Honestly why do people think that cannot happen at Apple ? That kind of thing can happen in any company. Apple is thousands of employees, it only requires a few bad people to create a situation like that.
I'm not sure though, creating a post like that is the best thing. I don't know what exists in the US, but in France, you can sue your employer for free (You don't even need a lawyer), and if you are able to show a few emails showing abuse, there is like almost 100% chance the company will loose
EDIT: To the people who downvote me, seriously why ?
There is a tendency to give Apple a pass among the big companies. They sell actual products instead of you, the user('s data). Their logistical chain does not rely upon a system of (often fellow American) warehouse workers who are pushed to the breaking point. [The developing world workforce that actually assembles their products- that's another story, but bogus hoaxes like Mike Daisey's only add confusion and make their supply chain working conditions seem more innocuous than critics claim.] They don't actively contribute to the disruptions and dysfunctions in our society that social networking have brought us. Somehow just by being less apparently bad, people assume that means they're more automatically good. But that's a fallacy; the badness can exist elsewhere, and given a culture of secrecy and silence, can be readily hidden.
They're also hip, maintain some level of underdog cachet, and folks like their products. People wish they could be that, and tend to give a pass to the things they idolize.
You might also imagine that inside a company made of money, there's no need for anyone to be a jerk.
They were clear underdogs in the 90s, and it's maybe only in the last decade or so that they've been in dominant mega-corp territory. I'm sure a lot of people still carry associations from that older time that haven't been completely extinguished.
Yes, that's what I was alluding to "the developing world workforce." For whatever reason, despite reoccurring reports about worker abuses from Foxconn/Wistron, Apple often gets a pass in the discourse- possibly because those workers are out of sight, out of mind.
From this and a few other random posts I've seen on Blind and Hacker News, the closed/secretive nature of Apple seems to allow it to happen more frequently than at other companies.
Sunlight is a disinfectant. With transparency, even the largest most aloof company has to grapple to some degree with poor PR and public shaming. Amazon is well-known for having a toxic work culture even beyond its fulfillment centers, thanks to Amazon employees speaking out. And having a high-profile voice- a Tim Bray, a Susan Fowler, is also invaluable. As of yet, there isn't an equivalent to Apple, probably because its culture is so secretive that people readily self-censor themselves about what goes on in the company.
I don't think it has to do purely with visibility outside the company. Visibility within the company is just as, if not more, important. A common theme I've noticed regarding this in stories from Apple is people covering up/scapegoating failing projects by lying to management, creating fake reports, fabricating data, etc. The con seems able to be kept up for a long time because there is only one person you need to fool or convince to not care.
At the less secretive companies I've worked at, where there are many-to-many dependencies and interactions, you'd never be able to get away with something like that because people will freely talk/collaborate/associate with people without going through management. Or people would just look at your source code and see that it's all smoke and mirrors.
Many bad posts about IS&T as well. I swear I've seen at least two very similar posts to the OP about Apple (maybe even written by the same person) although I'm having trouble finding it.
I think Tim Bray is going a great service, but I don’t see any ‘disinfecting’ going on.
I would like to believe sunlight is a disinfectant, but I have yet to see that in the corporate world.
I think the only real ‘disinfectant’ would be the CEO realizing that it’s worth making things better for its own sake, and not just because of bad press.
You're not wrong; we've seen Amazon try to wriggle out of their bad press by simply hiring armies of posters to tweet and blog positive propaganda, rather than actually fixing issues. Sunlight isn't enough, but I still think at least it's one step in the right direction. Better that Amazon has a poor work reputation than no one know about its abuses.
Apple also varies, culturally, pretty widely between departments. It's not always the case that abusive behaviour under one VP -- or good treatment under a different one! -- is extrapolate-able to other organizations.
> Honestly why do people think that cannot happen at Apple ? That kind of thing can happen in any company. Apple is thousands of employees, it only requires a few bad people to create a situation like that.
That's mind boggling, especially since all accounts paint Steve Jobs as being an massive asshole manager, and company culture gets set by examples at the top.
That is a common but very shallow take on Steve Jobs management. Yes, there are instances of him being abrasive, but he led some very successful tech development efforts which involved getting people to come together around difficult goals. Remember that for most of his second period of management Apple stock went for around 12-25 a share and it was hard to hire good engineers because it was common knowledge that Apple was doomed.
An example of how direct, involved management clashes with traditional corporate style came up right after Steve Jobs returned. He would walk around the offices, knock on doors and introduce himself, and ask what people were working on. Those who were fully engaged were kind of jealous that others had a chance to talk with the top manager directly in such a way. Oddly enough, most of the long term Apple corporate types reacted very badly to this. They stuttered and could not summarize what they were actually doing. In every case I was aware of these employees left the next day in absolute shock and horror, sharing with everyone just how mean Steve Jobs was. But I was there and observed some of these encounters myself and all he did was drop by, casually introduce himself, and ask about what people were working on. For some and those who stayed at that time that was actually pretty cool hierarchy flattening behavior but for corporate climbers it was an inconceivable breach of protocol.
Perhaps it's a case of cargo culting. His confrontational, often personally insulting behaviors were retained, but not his ability to bring people together.
> That is a common but very shallow take on Steve Jobs management. Yes, there are instances of him being abrasive, but he led some very successful tech development efforts which involved getting people to come together around difficult goals.
He might have had other talents that compensated (at a corporate level) for the damage from his asshole behaviors, but it seems pretty clear that he was, in fact, an asshole. Not all those stories are from the workplace, that second link is all about how he treated his daughter.
The issue here is how does having an asshole like that at the top affect the rest of the company's culture and the behavior of the other managers?
It’s less about disbelief than it being unacceptable.
If the company can be the biggest and most profitable, and build the best products, it sure as hell can figure out how it expects people to be treated, since there is already such a culture of controlling what information is leaked to the public.
Edit: I hold Apple to a special standard because it creates some of the best products that I pay a premium for. I expect the people and culture to be no less and unimaginable best of breed like the M1 chip and the A14 chip.
> I don't know what exists in the US, but in France, you can sue your employer for free (You don't even need a lawyer)...
In the U.S. there are many employment lawyers who will represent harmed employees on contingency, meaning that they will only be paid if the case results in a judgment or settlement for the employee. An individual can technically sue without a lawyer but that is usually a terrible idea.
This is a cursory and opinionated, unfounded claim saying 'never' and 'boring'. Who are they to decide beforehand about something that doesn't even exist yet, based on a highly subjective matter (boring)?! Also this 'never' thing is just a joke, have they measured the goodness of comments on voting and resulted in 100% 'no good'? This kind of 'reasoning' about vote comments is pretty empty, equals to saying: 'because I say it so!' :/
Knowing the reasons is quite important in fact. Part of the discussion and understanding, learning.
I happen to think the opposite. I know it's unpopular.
Downvoted posts are distinct markers that shape our experience. But we're warned to not discuss it; the very thing that controls how we see and what we see (or not see). Apparently that's boring.
Voting systems create echo chambers. Most people vote based on subjective agreement, not on objective quality. We need to be aware of that, and discuss it. Just my opinion, which I'm wary to post but will anyhow.
> Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading
Until HN has something other than just downvoting this isn't true.
If I make a point that doesn't fit the HN groupthink, and it gets downvoted without response, I always mention it because I know people linger around the thread and I want to challenge their assumption that my point is so false as to not deserve specific counterargument.
This will be a year-long, if not decade-long process.
The UK will probably be reasonably ok on its own, I don't imagine things will suck too much for the UK after Brexit. So what would be the incentive for rejoining the EU?
Plus if the UK does decide it wants to rejoin, this time it probably will get 0 exemptions, or close to it. I think it might get some as it's a big economy and it's geostrategically important, but definitely not as many as it used to have.
Without a major external or internal shock for the UK, it probably won't rejoin the EU during our lifetimes.
> Please follow the site guidelines and don't complain about downvotes—all it does is lower the signal/noise ratio. Everyone gets downvoted. It doesn't matter.
I'm not sure though, creating a post like that is the best thing. I don't know what exists in the US, but in France, you can sue your employer for free (You don't even need a lawyer), and if you are able to show a few emails showing abuse, there is like almost 100% chance the company will loose
EDIT: To the people who downvote me, seriously why ?