October 1, 2018

"Governor Jerry Brown virtually admits it's a bad idea even while signing it: 'I don’t minimize the potential flaws that indeed may prove fatal to its ultimate implementation.'"

"A terrible law, which will be bad for women and men. Laws and economics are not zero-sum; we can all lose," writes my son John, facebooking "California becomes first state to require women on corporate boards" (NBC).

Brown's statement continued: "Nevertheless, recent events in Washington, D.C. — and beyond — make it crystal clear that many are not getting the message." Is he talking about the Kavanaugh hearings?? Crystal clear. It's not even crystal clear what he's referring to. Spare me your California crystals.

Who will challenge this thing in court? What's the argument that it doesn't violate equal protection? It won't matter if no one sues. It seems easier to just put a woman on the board than to fight the law.

ADDED: A challenge could occur if the state tries to enforce the requirement against a company, and it's put in the defensive position. Maybe a flaw that is "fatal to [the law's] ultimate implementation" is that the state will never enforce it because then it would need to defend the law in court, and it can't. Passing the law is for show, and the law makes a show of requiring that corporations do something for show. And the corporations will probably put on the show, and that's how it's intended to work.

129 comments:

Gahrie said...

It seems easier to just put a woman on the board that to fight the law.

Which is the point...another form of lawfare. The Left is becoming quite adept at it.

rhhardin said...

If you put a woman in the board, there will be coffee.

rehajm said...

A jobs program for rich white Republican women with MBAs.

rehajm said...

Also for business movers and commercial real estate brokers in Nevada, Texas et al.

Cacimbo Cacimbo said...

What about the non-gendered. Does CA only care about the cisgendered. Not very progressive of them.

Sally327 said...

It seems easier just to change one's corporate existence to be domiciled in another state.

Curious George said...

"rhhardin said...
If you put a woman in the board, there will be coffee."

And sammiches?

Not Sure said...

Amounts to a tax of about a quarter mil per year on each corporation. Not including the cost of settling the sexual harassment suits to follow, of course.

Temujin said...

Another incentive to move businesses elsewhere. Imagine a state telling a private company who can and cannot sit on their board? What do they think this is? A state university?

Seriously- if you're a shareholder in a California-based company, you should feel very good that your investment will be guided, not by expertise or knowledge, but by vagina. Congrats everyone. This is the world you are making.

Paul said...

Well Gov. Moonbeam didn't say how much these female board members have to be paid so I guess one of the board member's wives can be on the board (just not have to show up) for minimum wage. Or use some homeless woman.

Silly regulations invoke transparent evasions.

gilbar said...

Curious George said.. "rhhardin said...
If you put a woman in the board, there will be coffee." And sammiches?
You Know what goes Great both IN coffee and With sammiches?
Delicious Whole Milk!!! Which we should be making Even more of now that we can sell to Canada

Bay Area Guy said...

Next, California will force women into the NBA. Higher salaries should be available to the gals, too!

Crazy California.

iowan2 said...

Boards are a live organism of itself. My dad was on the local coop board for 30 years, and several terms on a regional board. The Regional board did over $800 million in business, in the 80's. The point is each board is a constantly shifting living organism, one, two, three people might shift the shape, if the person(s) are strong enough, and influential enough, and work hard enough to do so. Most Board members are not. I was on a local country club board. I came on along with about 5 others because management and board decisions of the past had dug a deep whole. One board member, had his ideas, and struggled for a couple months to move things his way. He just went to work and got member support, in opinion and donation commitments to support his vision. Very hard to say no, when all the leg work is done an commitments in place.Those opposed were not willing to match one mans hard work with work of their own. You can figure out how things turned out.
The California thing is a classic example of not liking the results and fixing something wholly unrelated to what ever ill is imagined.

tim maguire said...

I can imagine the boycotts and activist outage towards any company that doesn't buckle under. Better to just create 2 (not 1!--what if you need to remove 1, leaving you with none, even if only for a little while!?) token positions. Maybe give them to somebody's daughter or girlfriend.

Not Sure said...

There probably aren't very many socialists on these corporate boards, either. Gotta fix that, too.

Sebastian said...

"Nevertheless, recent events in Washington, D.C. — and beyond — make it crystal clear that many are not getting the message." Is he talking about the Kavanaugh hearings?? Crystal clear. It's not even crystal clear what he's referring to"

It is crystal clear: women are special. But what he is really referring to is you and the politics of sisterhood.

exhelodrvr1 said...

rhhardin,
"If you put a woman in the board, there will be coffee."

And sammiches!!

walter said...

"Nevertheless, recent events in Washington, D.C. — and beyond — make it crystal clear that many are not getting the message."
--
Well..true. Starting with Moonbeam.

rhhardin said...If you put a woman in the board, there will be coffee.
--
No..coffee is already there. But now there will be "treats".

Fernandistein said...

More women directors serving on boards of directors of publicly held corporations will boost the California economy, improve opportunities for women in the workplace, and protect California taxpayers, shareholders, and retirees, including retired California state employees and teachers whose pensions are managed by CalPERS and CalSTRS.

Yet studies predict that it will take 40 or 50 years to achieve gender parity, if something is not done proactively!

Sydney said...

I wonder if I could support myself by offering to serve as a token woman. I would promise not to contribute anything to the meetings except my presence, but I would have to have the right to resign quietly if I thought they were engaging in malfeasance.

Fernandistein said...

A 2012 University of California, Berkeley study called “Women Create a Sustainable Future” found that companies with more women on their boards are more likely to “create a sustainable future” by, among other things, instituting strong governance structures with a high level of transparency!

Fritz said...

And nicer wall paper in the board room.

Fritz said...

Fernandistein said...
A 2012 University of California, Berkeley study called “Women Create a Sustainable Future” found that companies with more women on their boards are more likely to “create a sustainable future” by, among other things, instituting strong governance structures with a high level of transparency!


You mean institute more left-wing policies? Yes, that's exactly the point.

Fernandistein said...

Boards of directors need to have at least three women to enable them to interact and exercise an influence on the working style, processes, and tasks of the board, in turn positively affecting the level of organizational innovation within the firm they govern.

Birkel said...

Standing should be easy to establish.
Every shareholder should have a claim against California.

robother said...

Jennifer Pritzker and Marine Rothblatt were ahead of the curve on this one. The board of directors of every California corporation can have their cake and eat it too, with a designated...cutter. C'mon guys, who'll take one for the team?

Narayanan Subramanian said...

So *rule of law* means we can get you, get you, when we need to.

As another "Doctor" said in Atlas Shrugged

Unknown said...

Wait until the first token woman sus the board she's sitting on for fostering a hostile work environment.

chuck said...

The central valley choo choo and state pensions need funding, anyway this law can be leveraged to produce income for the state?

Fernandistein said...

“Female” means an individual who self-identifies her gender as a woman, without regard to the individual’s designated sex at birth!

Narayanan Subramanian said...

If any of the board members get nominated for anything this weapon will be deployed.

Birkel said...

When it comes to corporate strategy...
#BelieveAllWomen

Am I right, Leftist Collectivists?

Fernandistein said...

All that bullshit I just poasted was lifted from Hannah-Beth's bill.

EDH said...

Cacimbo Cacimbo said...
What about the non-gendered?

According to the article, pubicly traded companies are the ones covered by the law.

The Crack Emcee said...

"Spare me your California crystals."

Needless to say, that's not going to stop them.

Paul Zrimsek said...

"The law applies to companies that report having their principal executive offices in California." Easily mended.

Unknown said...

Polite meaningless words (and laws).

-sw

Tommy Duncan said...

Blogger Cacimbo Cacimbo said...

"What about the non-gendered."

Yours is a good point which suggests a simple work-around: Why not have the male board members take turns "electing to be a woman" on the day of each board meeting? That would be a win-win twofer. They get both a woman and a transgender.

zipity said...

Gee, you'd think that in a Liberal Democrat Utopia like California, this would be unnecessary.

You'd think.

sinz52 said...

I can't wait till a black manager claims that he was passed over for promotion to give the slot to a white woman.

The slicing and dicing of intersectionality theory is eventually going to have us all fighting with each other for scraps like a collection of pigeons being fed in a public park.

robother said...

As pointed out the law purports to apply to companies reporting that their principal executive offices are in CA. If applied to non-CA corporations (most large corporations are Delaware), that raises interesting commerce clause/federalsm issues. But the handwriting 's on the wall: why should any large corporation remain in CA, for this and a ton of other issues?

Fernandistein said...

Numerous independent studies have concluded that no publicly held companies which had midget Mexican wrasslers serving on their boards of directors filed for bankruptcy in 2017.

In the dismal field of economics it's unusual for the statistics to be so clear.

Levi Starks said...

I guess girls will be required to go to their local post office and sign up for the corporate boardroom draft when they turn 18.

Char Char Binks said...

So much for ownership rights.

gspencer said...

"Ms Blue, would you please get us six coffees and one Diet Coke for Mr. Ashcroft? Then I want you to sit in with us for the meeting."

gg6 said...

Dumb is as Dumb/Virtue-signaling/Preference Does .

traditionalguy said...

There have always been women on Boards of Directors. They inherit stock. Directors are not there for any expertise . They are there to oversee the hiring and firing of a management. The only thing they have to do right is the audit committee duties that create actual,legal liabilities when they fail to actually do the job. Other than that, they are required to attend a minimum number of meetings and be nice.

Big Mike said...

The obvious riposte is for a large (or largish) California corporation to buy a smaller Delaware corporation, announce it as a merger, and henceforth the merged corporation will be a Delaware corporation. Many American firms “merged” with foreign firms to avoid or mitigate the ridiculous American corporate tax rates of the Obama years.

Or they can hire a token female — even a hooker of a street corner — and tell her that the salary goes away the moment she opens her mouth in a meeting.

But I can understand California’s position, given the great job Elizabeth Holmes did with Theranos. Oh, wait.

Amexpat said...

Here in Norway at least 40% women need to be on the board of large, major corporations. It was actually a conservative government that passed it about 20 years ago. It's pretty much accepted by a broad spectrum of society. The only downside that I'm aware of is that some women who might be leaders in major corporations choose to be on many boards instead.

Nonapod said...

Passing the law is for show, and the law makes a show of requiring that corporations do something for show. And the corporations will probably put on the show, and that's how it's intended to work.

I don't know enough about how boards of directors in public companies work, but I assume it's possible to just put someone on a board in a purely symbolic role with virtually no real power. So, yeah, this is all just silly virtue signalling to placate left state idiots.

gerry said...

Look, find a bimbo who has a PHD in something useless but that does not motivate activism.

Create other credentials that make her appear to be useful on a board of directors.

Give her a nice corner office with a view somewhere.

Use a corporate travel agent to arrange continuous trips to beautiful locations to conduct useless tours of facilities the corporation is building somewhere.

Constantly reinforce her perceptions of herself as a crasher of glass ceilings.

In other words, model her after a high-paid California bureaucrat who happens to be a woman. There must be some female high up in California's railroad-to-nowhere administration who would be the perfect model for a do-nothing role model.

All the expenses would be deductible from the corporate gross income.

Or a corporate entity could simply move somewhere not insane.

Unknown said...

Find out if your husband or wife is cheating on you, find out who they talk to when you are not there, hack any mobile phone (call log, text message, whatsapp etc), hack email, educational portal, grade change, website and database hack, increase your credit rating, clear criminal records and many more. You can also protect yourself from hack attacks.You can pretty much get anything you need done with lifehacker. Contact: livinglegendaryhacker@gmail.com

Dave Begley said...

Tribalism run amuck.

Where does it stop? Blacks? Asians? Gays? Transgender? Indians? Native Americans?

Jersey Fled said...

Just another way to subsidize the California bar. Imagine all,of the ways this law and all of its "unintented" consequences can be turned into lawsuits.

Actually we have an an interesting case study here as Trump has doggedly reduced government regulation of business while states like CA and my home state of NJ have piled more on. Wonder which approach will prove better. And for whome.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Last night on PBS - they announced they are going full propaganda war before the election.

2 shows against Trump and a show about "dark money" which of course is a way for the left to lie about money in politics. Bad money is only bad when it goes to non-leftists.

Then - a show called HILLARY: STANDING TALL.

This is PBS. Get a heavy dose of free democrat propaganda and campaign ad.

n.n said...

Sex politics, sex in politics, and gender confusion.

Warlock trials are unconstitutional.

Next, California will force women into the NBA. Higher salaries should be available to the gals, too!

There will be a judicial override of the market and redistributive change. Democracy and equal rights died in California.

mockturtle said...

If you put a woman in the board, there will be coffee.

More likely herbal tea.

walter said...

California is home to a very real rape train. No end in sight.

Roughcoat said...

If you put a woman in the board, there will be coffee."

And meetings. And talking. Endless talking.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Update on the PBS show "Hillary: Standing Tall." It's about Sir Edmund Hillary.
my bad.

But the other anti-Trump stuff is there.


Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

"This is going to suck but I'm going to do it anyway" could be an official slogan for the democratic party.

Darrell said...

Wasn't Elizabeth Warren talking about a 90% corporate tax rate a few months ago? Why wouldn't that stop her presidential run in its tracks?

James Pawlak said...

As those corporations are in Inter-State trade, is that law in violation of the relevant clause in our Constitution?

MayBee said...

Why stop at women?

Rae said...

How is this not assuming gender? Genderist California.

wendybar said...

Stupid is as stupid does.

wendybar said...

Why would ANY man want to work with women now after what the Democrats are putting Judge Kavenaugh through???

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Will that Elizabeth Warren 90% corporate tax apply to Mark Cuban or Warren Buffet? Google, Amazon or Facebook? or any of the mega-insurance companies started by Jared Polis(D)?

NO.

Clyde said...

What about transgender? What about gays, lesbians and bisexuals? What about blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Jews and Muslims? Don't they have a right to be represented? And what about albinos who aren't actually "white"? Don't they have a right to their place in the sun (with lots of sunscreen)? And what about the Furries? Equal justice for all, California! ALL!

Sam's Hideout said...

A requirement of one woman isn't all that onerous (unless your board consists of only a few people. However, I've read elsewhere that one woman is the initial requirement by 2019, with a third of the board being women by 2021. I suspect some companies might end up fighting any punishments imposed for failing to meet that requirement.

FIDO said...

So women, after #MeToo, realize they have overplayed their hand. Excuse me: Feminists.

Men are going Pence and that will shut out women. They made themselves too toxic.

So what can women do? Sic the law and RBG at men!

If Brown lacked clarity, it is because he is in a hostage situation.

BROWN! If you need help, BLINK THREE TIMES!

Lyle Smith said...

Putting on a show costs money.

PM said...

Look at me when I'm Board of Directing you!

bleh said...

This would seem to run afoul of federal non-discrimination laws, and clearly all publicly-traded companies have impacts on interstate commerce and are regulated at the federal level.

Darrell said...

Look at me when I'm Board of Directing you!

That's HOT!
(In my best Paris Hilon voice)

Fernandistein said...

Look at me when I'm Board of Directing you!

Yes I heard you I was just resting my eyes.

JAORE said...

When a city council passes resolutions on global warming,you can bet the potholes on the city streets are cavernous.

When the California legislature passes....

FIDO said...

The only downside that I'm aware of is that some women who might be leaders in major corporations choose to be on many boards instead.

That and the fact that outside of petroleum, you have almost no economic growth.

But you have that warm glow of equality. It helps offset the joblessness.

https://www.forskningsradet.no/en/Newsarticle/Norwegian_welfare_system_facing_major_challenges/1253967894814?d=Touch&m=t

Bay Area Guy said...

You know, a thought just occurred to me.

There are many entrepeneurial and business opportunities in California. A woman could, you know, start a company, gets some capital, build it up, sell shit and put herself on the Board and other like-minded women, too.

Call me crazy!

Fernandistein said...

"I was just thinking about what you said earlier."

Unknown said...

We're going to need a bigger Board... or move our corporate domicile to a different State.

-sw

Fernandistein said...

A woman could, you know, start a company, gets some capital, build it up, sell shit and put herself on the Board and other like-minded women, too.

Like how Elizabeth Holmes became a Silicon Valley darling[sic] after persuading high-profile investors to back her blood-testing company?

Theranos Founder Elizabeth Holmes Indicted on Fraud Charges

JAORE said...

Dr. Blasey (?) Ford announced as member of board of directors on 452 California corporations.

Take THAT you virtue signaling pikers.

JAORE said...

Yep, read the law.... a female is one who self-identifies....

Toothless twaddle.

Would California have the balls (even if not biologically developed) to say a biological male self-identifying was a liar?

The self-identifying woman must be believed!

bagoh20 said...

I identify as a woman for the next hour, and during that hour I will be thorough insulted by this law which assumes us ladies are incapable of earning these positions on our own. We are not children, we are women. Hear us roar for special treatment!

bagoh20 said...

""This is going to suck but I'm going to do it anyway" could be an official slogan for the democratic party."

Nothing better describes their M.O., especially in California.

Achilles said...

I wonder how close Brown was to saying “fuck it, this is too fucking stupid even for us”

The Crack Emcee said...

California's great right now, in light of Kavanaugh:

Folsom Street Fair stresses consent amid leather and BDSM

For the ladies....

Big Mike said...

All it would take to fix this is a couple corporations showing up in Sacramento with billion dollar checks made out to the RNC, and then ask if the legislature wants them to sign it and mail it?

Martin said...

It may be unenforceable in an old-fashioned court of law, but that is irrelevant. All that matters now is the new Court of Twitter.

Francisco D said...

Does anyone know how many Fortune 5000 companies do not have women on their Board of Directors?

I am wondering if this legislation is creating a "solution" that has no problem.

Darrell said...

Are there any Boards without male members?
There must be some.

Fernandistein said...

"This is going to suck but I'm going to do it anyway"

Worse than nothing is just standard.

Char Char Binks said...

Nothing of importance ever happened in Norway.

bagoh20 said...

The all boys clubs in California-loving high tech are gonna love this.

Is there any legal way to stop a male board member from self-identifying as female just for the paperwork? I mean, as I understand it, your self-identity is unarguable and sacrosanct, no matter what it is. "You don't know me!"

bagoh20 said...

"Nothing of importance ever happened in Norway."

Raping and pillaging found it's wings.

Amexpat said...

That and the fact that outside of petroleum, you have almost no economic growth

Wrong about aquaculture. Business, especially with Salmon fish farms, is booming. Revenue is up about 300% in the last 10 years.

https://www.ey.com/Publication/vwLUAssets/EY_-_The_Norwegian_Aquaculture_Analysis_2017/$FILE/EY-Norwegian-Aquaculture-Analysis-2017.pdf

Steve M. Galbraith said...

It seems easier to just put a woman on the board that to fight the law.

And easier than fighting the protests by the left, aided by the media, targeting your business as being anti-women.

Howard said...

Whom among you would deny the rights of fierce woman to hit from the Ladies Tee's?

Michael said...

I have had personal experience of women on public company boards, Out of five women on three boards one is exceptional one is passable and the others are clueless. I know a number of highly qualified men who cannot get seats because they are reserved for women, preferably women of color. This is not a disaster for public companies, on the contrary it is quite easy to find pliant and easily led members, far easier than to find very qualified board members who will be independent. So boards will be stacked with women with no industry experience, often academics, who will essentially be powerless because their opinions will count for little.

Jupiter said...

Women ruin everything. Just saying.

LarsPorsena said...

Sounds good. Should be another incentive for corporations to flee CA.

JohnAnnArbor said...

"Spare me your California crystals."

GREAT quote.

Unknown said...

If you put a woman on the board..

She's going to want a cookie.

n.n said...

Male? Let me check the quotas. Disqualified.

Kirk Parker said...

"Governor Jerry Brown virtually admits it's a bad idea even while signing it"

Did this remind anyone else of the unlamented GWB signing McCain-Feingold?


James Pawlak,

No, of course not: corporations are state creatures.

Biotrekker said...

1. California Chamber of Commerce is already litigating this dumb law in court.
2. It doesn't matter to Jerry Moonbeam Brown if it's constitutional or not. It's a no brainer for him/them (the Left). If the law sticks, the Left gets to crow about how they are helping women. If the law is struck down, they get to virtue signal how wonderful they are and blame evil judges for denying women their basic right to a cushy director gig.

Etienne said...

Bottom line: get your company out of California.

Saint Croix said...

Who will challenge this thing in court?

A man who was kicked off the board because of his gender.

buwaya said...

This is not a new controversy.
I recall this case from over 20 years ago - T.J Rodgers of Cypress Semiconductor responding to one such demand. Its a classic.

Cypress Semiconductor response to demands for PC Board

"In the letter, Sister Doris, speaking for the Sisters of St. Francis of Philadelphia as a Cypress shareholder, expressed the view that a company "is best represented by a Board of qualified Directors reflecting the equality of the sexes, races, and ethnic groups." The letter went on to say that it is the congregation's policy "to withhold authority to vote for nominees of a Board of Directors that does not include women and minorities."

...

Response from T.J. Rodgers

"The semiconductor business is a tough one with significant competition from the Japanese, Taiwanese, and Koreans. There have been more corporate casualties than survivors. For that reason, our Board of Directors is not a ceremonial watchdog, but a critical management function. The essential criteria for Cypress board membership are as follows:

Experience as a CEO of an important technology company.
Direct expertise in the semiconductor business based on education and management experience.
Direct experience in the management of a company that buys from the semiconductor industry."
...

"Bluntly stated, a "woman's view" on how to run our semiconductor company does not help us, unless that woman has an advanced technical degree and experience as a CEO."
'''

"I infer that your concept of corporate "morality" contains in it the requirement to appoint a Board of Directors with, in your words, "equality of sexes, races, and ethnic groups." I am unaware of any Christian requirements for corporate boards; your views seem more accurately described as "politically correct," than "Christian."

My views aside, your requirements are -- in effect -- immoral. By "immoral," I mean "causing harm to people," a fundamental wrong."
'''

etc.

The piece lays out the fundamental counter to such demands, on all levels. Because of course it is immoral to fail, or even increase risk of failure, in the fundamental purpose of an enterprise.

Rodgers created Cypress in 1982, and it has been and still is an essential part of the basic hardware suppliers for all of computing. Second tier below Intel and AMD.

Saint Croix said...

Hey, California! Pass a law that says 50% of our prison cells have to be filled with women.

You know, for justice.

JAORE said...

There are mutual funds that are "virtuous" in that they won't invest in tobacco or alcohol producers. There are those that won't invest in any part of the military supply chain. Others look to non-Israel investing.

In other words they decide what to buy based on virtue signaling.

I've never considered these funds because I want my fund manager to look for the best RETURN for me. They may invest in any legal enterprise available.

I might make an exception for a fund that will invest anywhere but California Companies. Looks like they are being put at a competitive disadvantage (despite all the studies cited in the law).

JAORE said...

"Hey, California! Pass a law that says 50% of our prison cells have to be filled with women.

You know, for justice. "

Don't give them ideas. They might agree and release 90 percent of male prisoners.

Or male prisoners in California can claim to be women to get transferred to a woman's prison. Then, even if offered State funded surgery, decline because they fear scalpels.

Either way that pesky imbalance problem is solved.

Unknown said...

I have to say the Cypress thing sounds pretty rich coming from an organization without any men.

Saint Croix said...

Hey, California! What about the other 62 genders? Did you forget them?

Saint Croix said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Murph said...

Blogger Francisco D said...
Does anyone know how many Fortune 5000 companies do not have women on their Board of Directors?

I am wondering if this legislation is creating a "solution" that has no problem.
--------------------------------------
And as traditionalguy also suggested, this is a solution searching for a problem and failing to find one.

I own a portfolio of >35 public company stocks in my retirement portfolio, & every year am encouraged to vote for board members. I do my shareholder duty & scrutinize the entries in the proxy materials for the brief curr. vit. of each member standing for election.* I don't recall any board lacking a female member, and they usually have more than one.

Murph said...

ignore the asterisk please. Why oh why is there no edit function?????

Tom said...

What if one of the old white dudes says his testosterone has dropped so far that he now identifies as a man?

buwaya said...

Murph,

Good point - even Cypress Semiconductor has two women these days.

n.n said...

"In the letter, Sister Doris, speaking for the Sisters of St. Francis of Philadelphia as a Cypress shareholder, expressed the view that a company "is best represented by a Board of qualified Directors reflecting the equality of the sexes, races, and ethnic groups." The letter went on to say that it is the congregation's policy "to withhold authority to vote for nominees of a Board of Directors that does not include women and minorities."

Since when does Christianity endorse diversity or color judgments?

Unknown said...

This law, as i understand it, requires corp that have headquarters in Calif to obey this woman dictate--even if they are incorporated in another state. Unconstitutional.
Also, this violates corp governance because directors are elected by shareholders, not "put" on the board (even if some elections are shams). Who would do the "putting"? On what basis?

Unknown said...

There is research showing that female CEOs yield lower financial performance, and probably applies to boards also.

Unknown said...

Sausage party is over
Thank you CA

more chicks to hit on!

mikee said...

I met a woman recently who now, suddenly, headhunts executive women for board positions in California. Previously she had just been a headhunter specializing in helping technically proficient women who wanted to move up into the executive suites of companies. She made a lot of moolah before this. Now she is going to make gazillions doing this new search and placement, because it is mandated by the state. You go, girl!

After we had spoken long enough to be comfortable with each other, I asked if she had binders full of women ready to go. We both laughed. She said not just yes, but Hell, yes!

Bunkypotatohead said...

Just cut to the chase and make it 50/50. And 13% black, while they're at it.

Unknown said...

Maduro called

He says there is more CA can do!

Unknown said...

Diversity is our weakness

Unknown said...

They thought of this

If only they could think of a way for every CA city to pay police/fireman/teachers

gold plated pensions for life