I also believe "they" refers to legal responsibilities of the company as a whole, which are distinct and independent from the responsibilities of individual members. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood .
Even if you don't like corporate personhood, "they" can also refer to those people with an executive role, that is, the people who collectively made the decision. He does not have executive authority in this decision, so is not a member of that "we".
Why is "we" specifically meaning employment? Can't being a shareholder also count as "we"? That is, I can own a company, and control a company, but not be employed by the company - surely "we" still applies there.
Consider that, if Wozniak own shares of Goldman Sachs then, as shareholder, he could have a role in guiding its policies. (Ditto for Apple, of course.) But it wouldn't make sense to refer to both roles as "we", as that would make it even more confusing.
"Representative ... in a ceremonial capacity" is not "spokesman" except in the broadest of senses (eg, all employees, in some sense, can be spokespeople). It certainly isn't a spokesman for all of Apple's policies.
I'll note that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spokesperson comments "it is the job of a spokesman to faithfully represent and advocate for the organization's positions, even when these conflict with their own opinion."
This strongly suggests that Wozniak is not a spokesman, in the usual sense of that word, for Apple.
