Companies headquartered in California can no longer have all-male boards

[D4thincarnation]

They should do this to Hollywood, the media, and the banks and make it so that no one race / ethnicity can have a massively disproportionate share of power.

It will never happen though, because most people know why

You should check out the Supreme Court.

[GrandmasterWang]

That's according to a new law, enacted Sunday, which requires publicly traded firms in the state to place at least one woman on their board of directors by the end of 2019 — or face a penalty.

It also requires companies with five directors to add two women by the end of 2021, and companies with six or more directors to add at least three more women by the end of the same year.

It's the first such law on the books in the United States, though similar measures are common in European countries.

The measure was passed by California's state legislature last month. And it was signed into law by Gov. Jerry Brown on Sunday, along with a trove of other bills that look to "protect and support women, children and working families," the governor's office said in a release.

A majority of companies in the S&P 500 have at least one woman on their boards, but only about a quarter have more than two, according to a study from PwC.

California state Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson told The Wall Street Journal last month when the legislation passed that "one-fourth of California's publicly traded companies still do not have a single woman on their board, despite numerous independent studies that show companies with women on their board are more profitable and productive."

"With women comprising over half the population and making over 70% of purchasing decisions, their insight is critical to discussions and decisions that affect corporate culture, actions and profitability," she told the outlet.

Some see California's law as a crucial step toward establishing better parity in corporate leadership.

But setting quotas can be controversial, Vicki W. Kramer, lead author of the landmark 2006 study, "Critical Mass on Corporate Boards," told CNN last month. Opponents argue that pressure from quotas will lead to unqualified female members and potential discrimination against male candidates.

When quotas are not set, however, companies may fail to diversify their ranks. She points to more "aspirational" legislation in other states, like in Pennsylvania, where a 2017 resolution urged both public and private companies to have a minimum of 30% women on their boards by 2020. But without teeth in the law, Kramer said, better numbers won't follow.

Kramer said California's legislation is weak compared to the laws in Norway and other European countries, which require a certain percentage of women on boards. For larger Norwegian companies, the legislation requires that women make up as much as 40% of the board.

Thanks for linking that.

Absolutely pathetic. Terrible decision.

I support women on boards, but they should get there by merit, not some garbage quota.

This is actually a great insult to every woman already serving on a corporate board in California who got their based on their skills, experiences and ability to deliver results.

SJW pandering at its absolute worst.

['b']

You should check out the Supreme Court.

Yeah I know

[Motorcity Cobra]

I don't care for this rule either. It most cases it probably won't be an issue to find a qualified woman for the board, but in some cases it might not be reasonable and that should be OK

There are plenty of qualified wimen for thev positions but the good old boys network won't let them in.

[man down]

There are plenty of qualified wimen for thev positions but the good old boys network won't let them in.

I dont understand this way of thinking.
You think companies care more about men than making money? As a business owner I hired whoever would make me the most money. I could care less what color, what *** they were.

[Don Pichardo]

When are they going to demand 50% of women working in the sewers and 50% of the women on deep sea fishing vessels and 50% of women doing road works?


Feminism is not about equality, it about special treatment for women.

No it’s about equal pay for same work and equal opportunities for advancement. Statistics show they are disparate.

[D4thincarnation]

No it’s about equal pay for same work and equal opportunities for advancement. Statistics show they are disparate.

Wrong.

The gender pay gap is just an average of all male earning compared to all female earnings. Regardless of job, hours worked and years of experienced.

Affirmation action and tokenism is not equal opportunities, it is favoring one group and giving them extra opportunities.


Statistic shows a difference but that is through choice, as proved by Scandinavian countries that show when given more choice and opportunity, the difference in job choices between men and women grow rather than close.

[Don Pichardo]

You should check out the Supreme Court.

Thank *****.

Of the 113 justices, 109 (96.5%) have been men. All Supreme Court justices were males until 1981, when Ronald Reagan fulfilled his 1980 campaign promise to place a woman on the Court,[52] which he did with the appointment of Sandra Day O'Connor. O'Connor was later joined on the Court by Ruth Bader Ginsburg, appointed by Bill Clinton in 1993. After O'Connor retired in 2006, Ginsburg would be joined by Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, who were successfully appointed to the Court in 2009 and 2010, respectively, by Barack *****.[53] The only other woman to be nominated to the Court was Harriet Miers, whose nomination to succeed O'Connor by George W. Bush was withdrawn under fire

[D4thincarnation]

Thank *****.

Of the 113 justices, 109 (96.5%) have been men. All Supreme Court justices were males until 1981, when Ronald Reagan fulfilled his 1980 campaign promise to place a woman on the Court,[52] which he did with the appointment of Sandra Day O'Connor. O'Connor was later joined on the Court by Ruth Bader Ginsburg, appointed by Bill Clinton in 1993. After O'Connor retired in 2006, Ginsburg would be joined by Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, who were successfully appointed to the Court in 2009 and 2010, respectively, by Barack *****.[53] The only other woman to be nominated to the Court was Harriet Miers, whose nomination to succeed O'Connor by George W. Bush was withdrawn under fire

Think again, and look at the ********ic appointees

[man down]

No it’s about equal pay for same work and equal opportunities for advancement. Statistics show they are disparate.

Female CEO's make more than men.