LETTER FROM SAN FRANCISCO
California is innovating once again. It is not one of those “trend” phenomena of which she is accustomed, like the pandemic pods, tailor-made schools created by parents overwhelmed by distance education (and well-off enough to recruit private teachers). Or the rush on private fire trucks when the fires, far ahead of the season, have already ravaged 9,000 km2. The vehicles are offered on the Craigslist classifieds site. Some are imported from Japan, others are local glories having had their day, like this Ford truck of 1967 offered for 15,000 dollars (but the pump requires some patches, by the seller’s own admission).
No, this innovation is most official, and substantial. It comes from the California Assembly, whose Democratic majority was spurred on by the Black Lives Matter mobilization. At the end of August, elected officials adopted a bill which imposes ” positive discrimination “ in the boards of directors of private companies. The law – which the governor has until September 30 to enact – requires California-based companies to have at least one member of a minority group on their board before the end of 2021.
Individuals who identify themselves as members of minority groups are considered “Blacks, Latinos, Asians, originally from the Pacific Islands, Native Americans, homosexuals, lesbians, bisexuals or transgender”, details the text.
Democrat Chris Holden, who introduced the measure after George Floyd’s death, regretted that big business had not responded to “The emergency” of the moment and taken measures to increase the representativeness of their leaders. The legislator had to take over, he explained.
“Dismantle structural racism”
In 2018, California had already distinguished itself by requiring listed companies to have a minimum of women on their board of directors. The law had resulted in a 23% increase in the number of women in business leadership.
It was challenged in court by a libertarian institute opposed to quotas, the Pacific Legal Foundation. Reason: it contravenes the clause of the Constitution which guarantees the equality of all (equal protection clause). By favoring women from minorities, argues the institute, the text introduces discrimination against men from the same community (black men for example could feel the victims of injustice if black women benefit from special treatment. .) Pending the court decision, many CEOs have preferred to delay. In 2019, only 330 of the 629 companies concerned provided their statistics. Of these, 48 still did not have a woman on their council, in contravention of the law.
You have 44.24% of this article left to read. The rest is for subscribers only.
