Should Calif Mandate a Woman in the Boardroom

[Nakosis]

California is moving toward becoming the first state to require companies to have women on their boards –assuming the idea could survive a likely court challenge.

Sparked by debates around fair pay, sexual harassment and workplace culture, two female state senators are spearheading a bill to promote greater gender representation in corporate decision-making. Of the 445 publicly traded companies in California, a quarter of them lack a single woman in their boardrooms.

California may mandate a woman in the boardroom, but businesses are fighting it

While I understand the sentiment, I don't agree with the government getting involved to this degree in business. Mainly because I don't see it actually solving what they are trying to solve.

The easy way around this for any board is to simply appoint the wife of some CEO, and pay her a salary. Benefit for the CEO is he now gets to pull two salaries from the company profits.

A lot of these positions on a BoDs is honorary anyway. It's not necessarily a position of any actual power. Also any woman having a position on a BoD could be assumed to have been mandated the position instead of earning it. It may end up making it tougher for a woman in these positions to be taken seriously.

I'm not saying there aren't plenty of strong will business minded women, just this doesn't really guarantee such a women getting a position on the board. There's also men on the boards in honorary positions which hold no real power.

So I'm not against it, it just doesn't really fix anything. It's basically a social justice gesture.

 

[Twilight Hue]

California is moving toward becoming the first state to require companies to have women on their boards –assuming the idea could survive a likely court challenge.

Sparked by debates around fair pay, sexual harassment and workplace culture, two female state senators are spearheading a bill to promote greater gender representation in corporate decision-making. Of the 445 publicly traded companies in California, a quarter of them lack a single woman in their boardrooms.

California may mandate a woman in the boardroom, but businesses are fighting it

While I understand the sentiment, I don't agree with the government getting involved to this degree in business. Mainly because I don't see it actually solving what they are trying to solve.

The easy way around this for any board is to simply appoint the wife of some CEO, and pay her a salary. Benefit for the CEO is he now gets to pull two salaries from the company profits.

A lot of these positions on a BoDs is honorary anyway. It's not necessarily a position of any actual power. Also any woman having a position on a BoD could be assumed to have been mandated the position instead of earning it. It may end up making it tougher for a woman in these positions to be taken seriously.

I'm not saying there aren't plenty of strong will business minded women, just this doesn't really guarantee such a women getting a position on the board. There's also men on the boards in honorary positions which hold no real power.

So I'm not against it, it just doesn't really fix anything. It's basically a social justice gesture.

I think governments should appoint people with brains and smarts. Women or man.

If not....

She can sit in her chair and look pretty.

 

[YmirGF]

A dumb idea with good intentions.

 

[Mindmaster]

A dumb idea with good intentions.

Let us mandate sexism to defend against sexism...

Please hold while I shoot myself in the foot... (facepalm)

This is completely nonsensical in every way.

 

[Revoltingest]

California is moving toward becoming the first state to require companies to have women on their boards –assuming the idea could survive a likely court challenge.

Sparked by debates around fair pay, sexual harassment and workplace culture, two female state senators are spearheading a bill to promote greater gender representation in corporate decision-making. Of the 445 publicly traded companies in California, a quarter of them lack a single woman in their boardrooms.

California may mandate a woman in the boardroom, but businesses are fighting it

While I understand the sentiment, I don't agree with the government getting involved to this degree in business. Mainly because I don't see it actually solving what they are trying to solve.

The easy way around this for any board is to simply appoint the wife of some CEO, and pay her a salary. Benefit for the CEO is he now gets to pull two salaries from the company profits.

A lot of these positions on a BoDs is honorary anyway. It's not necessarily a position of any actual power. Also any woman having a position on a BoD could be assumed to have been mandated the position instead of earning it. It may end up making it tougher for a woman in these positions to be taken seriously.

I'm not saying there aren't plenty of strong will business minded women, just this doesn't really guarantee such a women getting a position on the board. There's also men on the boards in honorary positions which hold no real power.

So I'm not against it, it just doesn't really fix anything. It's basically a social justice gesture.

It's a great idea!
Government should extend the requirement. All boards should also have atheist,
gay, young, elderly, handicapped, veteran, wiccan, & all other types of people.
The same should be required of city councils, legislatures, administrations, etc.
A quota system should determine who is hired or elected.

 

[YmirGF]

It's a great idea!
Government should extend the requirement. All boards should also have atheist,
gay, young, elderly, handicapped, veteran, wiccan, & all other types of people.
The same should be required of city councils, legislatures, administrations, etc.
A quota system should determine who is hired or elected.

You are such a revolutionary! Yep, that would work.

 

[Twilight Hue]

It's a great idea!
Government should extend the requirement. All boards should also have atheist,
gay, young, elderly, handicapped, veteran, wiccan, & all other types of people.
The same should be required of city councils, legislatures, administrations, etc.
A quota system should determine who is hired or elected.

One person for every pronoun. Going to need more seats.

 

[Revoltingest]

One person for every pronoun. Going to need more seats.

Boards must be enlarged then.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Sometimes laws are needed because without things never get any better:

 

[Orbit]

I'm always surprised that although female representation is a problem, people think just putting any female in the seat will help. They need a smart, capable female. There's nothing about just being a woman that means you're not an idiot. I agree that they will just end up appointing their wives, which is a very sad outcome.

 

[Woberts]

Let us mandate sexism to defend against sexism...

Do you even know what sexism is?

 

[Cacotopia]

I guess people qualifying has no merit huh. I don';t agree with any mandates that people need a healthy diverse cultural "portfolio" of people working for a company. If you are the best qualified that should be the end of the discussion. Race or gender shouldn't be an issue. Just qualifications.

 

[Woberts]

I guess people qualifying has no merit huh. I don';t agree with any mandates that people need a healthy diverse cultural "portfolio" of people working for a company. If you are the best qualified that should be the end of the discussion. Race or gender shouldn't be an issue. Just qualifications.

>inb4 most boards are made up of old white men

 

[Revoltingest]

>inb4 most boards are made up of old white men

Oh, how I hate them!

 

[Cacotopia]

If someone better and more qualified comes along, then those old bags of flesh need to be replaced.

 

[Mindmaster]

Do you even know what sexism is?

Sexism is prejudice based on biological gender and the roles that people can fill. Modern progressives like the cute words, "Workplace Gender Discrimination". Whatever floats your boat, it's all the same.

My joke was poking at the fact that they were going to combat their "Workplace Gender Discrimination" by doing more of it against men. I find that massively amusing and hypocritical...

Women do not hold top jobs not because they can't, but because most of them are not interested. This has been the case for a long time for reasons only the women can tell you.

Personally, I think most intelligent women who were qualified for those jobs would probably be much better communicators as is typical the case. It would probably help the average board room to have more of them in there, TBH.

However, I think it's completely stupid to do this with some sort of governmental ordinance -- this process should be entirely merit based with no consideration of any protected class. Companies should have the right to put their best (regardless of their particulars) in the top seats. I think this hamstrings many smaller companies that may not have talented women in house who would be able to serve the role. In some roles, specifically tech, there ARE NO WOMEN that do that job at the higher tiers. What about them? Do you move the HR lady to the CIO? It's just silly to think about it.

 

[Cacotopia]

I feel like reverse sexism will be a big trend until people wake up the fact that it is a form of circular hatred. What's the term you kids use? Get woke?

Men had a sort o' patriarchal handle on society for a few 1000 years, women wanna rub men's phalluses in the dirt make it a bit of a matriarchal society I suppose, towards men of the recent generations. When those that lived at the end of that time are about to kick the bucket.

 

[Shad]

Horrible idea.

 

[cfyahoo08]

California is moving toward becoming the first state to require companies to have women on their boards –assuming the idea could survive a likely court challenge.

Sparked by debates around fair pay, sexual harassment and workplace culture, two female state senators are spearheading a bill to promote greater gender representation in corporate decision-making. Of the 445 publicly traded companies in California, a quarter of them lack a single woman in their boardrooms.

California may mandate a woman in the boardroom, but businesses are fighting it

While I understand the sentiment, I don't agree with the government getting involved to this degree in business. Mainly because I don't see it actually solving what they are trying to solve.

The easy way around this for any board is to simply appoint the wife of some CEO, and pay her a salary. Benefit for the CEO is he now gets to pull two salaries from the company profits.

A lot of these positions on a BoDs is honorary anyway. It's not necessarily a position of any actual power. Also any woman having a position on a BoD could be assumed to have been mandated the position instead of earning it. It may end up making it tougher for a woman in these positions to be taken seriously.

I'm not saying there aren't plenty of strong will business minded women, just this doesn't really guarantee such a women getting a position on the board. There's also men on the boards in honorary positions which hold no real power.

So I'm not against it, it just doesn't really fix anything. It's basically a social justice gesture.

Government should not come in our homes and tell us what to do, and they should not go into privately held business and tell the owners what to or not to do in most cases.