Apple shareholders defy company, approve civil rights audit plans

Apple shareholders have defined the companies recommendations and voted to pass measures that could see Apple conduct a third-party audit pertaining to civil rights.

Shareholders voted at the company’s annual shareholders’ meeting on March 4, passing the resolution by a narrow margin.

Back in December it was reported that Apple would face a vote on the matter amidst calls for the company to conduct a new civil rights audit. News at the time cited “employee controversies” and “slow progress in diversifying its workforce.” From Apple’s official shareholders’ meeting proxy statement:

RESOLVED that shareholders of Apple Inc. (“Apple”) urge the Board of Directors to oversee a third-party audit analyzing the adverse impact of Apple’s policies and practices on the civil rights of company stakeholders, above and beyond legal and regulatory matters, and to provide recommendations for improving the company’s civil rights impact. Input from civil rights organizations, employees, and customers should be considered in determining the specific matters to be analyzed. A report on the audit, prepared at reasonable cost and omitting confidential or proprietary information, should be publicly disclosed on Apple’s website.

The proposal cited racial inequality, pay equity, privacy (especially Apple’s child safety measures and CSAM scanning), and more. Apple recommended voting against the move, at the time stating it was “committed to respecting human rights, including civil rights, and to ensure everyone is treated with dignity and respect. We work every day to put people first—by being a force for equity and opportunity, creating an inclusive and diverse work environment, respecting the human rights, including the civil rights, of everyone whose lives we touch, and empowering them with accessible technology.” The company had claimed it already fulfilled the objectives of the proposal in several ways.

Shareholders voted on a number of issues, including passing Apple’s proposed executive compensation package for 2022 despite some opposition.

(function(d, s, id) {
var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];
if (d.getElementById(id)) return;
js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;
js.src = “https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v2.7”;
js.defer = 1;
fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);
}(document, ‘script’, ‘facebook-jssdk’));

var fbAsyncInitOrg = window.fbAsyncInit;
window.fbAsyncInit = function() {
if(typeof(fbAsyncInitOrg)==’function’) fbAsyncInitOrg();
FB.init({
appId: “291830964262722”,
xfbml: true,
version : ‘v2.7’
});

FB.Event.subscribe('xfbml.ready', function(msg) {   // Log all the ready events so we can deal with them later
  var events = fbroot.data('ready-events');
  if( typeof(events) === 'undefined') events = [];
  events.push(msg);
  fbroot.data('ready-events',events);
});

var fbroot = $('#fb-root').trigger('facebook:init');

};

Leave a Comment

%d bloggers like this: