Page 1 of 1

Gender Bias

Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 1:07 pm
by _subgenius
Gender bias is still available in this country, albeit not in its traditional form.

Beginning next year, California's corporate board rooms will be required to take on a different look.

Gov. Jerry Brown on Sunday signed landmark legislation that will require all publicly traded companies with headquarters in California to have at least one woman on their board of directors by the end of 2019. The minimum requisite will increase to two by the end of 2021.

No other state has passed similar legislation, although a handful have approved nonbinding resolutions with a similar aim of gender equality.

Though Brown expressed some misgivings about the law, which has been criticized as governmental intrusion into private business, he saw more pros than cons in its passage.


I wholeheartedly agree that a person is entitled to that which they have rightfully earned - regardless of race, sex, color, or creed. And I would prefer, on this topic, to avoid notions that will inevitably devolve into a recognition/dismissal of the fact that women have only been earnest members of the American "publicly traded" workforce for less than a century - compared to men having been entrenched since Tuttle's red Barn or the Lorillard Tobacco Company....(and please, dear Lawd, avoid the tedious, tiresome, minutia of citing pay rate arguments - since that is not part of this legislation per se)

What merit does this particular legislation have for the people of California and is anything revealed by it being particular only to "publicly traded" corporations with headquarters in California?


Image

Re: Gender Bias

Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 1:23 pm
by _Doctor CamNC4Me
I wouldn't be surprised if this is challenged in court. I can't really see how a government entity can tell a private corporation who to have on its board. I get the intent behind it, but it seems like overreach to me.

- Doc

Re: Gender Bias

Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 3:08 pm
by _subgenius
Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if this is challenged in court. I can't really see how a government entity can tell a private corporation who to have on its board. I get the intent behind it, but it seems like overreach to me.

- Doc

Perhaps the "publicly traded corporation with headquarters in CA" is their loophole?....and after spending the past 24 months with planning/zoning and LA County building review, I have realized that overreach is modus operandi for the State of California.

Re: Gender Bias

Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 3:17 pm
by _Kevin Graham
Nothing gnaws at a Republican white man like knowing a woman somewhere out there, may actually have to be treated equally under the law. When most of the population is female and virtually all of the people running the companies are male's, you're basically saying this is because men truly are better qualified over the women.

This is the crap that keeps idiots like [deleted] up at night.

Re: Gender Bias

Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2018 2:38 pm
by _DoubtingThomas
Kevin Graham wrote:Nothing gnaws at a Republican white man like knowing a woman somewhere out there, may actually have to be treated equally under the law. When most of the population is female and virtually all of the people running the companies are male's, you're basically saying this is because men truly are better qualified over the women.

This is the ____ that keeps idiots like [deleted] up at night.


But why does it matter? Business leaders generally don't do j*** s*** for humanity. What we really need is more women in STEM.

Re: Gender Bias

Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2018 3:06 pm
by _Some Schmo
DoubtingThomas wrote:But why does it matter? Business leaders generally don't do j*** s*** for humanity. What we really need is more women in STEM.


Amazon raises minimum wage to $15 for all 350,000 US workers following criticism

Let's hear it for public pressure. I was very critical of Walmart and Amazon. Now, at least, I feel a bit more comfortable with Amazon. Obviously, a $15 minimum wage doesn't spell the financial doom certain opponents would have us believe. Good on Amazon for trying to lead on this issue. I might just sign up for an Amazon account.

Re: Gender Bias

Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2018 3:11 pm
by _DoubtingThomas
Some Schmo wrote:Let's hear it for public pressure. I was very critical of Walmart and Amazon. Now, at least, I feel a bit more comfortable with Amazon. Obviously, a $15 minimum wage doesn't spell the financial doom certain opponents would have us believe. Good on Amazon for trying to lead on this issue. I might just sign up for an Amazon account.

Now that is news. Good for Amazon and Jeff Bezos.

Re: Gender Bias

Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2018 3:34 pm
by _EAllusion
Wal*Mart has long advocated for local min wage increases. Why? Because they have calculated they can absorb the increased labor costs better than their competitors. Amazon is doing the same thing, only they've already raised wages and the increase they want is substantial, so they are in a position to put a lot of pressure on the labor costs of the competition.