Author Topic: you can no longer have all-male boards if directors in california  (Read 2338 times)


Isn't this a law that enforces discrimination? isn't this law illegal?

id be okay with this but only if there was a no all-female board law paired with it. as it stands, this is bullstuff

thanks for the source mr unova

id be okay with this but only if there was a no all-female board law paired with it. as it stands, this is bullstuff
I wouldn't want either, this is a fantastic way to ruin a company, and it sets an even stufftier precedent.

thanks for the source mr unova
but its Le Fake News tho
I wouldn't want either, this is a fantastic way to ruin a company, and it sets an even stufftier precedent.
ruin a company? how do you figure lmao most boards in california are already p much half women in the first place
the issue is that this law sets an awful precedent for what qualifies as loveism as americans

affirmation strikes again.

ruin a company? how do you figure
They're choosing people because of their gender and not their merit, there is a high chance this will eventually lead to poor and shortsighted decisions.


loveist law is loveist
that's a golden oldie right there, but not untrue.



They're choosing people because of their gender and not their merit, there is a high chance this will eventually lead to poor and shortsighted decisions.
all this means is that wed end up with the second or third best rather than the best person for some positions. its pretty shortsighted to call out the end of the world just because of a dumb quota

If having women on boards is as beneficial to the company as this article claims, then why is a law necessary?
If there was such a huge benefit, then why wouldn't companies want to take advantage of what they have to offer?

Oh, probably for the same reason that my company hasn't had a single woman employee in the entire time I've worked here: none have applied.

It's not discriminatory, there just aren't very many women in my field (software development). Even going through college, there were women all over the school and in my general classes, but in all my actual degree-related classes, through all four years, there was one woman.

If my company where to have some law placed upon us saying we have to hire a woman next, we'd be forced to hire an underqualified/unqualified applicant just to fulfill the requirement. The company operates on a pretty tight staff; when we need to hire someone, we need to hire now, and don't have months to wait for the female applicants we never get.

I'm pretty sure upper management positions fall in the same boat: no women are hired because no women are applying

you know that place that lefties said we weren't going to go only a couple of years ago?

ya well we just went there