The Arizona Republic

Will ruling in California hurt boardroom diversity efforts?

- Jessica Guynn

California laws requiring more women and people from underrepre­sented communitie­s on corporate boards have been struck down in the courts.

Will increased diversity in the boardrooms of companies in California and beyond grind to a halt?

Clemson University associate professor Vincent Intintoli predicted the ruling would slow the “positive momentum of underrepre­sented director appointmen­ts to California boards.”

Publicly traded companies headquarte­red in California added record numbers of women and people of color as directors since the state passed the laws, research shows.

Boardroom diversity has become an urgent issue for corporatio­ns. Studies suggest greater diversity on boards leads to better business outcomes.

Yet a USA TODAY investigat­ion last year found that board membership of the nation’s largest and most valuable companies did not reflect the demographi­cs of their workforces, let alone the nation’s overall population. While white men make up about a third of U.S. workers, they held half or more of board seats, USA TODAY found.

California’s board diversity law succeeded where voluntary measures foundered or failed, said Intintoli, who researched the effects of the law.

The “binding nature” of the California law – the threat of hefty fines for not complying – “seemed to be effective in encouragin­g these appointmen­ts,” he said.

Judge rules board diversity law is unconstitu­tional

A Los Angeles judge ruled Friday that a California law requiring companies in the state to add female directors to their boards is unconstitu­tional because it violated the equal protection clause of the state’s constituti­on.

It was the second setback for the state’s groundbrea­king laws that mandated – and got – more diversity on corporate boards.

The state argued the law was needed to combat discrimina­tion and didn’t set quotas because boards could add seats for women without removing men from

their positions.

California boardrooms got more diverse after 2018 law

California companies in the Standard & Poor’s 500 made significan­t strides after the state passed laws requiring more gender and racial diversity on corporate boards, according to DiversIQ, which analyzed changes in the board compositio­n of 70 companies. At those companies, women secured nearly 100 new board seats since 2016, up nearly 12%.

Women now hold 239 board seats among these companies, which represents nearly a third of the total seats, DiversIQ said. California-based S&P 500 companies that have notably increased the number of women on their boards include Walt Disney, Intel, Ross Stores and eBay.

The California law passed in 2018 required that publicly traded companies headquarte­red in the state have at least two or three women on their boards or face hefty fines. It was opposed by more than two dozen business groups, including the California Chamber of Commerce, which argued the gender quotas were “likely unconstitu­tional.”

Even then-Gov. Jerry Brown was hesitant to sign the bill, citing legal concerns, but did so anyway as the Me Too movement raged.

Another Los Angeles judge issued a similar ruling last month, striking down a law that required that public companies in California add at least one director who self-identifies as Black, Hispanic, Latino, Asian, Pacific Islander, Native American, Native Hawaiian or Alaska Native or as gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgende­r by 2021.

Judicial Watch opposed boardroom diversity laws

Conservati­ve group Judicial Watch challenged both California laws in court, arguing they forced companies to discrimina­te based on gender and race. Judicial Watch did not respond to requests for comment.

The state laws, the first of their kind in the country, played a key role in increasing pressure on corporate boards to diversify.

In August, Nasdaq instituted a new policy requiring most of the nearly 3,000 companies listed on the stock exchange to have at least one woman on their board of directors and one person from a racial minority or who identifies as gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgende­r or queer. The Securities and Exchange Commission is facing a lawsuit over its approval of the Nasdaq rule.

BlackRock, State Street Global Advisors and big money managers now vote against directors on all-male boards to pressure them to add women. Goldman Sachs no longer underwrite­s initial public offerings for companies that don’t have at least two diverse directors.

Diversitie­s increased in companies outside California

Researcher­s told USA TODAY in February that they saw an increase in diverse directors on the boards of companies outside California, but the number of appointmen­ts by California companies was far greater.

At the current rate, it could take until 2045 for women to make up 50% of corporate boards, according to research from Morgan Stanley Capital Internatio­nal.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States