are they still allowed to do the chant and tomahawk gestures when the Braves got in trouble??

Anything can offend anyone in a culture in love with being offended.

 

[Naildown]

I'm waiting for male and female plugs and connectors to be banned. America, the world is laughing at you.

 

[fmillion]

which is known as Human Resources at most companies. That team at Apple is designed to help Apple connect with and care for its employees, handling talent development, recruiting, employee relations, benefits, compensation, inclusion and diversity, Apple University, and more.

Sorry, wrong. The role of human resources at any company is to protect the company, often from the employees themselves.

I'm sure Apple says their "people" department does all of these things, and yes, HR does handle things like benefits and compensation and diversity and such, just like most HR departments say. But most HR departments will tell you they're always there for you, the employee, which is one of the biggest, most often repeated yet accepted and believed lies in corporate settings.

HR is not your friend. They are not there for you. They are there for the COMPANY. If they're ever forced to choose, the COMPANY will ALWAYS come first.

If HR was truly there for the employees, nobody would need unions. Unions exist to attempt to keep HR accountable to that lie they tell. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, but like an HOA in a nice neighborhood, if HR was there first, they're going to do everything they can to make sure they always hold the upper hand.

 

[richinaus]

Anything can offend anyone in a culture in love with being offended.

I find it offensive that people find non offensive things, offensive.

 

[VaruLV]

Should be Chief Woke Officer instead, after all, not all identify themselves as humans.

 

[KENESS]

I'd assume it only becomes an issue if it is used in a derogatory way aimed at Native Americans/Indigenous peoples since the word itself was not (as far as I know) coined for racist or offensive purposes.

Thank you, a thoughtful and lucid answer. YOU WILL BE DESTROYED!

 

[laptech]

So Apple have just basically admitted that they did not have a specific job position that is extremely important to companies in the corporate world which is Human Resources or in some places referred to as 'Personnel Department'. Not very professional of Apple.

 

[entropys]

HR is usually a separate corporate group not aligned with other corporate hierarchy portions. Should never had the retail management also doing the HR role. That would be like two different company organizations. Now its what it should be, reporting directly to Apple CEO.

Disagree. Once HR isn’t working side by side with service delivery they turn inward, building empires built on mountains of reports everyone else has to complete, launching great and noble campaigns, not caring about the purpose of an organisation and doing nothing useful, in fact harming the poor benighted saps still trying to stay on mission.