Apple CEO Tim Cook addresses workplace issues, pay equity, more in all-hands meeting
By - spearson0
Did he actually address though or did he give corporate talk
It’s our biggest talk yet.
with up to 2x BS than previous meetings, and up to 3x BS than world class meetings
Twice as much BS as the competition!
It was full of courage.
We know you're gonna love it.
The biggest talk in an iMeeting yet. We think you're going to love it.
“Women of Apple, we’ve made your pay packets 30% thinner and lighter.”
This biggest talk is 30% bigger than our last biggest talk. Here’s Deidre to tell you all about our biggest talk yet.
And he thinks you’ll love it.
Said “looking into it”
And “when we find them we close them”
You can say he sure closed it: (he fired those activists lmfao)[https://twitter.com/ashleygjovik?s=21]
Gap closed! Lmfao. They’re doing standard big business stuff. Tim also doesn’t make changes or deal with it at that level. It’s mostly people below him.
Apparently he was really nice in the meeting, gave the iPhone and Apple watch teams the next 10 months off to chill and take time out for their mental health knowing that next years products will still be able to have more improvements than this years.
You made me laugh, but to be completely fair, the battery improvements and the Qualcomm radio upgrade may well be worth it for heavy users. That being said, I still fought off sleep during the Apple announcements.
To me it’s the doubled battery life while streaming and filming macroshots in 4k.
Somehow they make great products really boring, it’s impressive.
Kind of confused, the phone is preorder, not out yet?
I guess i shouldn’t say it’s a great product just yet, but if they fixed the battery & camera issues that the previous generation apparently had, it should be pretty solid product.
Ah :) thank you for clearing that up for me!
Curious why they couldn’t do more for battery life on the other models…. I mean enhanced battery isn’t actually a pro feature…
So know I know what S means.
Is the radio upgrade in the iPhone 13 and how does it help?
Now I haven't seen confirmation on it (and we probably won't until a teardown), but leaks said it's supposed to have a Qualcomm Snapdragon X60 (versus a X55). The X60 is supposed to be faster, more reliable, and more battery efficient, especially for 5G.
If that's true, the 13 should have more long-term utility than the 12 as 5G slowly creeps across the globe. 5G burns battery on the 12.
LMAO!! Actually laughed out loud on that
Well you deserve a good laugh on Reddit :) It's your cake day! :D
it took me too long to understand what this meant, good one
> next 10 months off to chill
Even for bug fixes?
Insult people when you dont have a good reply. shrug
Hardware teams. Software is a different department.
Isn’t this normal though? Small upgrades for few years then a big one?
I mean, Samsung is out here putting together foldable devices and creating a whole new category. I think that’s worth something. I still love my iPhone but I really want the flip 3 as a second phone, for example. That’s not just iteration.
Not just foldables. Samsung pioneered the phablets. Which are now just standard smartphones (with big screens).
> foldable devices
Did Tim at least present random graphs and stats? That’s how we know it’s true right
Only with an unlabeled axis and yet-unspecified comparisons
Pay equity is challenging because the most important factor in pay should be the quality of the work you do.
You can slice by YOE, gender, role, job class, etc., but unless you factor in actual performance then it doesn’t mean much. At the end of the day the best way to ensure you’r getting paid appropriately is to interview and see what you get on the market, along with checking sources like Blind, Glassdoor, or Fishbowl.
Every company is hurting for good employees, so take your shot on the market or internally negotiating if you don’t like your pay.
In jobs like this you get paid based on your ability and your balls in negotiations.
There are rare occasions where your supervisor will have your back.
Having done my IC’s job, and having been underpaid (without my knowledge) in the past, I really try to break the cycle and pay my team competitively. If I’ve done my job right, they’ll reach my level and pay scale faster than it took me to get here.
Can you be my manager?
Can you draw rectangles?
More specifically rounded rectangles
Solid interview question.
You’ve been promoted to Director of App-ovation User Experience.
Space Ghost reference in your username?
Maybe ( ͡~ ͜ʖ ͡°)
Living with you is like living in a living nightmare!
So if you have balls, you get paid more? (Joke)
This is unironically how the world works too much of the time 😪
Edit: ooh damn the sexism downvotes comin in hot
Edit2: Not here to argue with sexist attitudes you hold and about which you almost certainly won’t change your mind. Plenty of data exists on wage gaps along all axes of oppression as well as their intersections (age, race, gender, ability, etc.) and you need only to do a tiny bit of research on your favorite search engine. Take care y’all.
“I like my women with spunk and balls!”
I am so fucking tired of the ideology driven need to automatically blame everything on sexism and expecting 100% pay and promotion parity between genders, without looking at performance. The only way to weed out the real sexism is to look at every specific case in good faith and without predetermined conclusions.
In my old work we had to do some heavy long term travel (2-3 weeks, sometimes months at a job site), and work 10-14 hour days in a dirty, noisy, and very stressful environment. There were very few women in that group, and most who did end up there usually quit or transferred in a couple years. Yet we were forced to keep hiring and promoting girls straight out of college to make the organization look good. So we had a bunch of people who spent 10-20 years of their lives doing this job and being really good at it, routinely passed over for promotion in favor of someone with a couple years of experience, whose main qualification was having a vagina. And who will usually get out of their management position in a year or two because they were grossly unprepared for it and had to be moved elsewhere (not their fault). A couple women who were long term, experienced workers and would actually be good, well respected managers did not get promoted because they were "difficult" and "not team players".
Sexism is very real, but you don't fight it with simple statistics.
So what you're telling me, is if the job has very few women, then the working conditions are shitty and the hours are long.
That makes a lot of sense.
How about making the working conditions better and staffing up a bit so the hours aren't so shitty?
How about women just work the job as it is rather than restructuring the entire company workforce?
That’s anecdotal, but not common. More common is being a woman and being passed up because of “team fit” and “culture,” especially in tech.
Kinda not anymore hasn’t for the last 20 years
> in the West, women in the category 20-35 attend university in greater numbers and outearn their male counterparts
Guess what you think is not how the world works anymore. Funny how there’s not extra programs to get males into university and a lot of screeching about ‘equal pay for equal work’. 😪
An individual worker will always be at a disadvantage when negotiating salary and benefits with an employer. This is why organized labor is necessary.
But the wage is based on your performance. You can force them to give you what you want by performing well
lol what? "performance" is basically arbitrarily judged by the employer. you can't force them to do shit just by working really hard.
Having worked across multiple consulting and big tech firms, I can say this is false. There’s not a perfect way to judge performance, but every company employs some type of 360 feedback system that allows for multiple people to weigh in on your performance.
I worked at both EMC and Dell as both IC and management and and neither had anything of the sort.
It’s really not it’s how well you do your job be that how many things you sell in retail, how many deals you close how much paperwork you get through etc etc etc
so what? say you sell a hundred iPhones a day, if your managers are biased against you they have every ability to say you "meet expectations" and deny you a pay raise.
Have you never worked in retail?
have you never worked in a country that sees you as lesser because of something beyond your control?
But anyway in retail stores set targets based on hours worked. They’re generally around the same and available to everyone so you know how you’re performing vs the other workers.
What if the sexist boss assigns women to the departments that sell less, and the buyers are sexist and refuse to deal with women, and the paperwork is assigned more to males?
Then you complain to HR
Lol, HR’s job is to protect the company, not the worker.
Actually HR is to protect the worker and a lot of the time they lie outside the main body of the organisation.
Not if you stay a few years. Over time, rewards go to those making the most impact.
More ability generally means more impact
You'd like to think so, but I've met plenty of people with great ability that coast, or don't know how to focus, or work at odds with the team/organization's goals.
People that help the team move the ball down the field in the correct direction get rewarded more. A lot more.
Because they’re afraid to lose you at that point, it’s kind of a Cold War / silent negotiation happening without you even doing it
Getting paid more for having balls might be part of the problem.
> Not really female university graduates earn more than men until their 30’s
You have one paper and 2 articles and the paper isn’t well written. The fields are far to broad and focus on degree rather than sector of work. Just because someone gets a degree in say biology doesn’t means they will be working in that sector. It also doesn’t account for those going to masters courses and doctorates
> You have one paper and 2 articles and the paper isn’t well written.
And you have... What, exactly?
They have a very strong opinion and that’s enough, obviously. Well, enough for them at least.
Give him some time. He may be thinking of a genuine study somewhere that he has to dig out.
If you had read the first sentence, you would have found a vital clue that the article is English and is referring to in the UK.
Oh I wasn’t aware that America = the world
My department at my job is at about 1/3 of the number we were at before the pandemic, and a little over 1/6 of that original number is left. They’re still firing people for stupid shit. They’ve also increased our workload by about 300-400% and won’t give us raises, bonuses, or overtime. Companies straight up don’t care if you aren’t being paid enough.
The less they pay you the more they profit overall.
Its basically a game to see how far they can push employees before they start quitting in large enough numbers to affect the bottom line.
They don't give a shit how or who you are, just what profit you can bring to the company. There is a 99.9% chance you are replaceable so they will give as little as they possibly can.
They’re finally learning that we aren’t replaceable. They fired everyone who knew how to do anything so things have been a mess since they started moving everyone around to cover gaps left by people who quit. It’s a fun time lol
Yeah, that seems to be a problem in a lot of places recently. They have been pushing people too far and its started to bite them in the ass.
Just because an employee isn't a household name or at the very top of a department doesn't mean they aren't important. Like, clearly its in Apple's best interest to treat Craig Federighi or Eddie Cue well, but they can only piss off so many 'nobodies' before shit goes off the rail regardless of who is at the top.
The iron theory of wages: “workers should be paid minimal wages to motivate them to work harder in hopes of higher salaries, if paid more they will have to take time off work to spend earned wages” according to this theory the less the pay the less leisure you enjoy and dedicate most of your time to work, good for the employer.
Good thing work performance isn’t subjective and based on what your managers reviews for you.
Are there ways to objectively review ones performance?
I once had a manager who tried to explain containerisation to me - after I’d spent months migrating all of our Kubernetes clusters across to EKS. The same manager also tried to explain sprints to a meeting room full of PMs.
This manager was in charge of all of our performance reviews - which governed raises, bonuses, and promotions - and he evidently didn’t have the slightest clue what any of us did, or what our jobs actually entailed.
Sounds like most of the managers at my company as well. My last performance review consisted of a few petty comments from the other managers, "well I gave you some feedback 3 months ago", and nothing from the engineers I lead or business analysts and directors I work with for 95% of my actual duties.
The problem at the retail level is the fact that you can’t ever really renegotiate your pay unless you get a promotion which doesn’t happen much so for the people that have worked there for ten years now make less than the new people starting out
we will have another gender gap outrage as soon as only performance would affect pay.
keep in mind that most women don’t want to chase career opportunities or can’t since they have to give birth and catch up later which for sure will affect performance.
life is unequal, there are literally no fair solution.
I started in the US at $16/hour in 2008 and finished in 2014 at about $23/hour. Left for corporate IT help desk work and was started at $32/hour… Apple pays decent for retail, but **garbage**- relative to corporate America.
Then again, my brother is a compliance attorney and is shocked at how poorly his IT counterparts (me included) are paid.
Of course it’s different - retail and corporate are totally different animals.
But it could be argued that they’re equally difficult. Customer Service jobs require you to address very different challenges than corporate jobs. They’re certainly every bit as physically and emotionally taxing, if not more so.
Having worked both sides of this spectrum, I’d definitely argue in favor of equal pay for CSRs.
In an ideal world salary would be determined by the difficulty of your job, but even if that were the case they still wouldn’t be paid the same.
The harsh reality is that while working retail requires mental toughness and the emotional stability to seal with difficult people, tons of jobs require that.
The truly high paying jobs are the ones where you need mental toughness, emotional stability, and a law degree. Or the ability to write software. Or the ability to conduct surgery.
The sad truth is that a lot of people can be patient and stable, so if that’s all you bring to the table you won’t be able to command a large paycheck.
Sad, but true.
The way I compare retail and corporate is like this:
When I worked in retail, I certainly had jobs that required a lot of hard work, but at the end of the day, when my shift ended, so did all thoughts about my job. Going to work in a retail job was a slight deviation from my routine that I did for a few hours before going about my day.
Today I have a prominent role in the marketing department of a publicly traded, multi-national software firm, and work essentially *is* my life. At least a lot more than it ever could be when I worked retail. I don’t really have an off switch, except for time with my wife and kids. Otherwise, I’m usually thinking about work in some capacity. It’s late on a Sunday night and I just spent an hour making sure the email copy in a European campaign set to kick off tomorrow was all set because it will be launched before I wake up tomorrow morning. These are expectations set, if not by my boss, at least by myself, to ensure I am delivering top-level performance at all times, and that my performance is reflected in the company’s success. Retail workers never have to think about stuff like that.
As a result, if I were to take my average hourly wage from my retail life and multiply it to a 40-hour-per-week, 52-week-per-year annual salary, it would be about 1/5 of my salary today, and I think that’s fair.
This pay varies depending on your state. In my state genius are not paid this much in 2021
That’s what’s happening. There is a fluctuation along state minimum wages.
Where the hell is GTA? Thought that was a game
It’s funny how people assume everyone knows their local abbreviations.
He meant he’s an NPC working for iFruit
Greater Toronto Area
Well now they should just make a Grand Theft Auto set in the Greater Toronto Area.
NPC’s apologise to you after you run said NPC over.
Greater Toronto Area I assume.
GTA… Grand Theft Auto?
Greater Toledo Area?
Great Times Ahead?
How the fuck did you think anyone else would know what that meant?
No, it isn’t, seeing as my comment is upvoted multiple times
I cringe hearing "pay equity". Any rational person can line up their colleagues in a row from who deserves least to most amount of money.
Working somewhere where we do this to a degree, no they can’t.
People are terrible at this, particularly the ones who think of themselves as rational. People have a massive bias (both unintentional and intentional) towards “people like me”.
That can be classic race/gender/age discrimination (which I’m going to give my colleagues the benefit of assuming is unintentional) but also location, job, team.
If you ask the sales team they’ll say that sales makes the actual money. If you ask the engineering team they’ll say they make the actual product so they’re worth more. If you ask anyone they’ll say management are overpaid, but also that no one wants to do their job unless it comes with a pay rise.
That’s all before you get into multiple locations, divisions, products etc.
Every time I’ve seen strict talent ranking it just reinforces the default old-boys-club. Whoever is in that group gets paid more and stays, reinforcing the dominance that group has.
I can do that.
Then I can get the actual figures and they rarely match. It's horrifying how seemingly random it is sometimes.
The argument (that I don’t necessarily endorse) is that value should be merit-based, where the ability to earn that money is equitable. Not based on where you live, what dangly bits you got, or how much melanin is in your skin.
Equity in this case is more about being denied pay because of factors outside your control, not about everyone making the exact same amount in your job position.
it is should be based where you live as well.
market value for different places are different.
for example especially with WFH environment: you will find a lot more people willing to work for less than people in your city. this exactly why Google pay less for people from different states.
This is Apple we’re talking about, not some random third rate company in the middle of nowhere. There is no way Apple is discriminating their workers based on gender, race, etc. That’s absolutely ridiculous when Apple is literally one of the most progressive big companies out there
If Apple is sexist/racist/bigoted when it comes to pay then god help us all, because Apple is about as liberal as you can get for a company
Apple is not one big unified entity. Discrimination exists among teams and in the heads of individual employees.
And from Apple’s own data scientists using self-reported data, there is a pay gap across genders, and Apple has been really hand wavy about it, saying it’s not a problem or it’s been addressed, or that a third party audit paid by Apple disputes those claims but you can’t see the data or question the auditors. This all comes from TheVerge.com and their Apple article on how slack is changing the culture at the company.
god help us indeed.
I recently got interviewed by Apple and it was for a specific team. From what i understand each engineering team has a lot of autonomy in what they do(including the hiring).
Oh my god. 🤦🏽♂️
You have no idea what you’re talking about
Go on the app Blind, and you’ll see how false your preconceptions about all the well-paid people working at the big tech companies are.
Even though these company cultures promote a certain message, there are many (especially those with some level of influence) who don’t follow the message.
Toxicity, bigotry, racism exist at every level.
Lets be real, these people are complaining because they don't make us much as the person in the cube next to them. I've seen this in the work force enough to know exactly what this about. And frankly, some people are just not worth as much as others.
Remember 10 years back when everyone started getting participation trophies in sports and people said it would ruin a generation? Yeah, the generation is here and itll get much worse.
No it’s clown HR that is completely disconnected from reality. That is why the people “who are not worth as much” have to quit to get a paid there worth. This is a common problem in large companies.
I think in software development specifically everyone starts the same generally. The problem comes with career growth, bonuses etc.. Where biases have a greater impact.
Also unrelated, remember 20+ years back when every scientist was warning of irreversible climate damage? Yeah, your generation screwed us and itll get much worse.
HR doesn't decide an individuals salary. They usually set the bands that X role salary fits in. Management sets the individuals salary within that band. Management can gauge an individuals usefulness to a business in comparison to others in that pay-band. Its better to understand the basics of what HR does before claiming they are 'disconnected from reality'.
>everyone starts the same
Oh what a disconnection. You think everyone puts the same input in, to the same ability, to the same effort, to the same desire for career growth?
At my company HR does set initial salary and hiring manager has no part or say in the discussion.
From there forward hiring manager can give raises within a pay band
HR has nothing to do with salaries... You blatantly have zero idea what your are talking about
theyre complaining because they shouldn't make less than their male counterparts because they have ovaries.
And they’re not. They get paid on their work and how they negotiate. Whoever does both best gets the most end of.
Good thing people in negotiations are completely absent of any implicit biases! /s
They know what you’re worth and have a max amount they’ll offer you. It’s your job to know your worth too.
Yahuh okay bud
Who gives a shit. If they’re working there then obviously they’re happy with their pay. It’s not like most Apple employees would have a hard time finding a job somewhere else.
I agree that it sucks when some people get more than they deserve while others get less. But I don’t see it as a huge problem. If there is a simple solution with no side effects, sure go ahead. But I don’t see such a solution (other than teaching and reminding people that sexism is not okay, and hoping that this will change their attitudes. And the obvious stuff like not tolerating sexual harassment etc. )
I think you’re thinking of pay *equality*. Pay *equity* accounts for factors beyond position.
I mean, equity literally means “fair” and equality literally means “the same”.
Very rarely do people show their hand this early. Thank you for making it quick.
Have you ever worked in IT?
This is America in a nutshell. People literally asking to get screwed over because they think it’s a meritocracy. Forty years of stagnant wages, all the wealth transferred to the top one percent, you get bankrupted when you get sick, insane education costs, and any attempts to secure workers rights or universal healthcare are the demon socialism. Americans are, in short, really, really dumb. They’re like turkeys voting for Christmas.
Christ. Every country in Europe has single payer healthcare. It’s free at the point of need. University education costs a fraction of the states. There’s a proper welfare safety net. And Europeans live longer, and they’re not as obese. Germany, one of the wealthiest countries on earth, mandates worker representation on every companies board of directors. America is singularly screwed up as a country.
Yeah and you’re a navy seal etc. Lol.
Tbh I'd rather have the job classes and levels just have appropriate pay, and let people actually be promoted to the appropriate level based on the value they bring. It's really easy to create big disparities between like people if you have a wide range within the same job class and level
Eliminating merit rewards is just another step on our way to collectivism (communism).
Did anyone in the meeting record it on their iPhone?
Everyone there uses a Galaxy z-flip
Someone should ask why are most of the people in their marketing videos black women, yet almost their entire senior management team are white males.
Simple answer: There are fewer black women graduating with computer science degrees.
That's easy. Apple has a strong culture that they wish to perpetuate and, as such, they predominantly hire from within the company for C-level positions - people who already understand Apple and how it works. Unfortunately, to get to a position where you can even be considered, you have to be with the company for a while and have moved up in the ranks. You also have to wait for an existing C-level executive to leave.
So, the problem is an entrenched C-suite and a push towards diversity that has not yet filtered up that high, but *has* filtered into most, if not all of the lower levels.
Also, you're wrong. "Most" of the people in the videos are not black women. However, there *is* a good spread of diversity, including women, disabled people, coloured people and so on. There's also a good diversity of thought, with fitness people, a former professional dancer and so on.
I so agree with this. This is the very striking difference between apple and samsung ads. Samsung advertises with models while Apple advertises with normal looking people.
I think he was talking about the keynote videos but the same arguments apply regardless.
Which is the case in many companies. Sadly that also means that it’s now way harder for the groups not contributing to diversity to „level-up“
>Sadly that also means that it’s now way harder for the groups not contributing to diversity to „level-up“
I hadn't heard that. Have you got a source?
Personal experience. But it’s also common sense. In today’s times, as you can see on the comment you replied too, it’s not good for a companies image to have a low quota of woman or other ethnicities, especially in higher positions.
In most Management Meetings I experience in the tech Industrie, there’s a high emphasize on promoting more of these groups into these positions. Which in return obviously means a reduced quota for the remaining group. Those deciding this obviously don’t care too much, it’s good for the image and they already got the positions in question, thus no impact for them anymore.
Just keep an eye out when you work in IT cooperations. It’s not difficult to track
> Personal experience. But it’s also common sense.
I don't know anything about you and it's quite possible you're entirely on the level but whenever a minority (or, in this case minorities) starts gaining ground against long held discriminations, then there is always a lot of contrary FUD floating around. As such, my default position is to reject any anecdotal evidence.
Data? Studies? I'm down. I actually teach this stuff at a low level to IT students so good data is always useful.
And common sense? Well, that's untrustworthy stuff. It used to tell us the Earth went around the sun and that the wind was caused by the trees waving.
Common sense in terms of applying math etc. As you might know, woman are heavily underrepresented in Management positions. Let’s assume the goal is to have them equally represented (based on current staff). How should that be achieved if you do not promote a greater number of them to balance out the misrepresentation that’s already in place? And what does it mean to the other ones? Obviously if one side goes up, the other must go down.
Furthermore you’ll notice that many tech companies say they want to have a female male quota of 50:50. this is in heavy contrast to the graduates distribution in computer sience.
But maybe you can clarify how you mathematically can balance out an existing imbalance without discriminating those that are on the historically preferred side, though not yet „benefited“ from it. Or aim for 50:50 with imbalanced „supply“.
I’m open to your arguments though.
I have no arguments. That's why I was looking for data. However, we are not talking about management positions, but C-level positions. Apple already has lots of previously under-represented groups in management positions and they're doing pretty well. In fact, their diversity has clear benefits. The iPhone, for example, is the favoured camera for the blind to use.
> we are not talking about management positions, but C-level positions.
The comment you replied to talks about senior management.
If you need data, they all exist. Especially easy for F/M.
Check graduate quota.
Check announced „goal“ quota of companies.
Check current quota of company.
Check how they can come from 30/70 Management to 50/50. hint: it’s not by promoting based on the quota of available working force.
But again, it’s possibly the only way. It just sucks that some of us have to balance out what previous generations f*cked up. And they don’t care because the next promotions don’t affect them (they got it already).
It’s especially shitty though when the quota is 50:50 when the recruiting pool isn’t even 50:50.
> Someone should ask why are most of the people in their marketing videos black women, yet almost their entire senior management team are white males.
The department making the videos is probably a lot more diverse than management is.
If i were to be cynical, i'd say because Apple doesn't really care about inclusion and they just run those ads for the PR
And you’d be 100% right. They don’t care and only do it to appease the woke ones crying about representation.
A lot of asian people too.
So I wonder if that pay equity is applied to Chinese and Vietnamese factory workers too.
He should address csam
Apple employees have surpassed google’s as the whiniest in the tech industry
It is time for Tim Cook to go. He isn’t a bad person but he is misleading the company. He concedes to every government desire around the world and mistreats employees.
Mistreated his employees? It’s probably a walk in the park under Tim. People were fucking terrified when they worked under Steve Jobs. Sure people found his passion and vision profound, but directly working with him apparently was unbearable. He was true asshole, even though he accomplished great things.
I know what you mean and you are right. Big tech companies will always bow to certain governments, because at the end of the day big tech companies are profit oriented.
There’s one thing we all have to admit to — notwithstanding the strong financial performance, Apple can never go back to those days where Steve Jobs and Jony Ive were at the helm.
It’s obviously not easy to manage and grow a business without pros and cons and tradeoffs, it’s a business not charity.
No one can deny the fact that being the CEO of this tech behemoth, Tim Cook is a very talented business manager. Cook needs a visionary product designer to bring all the best consumer technologies to the market. Just as how Angela Ahrendts and Christopher Bailey did to revitalize Burberry.
It’s definitely not easy to work at and for Apple, irrespective of the job title and scope of responsibility.
I truly believe that we can all build an incredible business by doing good by humanity. And in doing so, it takes time and effort. I wish it was all easier done than said.
I ❤️ Apple. The iPhone, iPad and MacBook have improved my life personally and professionally. In this regard, I only speak for myself.
Found Tim cook’s Reddit
Listen, if you wanted better pay you should have had the Apple Worker job and not the WOMAN Apple Worker Job. /s
Get outta here. What he did was no short of miraculous. Thanks to Timmy C I can retire in my late 30s.
Maybe he should be having a meeting about recycling. Not the aspect of recycling alluminium and magnets maybe about the features. This year and last year was what I call an in between iPhone like a bluff. Normally happens every couple years but never two years in a row!!!!