Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Every employee who leaves Apple becomes an ‘associate’

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 337 posts

Re: Every employee who leaves Apple becomes an ‘associate’

#191

Post by jsjohnst »

PedroBatista wrote: post #90
jsjohnst wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just checked my emails and it was always $500 credit offered after returning for me, so maybe some DTK folks were offered $200? Either way, it ultimately was $500 however by your own admission, even if initially stated to some as $200.

Thanks again for participating in the Universal App Quick Start Program. We heard your feedback regarding the 200 USD appreciation credit mentioned in our last email. Our intention was to recognize the tremendous effort that you have put into creating amazing universal apps. By partnering with us early, you showed your commitment to our platform and a willingness to be trailblazers. So instead of the 200 USD credit t…

> we are giving you a 500 USD Apple credit and extending the time you can use it to get a new M1 Mac through the end of the year

So we are in agreement it was $500 that Apple ultimately offered? Great. Glad we cleared that up and what I said was correct.

Re: Every employee who leaves Apple becomes an ‘associate’

#192

Post by trulyawful »

Retric wrote: post #189
trulyawful wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve been investigated by federal and state governments nine times (welcome to contracting) since leaving Apple, up to and including a full SSBI, and have never heard a word about a discrepancy. Ever. Public sector, private sector, HireRight, nobody has ever flagged it, and I know what that looks like because others have been. HireRight in particular is sensitive to job level or title differences in what you report a…

Apple lying to the federal or state government etc doing background checks is quite different than sharing incorrect information to private systems.

I specifically mentioned the private sector twice. I go back and forth, and I only started off with government because it was contextual where I was replying. It has never happened to me in either context and I left Apple quite acrimoniously.

Apple lying at all is bad. It doesn’t matter to who. It’s potential liability if a candidate gets wind of it, but if these folks are going after the NLRB to address the concern, I suspect it means their lawyer told them they don’t have a case (probably because Apple confirmed their role accurately to the investigation in question regardless of what the credit reporting database says, I would guess).

Re: Every employee who leaves Apple becomes an ‘associate’

#193

Post by tptacek »

SilasX wrote: post #183
tptacek wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're not "lying about their level". Contra the article, the term "associate" does not in fact mean "junior employee"; I can think of huge companies where everyone's formal title is "associate" regardless of seniority, in the same way that Bell Labs did MTS. Further, nobody is "bending over backwards" to defend anybody; they're writing their own take on what happened. You're asked by the guidelines to assume good f…

I have to disagree. If they don't want to give titles, they should ... not give titles. That is, give no information for that field/query. If the system requires it, do something like "n/a". When you state "employee title: Associate", you are conveying[1] that the title "Associate" Is A Thing at Apple, and the former employee had that title. And if (as is the case here) it is the most unadorned title anyone can have…

Starbucks calls all its employees "partners". Are they misleading future employers in the opposite direction?

It sounds to me like Apple is just another tech company that doesn't confirm titles, and that their generic word for "employee" is "associate". That is not a weird Apple thing; if you go out into the Fortune 500, you'll find a bunch of other companies that do the same thing. Contra this article, "associate" does not in fact mean "low-level employee".

Re: Every employee who leaves Apple becomes an ‘associate’

#194

Post by Wiseacre »

trenning wrote: post #20

Sounds like when you leave Apple you are free to give yourself a title promotion since they wipe all that info. I would also pass on any company that needs references to my job title because their dystopian background check through the infamous Equifax says I'm an associate, even with a software engineering background, haha that part was beyond silly.

I'm sure a non-zero number of ex-Apple interns will try putting "Senior Software Engineer" on their resume for a $350,000 director gig at a startup.

Re: Every employee who leaves Apple becomes an ‘associate’

#195

Post by eunoia »

daniel_reetz wrote: post #145
tristor wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wouldn't there be other ways for you to prove you were a "Level 4" or whatever at Apple and not an associate? An offer letter from Apple? Having gone through this with several employers, the largest company doing this verification is HireRight. HireRight is BEYOND incompetent at every single level. They refuse documentation such as offer letters on company letterhead to prove a title. The only documentation they ac…

Can confirm. And Apple used HireRight when they hired me.

Me too. HireRight was somehow completely unable to contact some of my previous employers. Situation resulted in me visiting old offices in person for proof of employment to satisfy HireRight.

This all occurred after I had accepted the job offer and took a long and stressful time.

Re: Every employee who leaves Apple becomes an ‘associate’

#196

Post by ghaff »

Retric wrote: post #189
trulyawful wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve been investigated by federal and state governments nine times (welcome to contracting) since leaving Apple, up to and including a full SSBI, and have never heard a word about a discrepancy. Ever. Public sector, private sector, HireRight, nobody has ever flagged it, and I know what that looks like because others have been. HireRight in particular is sensitive to job level or title differences in what you report a…

Apple lying to the federal or state government etc doing background checks is quite different than sharing incorrect information to private systems.

One can debate whether companies in general should use "associate" to refer to all their employees given that it has a specific meaning in some contexts, e.g. Big Law. Nonetheless, many companies do so. (Probably because employee has some specific legal meaning.) So it's not lying to basically say they worked here. I expect that many companies do this and it seems entirely appropriate.

Re: Every employee who leaves Apple becomes an ‘associate’

#197

Post by penguin_booze »

rdtsc wrote: post #184

Am I the only one surprised these sharing databases even exist? What if Apple went the other way, and artificially inflated the level? Every engineer is "Senior engineer level XIV". Or, they could be evil and tie the level entered to the conditions of leave. If you sign a bunch of non-competes and non-disclosures etc, you get marked 2 levels up in this db. One of my employers used to let us pick our own titles. We co…

It's unsettling that these behind the scenes database/cliques exists.

Some time ago, I listened to a podcast (might be NPR) that talked about an employee, who left a financial firm, couldn't find a new job. Every opportunity to which he applied, either rejected him with unconvincing reasons or ghosted him. Later he found out that his previous manager poisoned the well in some shady database to make sure his life outside that job will be miserable.

Re: Every employee who leaves Apple becomes an ‘associate’

#199

Post by SilasX »

tptacek wrote: post #193
SilasX wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to disagree. If they don't want to give titles, they should ... not give titles. That is, give no information for that field/query. If the system requires it, do something like "n/a". When you state "employee title: Associate", you are conveying[1] that the title "Associate" Is A Thing at Apple, and the former employee had that title. And if (as is the case here) it is the most unadorned title anyone can have…

Starbucks calls all its employees "partners". Are they misleading future employers in the opposite direction? It sounds to me like Apple is just another tech company that doesn't confirm titles, and that their generic word for "employee" is "associate". That is not a weird Apple thing; if you go out into the Fortune 500, you'll find a bunch of other companies that do the same thing. Contra this article, "associate" d…

Starbuck refers to their employees as partners in addition to an actual title. (I worked for HEB in high school, which did the same thing.) If they genuinely had no titles for anyone beyond partner, then yes, that would be fine. Apple doesn't work like that.

Re: Every employee who leaves Apple becomes an ‘associate’

#200

Post by ProAm »

reaperducer wrote: post #166
tinalumfoil wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe, but my experience working mostly at smaller companies is that nobody really cares. If you say you’re a level X they’ll say, “okay prove it. Demonstrate through your accomplishments and knowledge you’re a level X” not “Prove it. Show us your documentation, citizen.” I also can’t imagine verifying or asking HR to verify someone’s level or salary. They’d start questioning if I understood the point of the intervie…

I also can’t imagine verifying or asking HR to verify someone’s level or salary. They’d start questioning if I understood the point of the interview. The whole prior salary thing is very touchy now, and in some states potential employers aren't allowed to ask. The company my wife works for will only confirm whether an employee was employed at a given date, or not. No salary information. No titles. Nothing other than…

> in some states potential employers aren't allowed to ask.

You dont need to when you can just look this up. Plenty of services offer this now. You're salary is pretty much public info. [1]

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29834753

Post reply on HN