Apple’s Board of directors is comprised of two women, one African American male and five white men. The executive team of eighteen includes one white women, two African American women and fifteen white men.
In 2015, the entire company was 69% male, 54% white.
Apple shareholder Avian Maldonado submitted a proposal to the board which would require an accelerated recruitment policy to increase the diversity of Apple employees.
The board rejected the policy, saying it is “unduly burdensome and not necessary”.
Really? The board is 75% male, the executive team is 83% male, the entire company is 69% male and extra effort to improve diversity is burdensome and unnecessary?
According to the proxy statement:
Within Apple, we believe that inclusion and diversity are fundamental to innovation, therefore also to the need to attract and retain the best talent. Apple leaders and managers are encouraged and supported in inclusively leading globally diverse teams. We also encourage our employees to share their cultures with each other by joining Diversity Network Associations, which are Apple employee groups representing different ethnicities, religions, orientations, and interests.
Our Board of Directors shares this commitment. Pursuant to its charter, the Nominating Committee of our Board of Directors actively seeks out highly qualified women and individuals from minority groups to include in the pool from which Board nominees are chosen, and this has been reflected in our most recent appointments to the Board.
This proposal would require the Board to adopt an accelerated recruitment policy for increasing diversity among senior management and the Board. We believe that the proposal is unduly burdensome and not necessary because Apple has demonstrated to shareholders its commitment to inclusion and diversity, which are core values for our company.
There’s lots of other lovely culture change generalisations and examples of encouragement and investment and commitment, but it’s difficult to understand why, if they really are dedicated to improving diversity, they think accelerated recruitment commitments are burdensome.
Unless perhaps it has something to do with the white male dominated culture at Apple holding on to the power they have and being unwilling to share it with a more diverse group they’re currently excluding? I guess that’s a question only they can answer.
If an aberration in a sea of organisations committed to change, it would almost certainly provoke a wave of outrage, but sadly it’s not an aberration, it’s the norm, and it will probably pass almost unnoticed.
It shouldn’t.