I didn't know this was even going on, but apparently the EU may soon require boards to be 40% female. Britain is against strict quotas, instead favoring a business-driven approach.
I actually can't believe this is an issue. The EU can actually get together to force diversity upon the private sector, but not to manage monetary policy. How exactly is this justified?
Still, Britain might be obliged to accept some aspects of the proposal after Viviane Reding, the European justice commissioner, dropped plans to punish companies that did not meet the 40 percent threshold. Ms. Reding said sanctions would apply only in cases where noncompliant companies did not establish adequate selection procedures.Companies would need to give priority to a woman in cases where “that candidate is equally qualified as a candidate of the other sex in terms of suitability, competence and professional performance,” her proposal said.
What's the over/under on how many years until the EU is swept into the the dustbin of history?
dont act like this shit wont end up here soon
"European justice commissioner" sounds like something out of a some sort of dystopian science fiction novel. Then again, quotas forced upon private entities by a supra-national authority also sounds rather Orwellian.
Creeping liberal authoritarianism. Slowly, but surely coming to America.
Think about it: Liberalism of this type would never survive if it was not forced upon the people in the name of equality. In a free state, people would not be equal...life would follow nature, and the normal distribution curve. But liberal want to defy nature and rearrange the normal distribution curve.
holy hell
I read this on the BBC news app, it's dismaying, what happens to sectors that are mostly men i.e. tech. Quotas are ineffective, what works best is the market. It is expensive to discriminate.
Wouldn't this be qualified as discrimination? If both candidates are equally qualified and preference must be given to the female candidate because of her gender, that should be considered as gender discrimination.
Better work on going through those binders of women
What will happen is companies will put figurehead women on the Boards but control will still reside wherever it did before. It will just be another rule people have to work around. This actually already happens in the U.S. with "minority owned" or "woman owned" businesses (minority owned or woman owned businesses get preferable treatment in certain situations). A lot of times the "woman" or "minority" owner is owner in name only.
Similar things happen regarding classification of employees. I know a lot of smaller businesses 1099 what should be full-time employees.
The list goes on.
Basically stupid rules like this come out and it just pushes more things underground and makes liars of us all (out of necessity).
I live in the UK and this is a frankly ridiculous idea. I am not for one second against women achieving the top echelons of power in a business but EVERYONE (male and female) should only do so on their own merits - not because of a government enforced quota.
Imagine; the best person for a job is a guy, but the company needs to reach the quota... is the company going to risk non-compliancy penalties and burocratic process? if not, probably is going for 2nd, 3rd, 4th best, until it's a women. Or it will take the best candidate at a surcharge (Personnel costs). Does this make sense?
I have worked for first-class women, and am all in for equal chances and meritocracy, but this rule is a disaster economically and socially for companies, for hiring processes (incl. time delays etc), employees and society in general.
Most importantly, it is an offence for those women in top positions, who have worked very hard to get there.
There was a program on this in the UK looking at some Scandinavian countries that have already implemented this and interestingly the stock market performance of the companies that implemented this had outperformed those who had not. Now obviously correlation is not causation but I thought it was interesting. There seems to be a lot of backlash from women who have made it without quotas.
Anyway, what I'm hearing is, if women can't compete, even with similar opportunities, it's unfair and we need to rig the game for them to win. I would like some hippie explain to me why it's OK to discriminate against guys like this.
Positive discrimination is just discrimination to everyone else.
Beatae et odit distinctio aut. Temporibus numquam doloremque laborum omnis qui iure voluptatem. Omnis non itaque tempore laudantium fugit et facilis exercitationem. Sint voluptas dolorem praesentium sed libero.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...