California AB-979 Corporations: boards of directors: underrepresented communities

Judge Amy Coney Barrett was recently criticised for saying ‘sexual preference’ rather than the woke term ‘sexual orientation’ because apparently it implies that people might have a choice over their sexual preferences and identity. Which is to take away free will and self determination. Be that as it may, we live in a weird world where words that were standard and unobjectionable as recently as 12 months ago are now banished for fear of some perceived micro aggression.

On 30 September, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law AB-979 which provides for all corporates with headquarters in California the following:

No later than 2021:

(1) If its number of directors is six or more, the corporation shall have a minimum of three female directors.
(2) If its number of directors is five, the corporation shall have a minimum of two female directors.
(3) If its number of directors is four or fewer, the corporation shall have a minimum of one female director.

No later than 2022:

(1) If its number of directors is nine or more, the corporation shall have a minimum of three directors from underrepresented communities.
(2) If its number of directors is more than four but fewer than nine, the corporation shall have a minimum of two directors from underrepresented communities.
(3) If its number of directors is four or fewer, the corporation shall have a minimum of one director from an underrepresented community.

The Bill provides the following definitions:

“Female” means an individual who self-identifies her gender as a woman, without regard to the individual’s designated sex at birth.

“Director from an underrepresented community” means an individual who self-identifies as Black, African American, Hispanic, Latino, Asian, Pacific Islander, Native American, Native Hawaiian, or Alaska Native, or who self-identifies as gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender.

There have been calls for a similar Bill in Australia. How would this work? In Australia under the Fair Work Act 2009 to ask potential employees questions relating to ethnic / racial background and sexual orientation among many other prohibited questions. So how would a corporate ascertain that it is meeting the quotas?

And the self identification allows pretty much anything – say you’re bixsexual and voila you’re in an under-represented community and no one will be the wiser.

Finally the Bill has a long preamble that includes:

According to the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, only 31 percent of African Americans and 22 percent of Latinos worked in management, professional, and related occupations while 54 percent of Asians and 41 percent of Whites worked in the same occupation.

So Asian is defined as an underrepresented community according to the Bill, yet is overrepresented in management according to statistics.

Go figure.

About Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus

I'm a retired general who occasionally gets called back to save the republic before returning to my plough.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to California AB-979 Corporations: boards of directors: underrepresented communities

  1. Terry

    Get these authoritarian bullies right out of the boardroom. It is not their business.

    Any worthwhile business will be well advanced on their corporate HQ relocation by now. What a Socialist Shithole Swamp California now is.

    Just more interference from wannabe totalitarians enforcing their proclivities on the freedoms of private citizens. #fuckrightoffanddie

  2. Lee

    And what if female directors predominate on a board?
    Let’s say there is six person board, and five are female, are two going to have go, to be replaced by males?
    It’s a ridiculous law, and absolutely no business of any government or outside body to interfere in.

  3. Rob MW

    And the self identification allows pretty much anything – say you’re bixsexual and voila you’re in an under-represented community and no one will be the wiser.

    So blokes get 2 applications and women get 1. Seems like women along with Scots, Muzzies and trannies will be discriminated against, although, trannies get a good run in women’s sports.

    I’m starting to think that so called ‘democracy’ deserves to die.

    Cause and effect !

  4. JohnL

    Don’t bring this to the attention of Crazy Dan!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  5. Lee

    And the self identification allows pretty much anything – say you’re bixsexual and voila you’re in an under-represented community and no one will be the wiser.

    I presume it will be illegal to tell someone with a penis that he can’t identify as a woman, in order to qualify?
    Problem solved!
    The Left is utterly freaking, barking mad.

  6. Professor Fred Lenin

    How about the board are all blokes in drag talking poofy ?Is that a full female by choice board ?
    I m visualising five fat guys in short skirts and hairy legs wearing sneakers ,complimenting each pthers make up ! Ugggh bloody orrible sight “? So commos are poofters too ? Now theres a brew for you .

  7. Walter Plinge

    Seems an easy law to circumvent. Merely have Joe Testicles identify as female and Snow White identify as black. If Rachel Dolezal can do the latter it must be easy.

  8. John A

    There have been calls for a similar Bill in Australia. How would this work? In Australia under the Fair Work Act 2009 to ask potential employees questions relating to ethnic/racial background and sexual orientation among many other prohibited questions. So how would a corporate ascertain that it is meeting the quotas?

    No problem. The issue will be ignored by the legislators. Then they can get you coming or going. Either you are discriminating by asking, or you are failing to give proper respect to the under-represented by not knowing who you have employed.

    Wokeness and SJW SOP.

  9. Nighthawk the Elder

    Another option for these companies with headquarters in California would be to move the headquarters. Preferable to a state with more favourable tax and other business laws.

    But you know this won’t happen because many of the companies who already headquarter in California will be totally on board with this woke shit. It totally aligns with their objectives of inclusion and diversity and they long ago abandoned their core mission to make decent returns for their stockholders.

  10. Old Lefty

    On preferences, a retired academic I know was lucky not to have his anatomy rearranged when he said to a pair of radical lesbians ‘Actually, I’m quite sympathetic to the lesbian cause: I prefer women too.’

  11. H B Bear

    I would have loved to go around and ask the directors which gender they identify as for the Annual Report, Reckon I would have got more than a couple of two word responses, second word “off”.

  12. mundi

    There is a HQ flight in progress at the moment, it more so, just a general flight of all companies out of California.

    Even Apple is wiggling their way to make their HQ officially at their offices in Austin Texas, while the cupertino is going to be their “design” centre.

  13. H B Bear

    Yep – all the U-Hauls are heading one way. And it isn’t into LA.

  14. wal1957

    So…No new fossil fueled cars to be sold post 2035 and now this????

    Any business who can vacate that state should do so now. It can only get worse.

  15. Rob MW

    Yep – all the U-Hauls are heading one way. And it isn’t into LA.

    Problem is that they are taking their votes that created this shit with them. They should be forced to stay and live under the shit conditions they put in place, even a pig is cleaner than these dirty socialists.

  16. Davey Boy

    Yeah, we’ve already has Tim F. Southpossumarse call for “cultural targets and quotas across the business, academic and political worlds” when he was pulling in $340k pa as Commissioner for Racist Discrimination, I’m sure it’s just a matter of time until that idea resurfaces as a bubble of brain fart from one of our betters.

  17. Kneel

    “cultural targets and quotas across the business, academic and political worlds”

    There are NO gay, left-handed, midget, albino eskimo’s in parliament! WHY NOT?
    Since I identify as one, when can I expect my place in parliament, complete with travel expenses, pension et al.
    What do you mean I have to win a seat?
    RACIST!

Comments are closed.