Does this mean companies with no women on their board need to fire a current board member on the sole basis of their gender? Isn't that discrimination based on a protected class?
>SEC. 2. Section 301.3 is added to the Corporations Code, to read:
301.3. (a) No later than the close of the 2019 calendar year, a publicly held domestic or foreign corporation whose principal executive offices, according to the corporation’s SEC 10-K form, are located in California shall have a minimum of one female director on its board. A corporation may increase the number of directors on its board to comply with this section.
But it goes on to say:
>(b) No later than the close of the 2021 calendar year, a publicly held domestic or foreign corporation whose principal executive offices, according to the corporation’s SEC 10-K form, are located in California shall comply with the following:
>(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.
So it appears that if you currently have, for example, five directors that are all men and they continue to be directors until 2021, you'll need to fire two of them and hire two women directors OR hire three new female directors.
[1] https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm...
>a publicly held domestic or foreign corporation whose principal executive offices, according to the corporation’s SEC 10-K form, are located in California
[1] https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm...
So if it can be proven that someone has a hiring preference for women over men that is a violation of existing law.