Posted on by Californiacontrarian

Underrepresented

“I have been underrepresented all of my adult life. It’s just not fair! When I was younger no one wanted me on their sports teams, and now that I am older, I am underrepresented in the corporate boardrooms. My group makes up 13.9% of the population in the U.S. and so we should make up at least 13.9% of those in corporate boardrooms. I am not going to take it anymore! I am tired of being nice! We need to pass a law to insure that we are proportionately represented. I am left-handed and proud of it.”

Any rational person reading this would probably have to resist laughing out loud. It should be obvious to everyone that boardroom representation would and should be based on merit. A corporation could appoint a bunch of southpaws to its board, but unless these left-handed individuals had concomitant excellent qualifications, this corporation would be setting itself up for failure.
But this doesn’t have to stop with left-handed individuals. For example, these same exhortations could be made by people of short stature . . . “Those of us men who are less than 5’7”, and those of us women who are less than 5’2” make up 19.75% of the U.S. population, and therefore it would only be fair if we made up at least 19.75% of the corporate boardrooms. All we short people have to do is get elected to state legislatures, and then we can propose legislation that encourages ‘fairness’ for a group that is obviously underrepresented in corporate boardrooms. If we can then get some vocal short legislators to feign enough anger and resentment to this obvious injustice, we can probably convince many of the other lemming-like legislators to agree that there is corporate bias against short people. Next we can propose and pass a law that corporate boardrooms in this state must not continue this prejudicial attitude. This new law will mandate that corporate boards have at least 20% of its members be people of short stature. It doesn’t actually matter that new law this is blatantly unconstitutional, because what’s fair is fair!”
I can hear all of you laughing out loud . . . but welcome to California!

Citing a lack of diversity in corporate boardrooms, California lawmakers on 8/30/18 sent Gov. Jerry Brown a bill that would require women to be included on the boards of directors of firms based in the state.The bill (co-authored by Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson, D-Santa Barbara, and Senate leader Toni Atkins, D-San Diego) states that publicly held corporations in California include at least one woman on their boards of directors by the end of 2019, and at least two by July 2021. Corporate boards with six or more members would be required to have at least three women on the panels by the middle of 2021. That means that a corporate board with six members would be required to have 50% of the panel members be female by the middle of 2021. Does it also mean that if there are three members on a corporate board of directors in July, 2021, that two of them, 67%, must be female?

“We are not going to ask anymore,” Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson said in a fiery floor speech. “We are tired of being nice. We’re tired of being polite. We are going to require this because it’s going to benefit the economy. It’s going to benefit each of these companies.” It is perplexing to me that a politician would know what is best for a company! . . . especially a politician with a hyphenated name!

Atkins responded angrily to those who said the bill isn’t necessary. “I am sick and tired of being in a position of influence and power and yet seeing so many people like me who are still pleading to be given that opportunity,” Atkins told her colleagues. This statement speaks volumes! Reread it carefully.

The legislation was opposed by a coalition of 30 business groups including the California Restaurant Association, the California Chamber of Commerce, the California Trucking Assn. and the Long Beach Area Chamber of Commerce. They issued a joint letter saying that they support gender equity but that the legislation is illegal.

The state chamber of commerce said the measure “requires publicly traded corporations to satisfy quotas regarding the number of women on its board or face significant penalties, which is likely unconstitutional, a violation of California’s Civil Rights statute and a violation of the internal affairs doctrine for publicly held corporations.”

Governor Brown has a month to sign or to veto this bill. Hopefully he will recognize that “fairness” and constitutionality are not the same despite what these two angry and fiery senators think!

113 Replies to “Underrepresented”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.