Apple says it now pays women, men, whites and minorities equally in the U.S.

“Apple says that it has achieved its goal of establishing equal pay for women and men, and it’s also becoming more diverse by ramping up its hiring of non-whites and women,” Aaron Smith reports for CNNMoney. “‘We’ve achieved equal pay in the United States for similar roles and performance,’ reads the Apple report. ‘Women earn one dollar for every dollar male employees earn. And underrepresented minorities earn one dollar for every dollar white employees earn.'”

“Apple is still dominated by white males. Whites comprise 56% of the U.S. work force, and 68% of the global work force is male,” Smith reports. “But the company claims that it’s getting better.”

“The company said that only 32% of its global work force is made up of women, though they represent 37% of new hires around the world,” Smith reports. “That’s an improvement from 2014, when women represented 31% of new hires.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Note: Apple’s “Inclusion & Diversity” report can be found here.

SEE ALSO:
Apple touts diversity of recent hires – August 3, 2016
Apple inches toward workforce diversity – January 20, 2016
Diversity report shows Apple’s U.S. workforce still mainly white and male – January 19, 2016
Apple’s Board of Directors says a call for diversity is ‘unduly burdensome and not necessary’ – January 15, 2016
Apple leads Facebook, Intel, Cisco, Google on gender diversity among Bay Area companies – November 17, 2015
Apple’s latest diversity report shows progress – August 13, 2015
Tim Cook is ‘personally involved’ in improving diversity at Apple Inc. – July 14, 2015
Apple donates over $50 million to diversity efforts – March 10, 2015
Apple CEO Tim Cook met privately with Jesse Jackson regarding diversity – December 9, 2014
Apple adds Vice Presidents, more diversity to Executive Leadership Team – August 15, 2014
A message from Apple CEO Tim Cook on diversity – August 12, 2014
Jesse Jackson calls on Obama to scrutinize tech industry’s ‘lack of diversity’ – July 28, 2014
Tim Cook: Apple will release diversity data ‘at some point’ – July 9, 2014
Jesse Jackson targets tech’s lack of diversity; sends letter to Apple, Google, HP, others – March 19, 2014
Apple changes bylaws after facing criticism about lack of diversity on board – January 9, 2014

28 Comments

    1. Your point? The law is one thing…execution is quite another, especially when it involves complex situations. I view this as a very positive development in a progressive and open-minded corporation. I am glad to be a shareholder.

      1. I just hope now that job possession will be merit-based, rather than quota or affirmative action based. That is the real world we should be living in. (and I am not saying that past affirmative action or quota levels were wrong to do. Just saying that at some point we have to get to a level playing field for opportunity, while individual merit can be rewarded.)

      2. My point? My point is exactly what I said. They were already paying men and women who did the same job the same amount. That is Federal law, I very much doubt they were in violation.

        In a “complex situation”, as you term it, saying they are paying men and women equally is just double-speak, or, if true, the WRONG thing to do, as I assume you mean where the men and women are working different amounts of hours, or have differing amounts of experience, or some other complication.

        In other words, Apple announcing this as if it is some big deal, instead of as what they have already been doing by law since 1976, is just press release BS. But hey, view it as a positive development. I’ll just roll my eyes.

  1. Equal pay for one and all sexes and races and physical abilities: regardless of intelligence, creativity, work ethic, and the like! Hallelujah! As long as our genitals, complexions, and physiques are equal within our paychecks, the world will definitely be a better place! Here’s to egalitarianism, Tim, regardless of personal contribution!

    1. Did you forget to think?

      If they are doing the SAME job then obviously they have the “intelligence, creativity, work ethic, and the like” to do it SAME as everyone else doing that job.

      You do know that there is this thing called a “job interview” before you get the job….right?

      1. Not so fast, Paul. Pay for Performance remains a fundamental tenet of any successful organization / society. By all means equal opportunity and starting salary should be offered, but after that, a person who contributes more is a more valuable employee. They should be compensated based on RESULTS.

        If Cook’s growing bureaucracy cannot distinguish between the effectiveness and individual contributions of its employees, then Apple is as broken as most corporations, where personality and politics are used in lieu of actual performance measurement.

        1. I believe it says equal for “similar roles and PERFORMANCE.”

          What other criteria should be considered in one’s paycheck? What are you complaining? Are you saying that one group be paid less than another in the same job and performing at the same level?

    2. Way to completely twist a situation in an attempt to undermine it, Yorval. Equal pay for equal work is a good thing, particularly if you are a member of one of the groups historically underpaid by a system dominated by white males.

    1. Spark and trondude, I agree with your posts.

      Now is a good time to quote some lyrics:

      There is unrest in the forest
      There is trouble with the trees
      For the maples want more sunlight
      And the oaks ignore their pleas

      So the maples formed a union
      And demanded equal rights
      ‘The oaks are just too greedy
      We will make them give us light’
      Now there’s no more oak oppression
      For they passed a noble law
      And the trees are all kept equal
      By hatchet,
      Axe,
      And saw

      — The Trees by Rush (Hemispheres, 1978)

      I’m aware of how people will excoriate me for this post, without even bothering to ask who I am (half black and half Shawnee). I’m quite successful (professionally and personally) without ever having to use welfare, EBT, or some quota-based hiring system to progress in life.

  2. I agree, I have no problem earning less than someone who is objectively more productive than me, no matter what his/her sex, skin tone or sex orientation is. However, same pay based on job description only is absolutely unfair.

  3. Once again, the prevalence of sexism among the MDN’s commenters rears its ugly head again.

    When Apple announce that it now pays men and women equally, the knee-jerk reaction on this board is, as expected, that the political correctness is destroying the company, egalitarianism trumps merit.

    Has anyone here taken a second to thing how is Apple managing to remain the largest company in the world (by market cap) and the most successful one? How can it possibly be if it pays everyone equally, regardless of merit, performance, or results?

    Or it is something else. For decades, we have been hearing the research data that told us that for every $1 dollar earned by men, women earned $0.82 for the same kind of job, with same qualifications, and with same results. What Apple is telling us that they, as a company, have been able to eliminate this discrepancy and are now paying women and men with same qualifications (and same performance results) the same wages.

    Let us not forget, Apple Stores hire thousands of blue T-shirt workers who all do more-or-less the same thing, and their pay generally doesn’t really vary based on monthly performance. So, Apple is finally paying women same as men, which should be perceived as good.

    And all this crowd hears is “egalitarianism”.

    1. Amen!

      I am appalled at some of the reactions here. They blatantly conclude that paying women and minorities the same as a white man occupying the same position is Political Correctness. The unstated assumption is that the women and minorities are less qualified, and therefore less worthy of being paid, BECAUSE of their gender or ethnicity. Where is the proof that women are only 82% as productive as men, so they are only entitled to get 82¢ on the dollar?

      Even if it were demonstrated that the average woman employee is less productive than the average man—and I have seen no evidence of that—it would not mean that there were not a whole lot of individual women who are more productive than an average man. Apple isn’t hiring average people in any case.

      Yes, there are individual women who are less skilled engineers than some men, but there are plenty of qualified women to fill all of Apple’s positions. There are also individual women who are less skilled at basketball than some men, but does that mean that a men’s pickup basketball team could beat the US Olympic women? I doubt it.

      1. You wanna know where the assumption about Women and Minorities being less qualified comes from? Look in the mirror.

        Being given special treatment, having expectations lowered for you only reinforces racist and sexist ideas.

        You just don’t get it.

        1. When I look in the mirror, I see a middle-aged white male. The special treatment that guys who look like me have received in America since 1492 has not lowered MY expectations. I will admit that it has reinforced the racist and sexist tendencies of a lot of white guys.

  4. AS a white male, who has never been given any preferential treatment by an employer, I feel bad for the young men trying to get ahead in life, who do not have something they can point to that will get them in the door. Something that has no relation to the skills needed to do the work, but everything to do with statistics and optics as to hiring for some ‘checklist’!

    1. So if I have 2 people, both are coders. One is sufficient. Let’s call her Joan. The other is freaking outstanding. Let’s call him Bob. I have the pay Joan the same thing even though Bob’s work is consistently superior, he’s done faster, he works harder and longer hours etc.

      I am not allowed to say that Bob has earned a greater raise?

      I.e. Apple just said fuck you to merit? How damn socialist can you get?

      Score one for enforced mediocrity.

      1. Of course you can give the bigger raise to the more qualified employee. You just are not allowed to act on the assumption that everybody named Bob is more qualified than anybody named Joan. That unexamined assumption is why affirmative action programs are necessary.

        1. “That unexamined assumption is why affirmative action programs are necessary.”

          YOU are assuming that there IS an assumption. THAT is the racist or sexist thought. Why would you assume that? The only reason is that YOU make that assumption. And that is why affirmative action, by definition, is racist, and UNNECESSARY.

    1. I figure we’ll see them about the same time we see male Mary Cassatts, Grace Hoppers, and Toni Morrisons. That pesky thing called history includes those women, too.

      You are rather making my point with your implication that women and minorities are inherently inferior. What is your _evidence_ that women and minorities compare so poorly to white guys like you and me that they cannot possibly earn equal salaries on their own merits?

      Given that prevailing attitude, a successful woman clearly has to be considerably more talented than her male competition. As has often been said, Ginger Rogers could match Fred Astaire step for step, except that she had to do it backwards in high heels.

  5. But they hire a skewed number of gay versus straight males anyways so as far as hiring practices they are inversly biased. Especially at retail, thats where the pay is very much the same. So this is a stoopod pr push. I hate Apple a little more every day. And i was akoolaid drinker for decades. Cook changed all that.

  6. OK, it’s really simple people.

    When Apple sets out to hire someone, they say the job pays $XXX. They don’t say that the salary is negotiable. Whom ever gets the job: black, white, hispanic, asian, etc, gets the job’s salary. Now, if they do an outstanding job, they can increase their pay upon a merit review once per year. If they don’t do so well, their raise won’t be as much. The basic point is that on the date of hire, it doesn’t matter who is applying- the salary is set.

Leave a Reply to macaholic Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.