California's New Board Quota Law Could Move the Needle on Diversity
A bill signed into law this week by Gov. Jerry Brown has made gender diversity on company boards not just a moral issue, but a legal one for companies in California.
October 02, 2018 at 02:34 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Corporate Counsel
A bill signed into law this week by Gov. Jerry Brown has made gender diversity on company boards not just a moral issue, but a legal one for companies in California.
Companies headquartered in the Golden State will need to have at least one woman on their board by 2019. Larger boards will be required to have more women, two out of five or three out of seven directors, and be given until 2021 to comply.
California's Senate Bill No. 826 comes a year into the #MeToo movement, which has prompted discussions on workplace gender equity. It's the first time a U.S. state has set a quota for women on boards, a rather controversial approach to boosting diversity.
Susan Keating, the chief executive officer of WomenCorporateDirectors, an international organization of women on boards that works to increase diversity, said that even among her group, there are differing views on gender quotas.
“We have members that are in California who not only supported the bill but were engaged in writing the legislation, and we have other members that ardently stand for deregulation,” Keating said.
She said WCD has focused on increasing the pipeline of diverse candidates rather than quotas. That's in part because California's mandate is the first of its kind in the U.S.
But California is far from the first jurisdiction globally to have a gender quota for boards. For a decade Norway has required corporate boards to be at least 40 percent women. Italy, France and other European countries have similar quotas, which have upped the number of women on boards. However, the board quotas did not seem to move the needle for women in other gender equity areas.
The Economist reported that in the decade since Norway's quota went into place, fears of unqualified women being appointed to boards mostly did not come to fruition and that qualified women were not stretched any thinner than their male counterparts.
In California, as in European countries with board quotas, companies that don't comply will be fined. For companies in California, the fine is $100,000 on first offense and $300,000 for subsequent violations.
Olga Mack, the vice president of Quantstamp Inc., founder of Women Serve On Boards and a longtime in-house lawyer, said she believes having the quota as law will bring gender equity sooner.
“When it's illegal not to find women they tend to be found,” Mack said.
Mack advocated for the bill. She said that, because the number of women required increases by board size, there should not be a single token female board member, a concern of some quota critics.
Without regulation, women may still find a place in leadership—but that could take a century, Mack said, and the new law will help bring equity now.
“It's predicted for us to reach parity on corporate boards it will [take] 40 to 100 years, so it will not happen during my lifetime and not during my daughters' lifetime,” Mack said. “So I'm convinced we should be doing something on a policy front to change it in our lifetime, because one lifetime or two lifetimes is a long time to wait.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPlaintiffs Seek Redo of First Trial Over Medical Device Plant's Emissions
4 minute readIn Lawsuit, Ex-Google Employee Says Company’s Layoffs Targeted Parents and Others on Leave
6 minute readPaul Weiss’ Shanmugam Joins 11th Circuit Fight Over False Claims Act’s Constitutionality
Trending Stories
- 1As 'Red Hot' 2024 for Legal Industry Comes to Close, Leaders Reflect and Share Expectations for Next Year
- 2Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 3Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 4Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 5Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250