Male employees who work for Apple in the United Kingdom earn five percent more on average than women, according to a UK Gender Pay Gap report released today by Apple [PDF]. The median hourly pay gap was two percent in favor of women, however.
According to Apple, the average pay gap is due to more men holding senior positions at the company, and when factoring in "similar roles, markets, and performance" it has achieved pay equity. Apple has more than 6,000 employees in the UK.
Apple believes strongly that equal work deserves equal pay. Every year, we examine the compensation employees receive and make adjustments where necessary to ensure we maintain pay equity. And we have achieved this in every country -- women at our company earn the same as men when you factor in similar roles, markets and performance.
As part of our commitment to eliminating pay disparities from the first day at Apple, later this year we'll also stop asking candidates about their salary history.
Apple says that 30 percent of its UK employees are women, and 36 percent of new employees last year were women. 40 percent of the companies "leaders under the age of 30" are also women.
92 percent of men received a bonus including vested stock, while 88 percent of women received the same bonus. Additional detail on the wage gap in the UK is available in Apple's full report.
Apple published this information because of a new UK law that requires companies with more than 250 employees to publish the average total pay received by men relative to that received by women.
Note: Due to the political nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Politics, Religion, Social Issues forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.
Top Rated Comments
End of story.
[doublepost=1522791000][/doublepost]With this being said, you wonder why macrumors publishes such rubbish.
It is when these statistics get twisted to imply a bias against women (where none exists) and used to implement a quota system that penalizes or excludes qualified men for promotions that yes, the discussion will get heated and men understandably would be angry. But that's not what is happening here at the moment anyway.
My husband works for a tech company and they are very encouraging of women's careers. But there simply is a shortage of female recruits. They need to fill positions and if there are no qualified women then of course they won't overlook qualified men and just leave positions unstaffed to avoid an appearance of bias. Unfortunately the preponderence of male employees will skew these final ratios to look bad. So you have to refer to the individual data to ensure that women in fact are not being paid less than a male occupying a comparable position and doing the same work. And that is what the other forum members are pointing out.