Apple Updates Corporate Bylaws on Diversity Following Criticism Over Lack of Female Leaders

[whitedragon101]

So you don't think in the long run women aren't equal to men? Seriously?

----------



So what should they do to make sure women get onto boards?

I think you're mistaking population numbers with potential candidates.

For example I did a Computer Science Degree. As is typical there were 4 women and 125 men. Now assuming no difference between men and women the chance that any individual you select will be the top of the class is 1/129 or 0.007% . The chance that the individual will be a man is 97% and the chance it will be a woman is 3%. The workplace reflects those odds.


ps
We all thought it sucked that choosing maths or engineering type subjects meant almost no women on our course. My girlfriend is a pharmacist and if you look at the numbers on her course in Ireland each year (M/F) and look at the senior pharmacists, yep more women on the course, more women than men senior pharmacists.

 

[WestonHarvey1]

Seems like a good first approximation...

It's a terribly naive one. There's a large percentage of women that will always want to have kids and stay home with them for at least a significant chunk of their working years. This means there's a large number of women who will always be less likely than men to be on Apple's board. You will never reach 50/50.

 

[Eraserhead]

I think you're mistaking population numbers with potential candidates.

For example I did a Computer Science Degree. As is typical there were 4 women and 125 men. Now assuming no difference between men and women the chance that any individual will be the top of the class is 1/129 or 0.007% . The chance that the individual will be a man is 97% and the chance it will be a woman is 3%. The workplace reflects those odds.


ps
We all thought it sucked that choosing maths or engineering type subjects meant almost no women on our course.

Agreed. But the reason I said "long run" was because presumably that divide will disappear as sexism is reduced.

 

[MacVault]

Solution - GENDER MODIFICATION!

Just force sex changes on half the male board members

 

[Boston007]

It's a terribly naive one. There's a large percentage of women that will always want to have kids and stay home with them for at least a significant chunk of their working years. This means there's a large number of women who will always be less likely than men to be on Apple's board. You will never reach 50/50.

Thank you, FINALLY someone who GETS IT

 

[gnasher729]

I'm not sure about this. In principle, sure, I'll vote for more diversity.

But be careful, Apple! Put more females in the boardroom could create distraction and tensions (if there is more than one females, they'd compete sometimes); just look at the HP for the last decade or so for all the dramas they created...

Just wow.

I remember a report about one airline refusing to hire female pilots. The argument: It is harder for female pilots to get a job. Therefore, they most be more competitive. Therefore, they are less capable of team work. Team work is very important for a pilot. Therefore, we don't hire female pilots.

Seriously, if you have a male board member who can only think with his dick and has problems with one or two women in the boardroom, then it should be clear to anyone who to get rid of.

 

[Eraserhead]

It's a terribly naive one. There's a large percentage of women that will always want to have kids and stay home with them for at least a significant chunk of their working years. This means there's a large number of women who will always be less likely than men to be on Apple's board. You will never reach 50/50.

Even if there is some underlying truth to this rather than it just being societies expectation you could still get pretty close (say 45-55) as people don't spend that much of their working lives looking after children.

 

[Boston007]

Even if there is some underlying truth to this rather than it just being societies expectation you could still get pretty close (say 45-55) as people don't spend that much of their working lives looking after children.

WHY do you need to get it say 45-55? WHY?

Why not hire the most qualified person?

This policy is stupid and will result in less qualified people running the company.

If I was a shareholder I'd be pissed. Especially with the current decline of the stock price.

 

[WestonHarvey1]

Even if there is some underlying truth to this rather than it just being societies expectation you could still get pretty close (say 45-55) as people don't spend that much of their working lives looking after children.

It's not society's expectation, it's a maternal instinct deeply rooted in biology.

In fact, I'd say today's society has the opposite expectation. Women are expected to work and have fulfilling careers outside the home, and are expected to toss their kids in day care to do so. And yet, many women resist this new expectation.

 

[Boston007]

It's not society's expectation, it's a maternal instinct deeply rooted in biology.

Oh snap. Get ready to be attacked buddy.

 

[krravi]

Well on the upside for a few, we will get Pink iMacs!

 

[Eraserhead]

It's not society's expectation, it's a maternal instinct deeply rooted in biology.

Source?

----------

Oh snap. Get ready to be attacked buddy.

So you think it is acceptable to believe that women are only good for bringing up children?

----------

WHY do you need to get it say 45-55? WHY?

Because a diverse group will have a wider range of experience and therefore be more qualified for making decisions.

 

[KdParker]

You are assuming that the best in those field are not older white males.

Diversity is something that has to be changed from the bottom to upside, not the other way around. Are there qualified members of minorities to fill the positions within Apple? If yes, and they are better than those currently there, those individuals should be employed by Apple.

If not, however, Apple should not be forced to hire unqualified people just to fill some kind of "token minority" quota. In my country, for example, few women apply for engineering courses, so it's expected that there are more great engineers of the male gender than the female gender - simply because there are more male engineers than female engineers.

WOW....we are past the point of not having qualified 'minorities' for these types of positions.

That being said, there isn't any reason that staffing isn't more diversified.

 

[macpro2000]

Give me a break! Get the best...if it's all white men...so be it!

 

[whitedragon101]

It's a terribly naive one. There's a large percentage of women that will always want to have kids and stay home with them for at least a significant chunk of their working years. This means there's a large number of women who will always be less likely than men to be on Apple's board. You will never reach 50/50.

They discussed this in a program on surgeons and the chances of becoming a consultant. The women had a tough choice to make as they said the demands are so insanely high and competition so fierce that they could not have children if they wanted to compete. Basically taking several months off work for any reason put you out of the race.

 

[WestonHarvey1]

Source?
So you think it is acceptable to believe that women are only good for bringing up children?

If that's really what you got from what I said you should probably take some Tylenol for your jerking knee. You're going to be sore in the morning.

 

[Boston007]

Source?

----------



So you think it is acceptable to believe that women are only good for bringing up children?

Where did I say that?


----------

Because a diverse group will have a wider range of experience and therefore be more qualified for making decisions.

What a laughable statement.

The best experienced people will get you the most experienced decision.

 

[KdParker]

Just wow.

I remember a report about one airline refusing to hire female pilots. The argument: It is harder for female pilots to get a job. Therefore, they most be more competitive. Therefore, they are less capable of team work. Team work is very important for a pilot. Therefore, we don't hire female pilots.

Seriously, if you have a male board member who can only think with his dick and has problems with one or two women in the boardroom, then it should be clear to anyone who to get rid of.

Agreed. I feel like I have been transported back to the 50s. There are some strange comments being made in this thread.

 

[Boston007]

If that's really what you got from what I said you should probably take some Tylenol for your jerking knee. You're going to be sore in the morning.

He is clearly living on another planet.

 

[Eraserhead]

If that's really what you got from what I said you should probably take some Tylenol for your jerking knee. You're going to be sore in the morning.

I don't really see how else you can possibly justify saying that having a pretty close sex balance in the long run isn't a good thing to happen. Especially over a large enough group (e.g. All stock market listed companies)

----------

What a laughable statement.

The best experienced people will get you the most experienced decision.

So having a bunch of people with the same upbringing and experience is going to lead to good decisions? Seriously?

----------

He is clearly living on another planet.

One where women as men are treated equally.

 

[WestonHarvey1]

I don't really see how else you can possibly justify saying that having a pretty close sex balance in the long run isn't a good thing to happen. Especially over a large enough group (e.g. All stock market listed companies)

I didn't opine on it being good or bad. I was just talking about the realities - you'll never see those numbers, because not as many women want it, or they're willing to accept tradeoffs to have a career/family balance.

 

[Boston007]

So having a bunch of people with the same upbringing and experience is going to lead to good decisions? Seriously?

OMG you are delussional and putting words in my mouth!

Where did I say same upbringing?
Where did I say same experience?

You can easily have two people with different upbringings, backgrounds, and schooling both be extremely experienced and, OH MY GOD, not a woman!

You are clearly missing the point.

 

[Marx55]

They should be the best. All the rest is irrelevant.

 

[sransari]

It really wasn't liberals as much as lazy people, and there have been enough legal precedents now that what used to happen, doesn't happen all that much.

You can't use quotas, and if you give "points" to a candidate for being a minority, you have to show that diversity is a key characteristic of your organization. Like a college that argues that a diverse population benefits all students by being exposed to people different than themselves. But those points can't be a substantial part of the decision, meaning that it gives them a distinct advantage over non-minoirites.

Is it actually law that a business can't use quotas, and give points for minorities? I oppose the restriction of quotas/points as much as I oppose a mandate for quotas/points.

Not sure why the government and/or legal system is wasting so much time and money on trying to tell businesses what they can and can't do. If a business wants to use quotas, let them. If they don't want to, then don't make them. Who is the government to say that you can't hire a minority just for being a minority, and similarly, who is the government to say that you MUST hire X number of minorities? Let businesses make their own decision so they can live and die on their own choices and merits.

 

[Boston007]

They should be the best. All the rest is irrelevant.

Please tell EraserHead