![]() The Nasdaq rule and a California law signed last year requiring publicly traded corporate boards have a member by January from an underrepresented community - including Black, Latino, Asian, Pacific Islander, Native American, or someone who self-identifies as gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender - are also facing lawsuits. There’s no penalty for companies that don’t meet the Nasdaq diversity criteria, but they must publicly explain why they could not comply. Securities and Exchange Commission in August approved Nasdaq’s proposal that most of the nearly 3,000 companies listed on the exchange have at least one woman on their boards, along with one person from a racial minority or who identifies as gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender or queer. “The train has left the station,” Berkhemer-Credaire said.Īdding pressure on the issue, the U.S. If it is found unconstitutional, it could slow progress, but she thinks pressure from institutional and private investors will continue to lead to more women being named to corporate boards. She’s also heard anecdotally that other companies are waiting to see how the court rules.īerkhemer-Credaire said she is confident it will be upheld. With a deadline approaching, “there’s a lot of scrambling going on,” said Betsy Berkhemer-Credaire, CEO of 50/50 Women on Boards. Still, some 40% of the largest companies in California need to add women to their boards to comply with the law, the group said. As of September, the percentage of board seats held by women climbed to more than 30% in California, compared to 26% nationally. Several European countries, including France, Germany, Norway and Spain, require corporate boards to include women.īefore the California law went into effect, women held 17% of the seats on company boards in the state, based on the Russell 3000 Index of the largest companies in the U.S., according to the advocacy group 50/50 Women on Boards. Illinois requires publicly traded companies to report the makeup of their boards. Washington state passed a similar measure this year and lawmakers in other states, including Massachusetts, New Jersey and Hawaii, have proposed similar bills. Supporters of the law said it has already had a big impact in California and beyond. Dresner and the state attorney general’s office declined to comment on pending litigation. The state has argued in court papers that it hasn’t used taxpayer funds to enforce the law. No companies have been fined, though the secretary of state can do so, said spokeswoman Jenna Dresner. More than half didn’t file the required disclosure statement, according to the most recent report. Companies that do not include the required number of female board members can be fined $100,000 for first violations and $300,000 for subsequent violations.įewer than half the nearly 650 applicable corporations in the state reported last year that they had complied. Penalties range from $100,000 fines for companies that fail to report board compositions to the California secretary of state’s office. By January, boards with five directors must have two women and boards with six or more members must have three women. The law required publicly traded companies headquartered in California to have one member who identifies as a woman on their boards of directors by the end of 2019. “Any time you try to make significant change to the status quo the powers that have been institutionalized to this kind of discrimination are likely to fight back.” “I find that to be incredibly ironic and hypocritical,” Jackson said. She said the plaintiffs should be embarrassed for claiming the law is discriminatory. Corporations can meet the requirement by adding women without undermining the rights of male board members. Hannah-Beth Jackson, who authored the legislation, said the bill did not impose a quota because boards don’t need a certain percentage of women. Another conservative legal group has filed a separate lawsuit in federal court claiming the law violates the equal protection clause of the U.S.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |