California Says Public Companies Have To Have Women On Board of Directors

What percentage of private large companies are owned by women?

What percentage of CEO's are women?

What percentage of public large companies were founded by women?

That isn't the fault of women.

Is it really relevant to the issue?

 

There's no limits on women except the ones they place on themselves. There's no limit to women in the corporate arena, except the limits that they place on themselves. Many women don't want that life. Many men don't either. Same for the women in STEM argument.

There are many talented and capable women, there's no doubt. Almost always, that talent is recognized and rewarded, if it is consistent and dedicated. In the industry I am in, I see companies falling over themselves to reward women with upper level and even C-suite positions, if they are at all qualified for them. (And: this is Big Business)

The problem is that at some point, most women want to engage in family life. This also a big part of the reason for the wage gap. Abandoning the career arena for many years is going to cost anyone that does that, in a career sense. And I'm not saying it shouldn't be done. The old saying "no one lay on their death bed feeling sorry that they didn't put in more hours at the office," applies here.

And yet it is that very sacrifice that success at the highest levels requires. I don't think most women want to make that sacrifice, especially if it means abandoning family. And by the way, there's a lot of men that don't want to make that sacrifice either. And that's fine. I'm all for life choices. But every choice has a cost.

In summary, the main thing I object to is quotas imposed by the government. That, and social engineering that runs counter to natural desires and goals.

 

Totally agree.

This is a clear case of government overstepping its bounds because of a current hot topic.

The best people for the job should get the job, period.

If that means 5 white guys, fine. If it means 5 black women or 5 transgender jews, fine.

 

I believe there is when we are referring to corporate executive positions. Maybe not when it comes to receiving an engineering degree and being hired into an entry level engineering position. That is all up to the female and her having a desire in those fields and the work ethic to do well in STEM programs.

But at uper echelons of executive management, there definitely is a "good ol boys" system of networking where privileged men were in the right frat born into the right family that are more predominant in high level corporate positions where men do have an inherent advantage. Nepotism and networking is run rampant in the uper echelons of corporate management.

 

Apparently they aren’t CEO s because they’re all going to medical school rather than starting companies

 

We need to get rid of these all-male garabage-truck crews, road-work crews, fishing-boat crews, roofing crews, lumberjack crews, firefighter engines, foot-soldier platoons, prisons, and restrooms.

END THE ABUSE!

 

Word.

 

There should be more women in board rooms, but I don't think legislative measures is the right solution.

Sexism may not be the only reason for a lack of women in the executive suite. I think it's something that should be researched and understood more.

 

While I agree with your right to have your own opinion I simply disagree. Companies should be allowed to hire based on whatever criteria they choose. The government is not a financial partner and does not share in the risk if that company fails. If you beleave otherwise I would argue that you are not as conservative as the next man.

 

The board is a mix of current executives like the CEO, former executives, and major shareholders (who often were former executives).

A law like this could mean some companies wouldn't be able to take a Series A round from a man because their board may only be 3 people - the seed investor and a male CEO. I think putting women on a board for the sake of having women on a board doesn't serve women nor the company.

 

There are perfectly qualified underrepresented minorities that never had their chance and kept silent in order to be team players. When the environment is pervasive and industry wide, it stifles the traditional means of moving up (transferring departments, finding other places with the title), and that in itself reduces the competitiveness of these companies with an artificially induced supply of available directors.

The glass ceiling and all boys club is already a form of social engineering and it’s highly discriminatory. Civil rights reform broke corporate racism down to smaller chunks because the numbers were clear. Not having any women at the board at all is one of those numbers.

In time, I would disagree with the policy if they moved that beyond one woman, but doing nothing about this out of principle is an act of gross negligence and support of a sexist system.

 

I guess board rooms need cleaning too. I’m kidding!

 

I feel so, so, so sorry for any future sons I have.

This world is becoming a joke.

 

You sound like you don't know what you're talking about if you don't think there's certain qualifications and attributes someone should have to be sitting on the Board of Directors of a company.

 

Nepotism and "networking" are those qualifications.

 

I guess I just don't believe this, mostly because I have never seen it in any place I have worked. Nor have I heard of it from friends and acquaintances.

If a man or woman has talent and dedication to his/her job, and makes a difference in the endeavor, management will recognize it.

Now -- sometimes management is stupid. That's true. Almost always, in such a case, the talented employee takes their skills to a competitor, who are more than willing to reward them.

Basically, as far as I can see in "real life," this glass ceiling business is a bunch of hogwash that is offered up by certain "civil rights groups" that need to find something wrong in society to perpetuate their existence.