California Mandates Boards Must Have One Female Member (cost, law)

[UEHelp]

Well, this is interesting.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-c...-idUSKCN1MB172

[TristramShandy]

Companies are stupid if they don't.

[kettlepot]

Given that the Supreme Court has ruled racial quotas unconstitutional, this law should quickly establish the legal principle that gender quotas are unconstitutional too.

Q: Why bother to pass something that they know will be struck down, and will cost the state million of dollars to argue through the appeals process?

A: Virtue signalling.

[Des-Lab]

Originally Posted by kettlepot

Given that the Supreme Court has ruled racial quotas unconstitutional, this law should quickly establish the legal principle that gender quotas are unconstitutional too.

Q: Why bother to pass something that they know will be struck down, and will cost the state million of dollars to argue through the appeals process?

A: Virtue signalling.

Phhhht. Please. The USSC takes its orders from CA. You still one of those who thinks it's other way around? CA has the trifecta of clout: social, political, and economic...to where it can do....pretty much whatever it wants. Who's going to stop them? Congressman Maynard Fartney of South Bumbleville, KY?


If CA says it's legal, it's legal. Period. DC can sit there and saber rattle all it wants. They neither can nor will they actually dare and try and stop us. You can bet your last California fish taco that for all the grumbling you see in DC about CA, it's purely for show. Created to give the illusion and impression that CA has to answer to anyone but themselves. Soon as the cameras are off, it's "Do as you like CA".

Get real.


California is to the Union what Facebook is to Social Media or Wal-Mart to retail: invincible and untouchable and can and will do whatever they want. Because they can.

[expatCA]

Originally Posted by Des-Lab

Phhhht. Please. The USSC takes its orders from CA. You still one of those who thinks it's other way around? CA has the trifecta of clout: social, political, and economic...to where it can do....pretty much whatever it wants. Who's going to stop them? Congressman Maynard Fartney of South Bumbleville, KY?


If CA says it's legal, it's legal. Period. DC can sit there and saber rattle all it wants. They neither can nor will they actually dare and try and stop us. You can bet your last California fish taco that for all the grumbling you see in DC about CA, it's purely for show. Created to give the illusion and impression that CA has to answer to anyone but themselves. Soon as the cameras are off, it's "Do as you like CA".

Get real.


California is to the Union what Facebook is to Social Media or Wal-Mart to retail: invincible and untouchable and can and will do whatever they want. Because they can.

Uh, the 9th circuit court, which covers CA, has had its ruling overturned by the USSC sooo many times. You have no idea.

[kettlepot]

I know a number of the responses are bit on the facetious side, however reconsidering my previous post, before adjudicating the quotas issue, the higher courts will probably overturn it as impermissible state regulation of interstate commerce. Publicly listed companies are generally covered by federal law.

Now, if the law says that the California Public Employees Retirement System will only invest in companies that meet these quotas, that might have some legs.

[LuvSouthOC]

Social engineers gonn’ socially engineer. Is there concern that Boards of Directors all have at least one single male member? Yeah, thought not.

Also, there are what, like 73 genders now, so should each of those be ensured a place on the BoD?

[Synchromesh]

What about LGBT, black and latinos, Jews and so on? I think it should be a requirement too. On top of that I think it's fair to require that no men are present (unless they're one of the above) and definitely no white men (ever). Because since now qualification depend purely on what you have in your pants so why not push it a little?

[JGC97]

Makes you wonder how women will perceive this. If they're fortunate enough to become a board member, did they make it because they're worthy or is it to fill a quota?

[Des-Lab]

Originally Posted by HereOnMars

Makes you wonder how women will perceive this. If they're fortunate enough to become a board member, did they make it because they're worthy or is it to fill a quota?

Probably makes no difference. It's having them paychecks and that decision making power that matters, not how or why they got there.