California Law Is Increasing Gender Diversity In Boardrooms

The video discusses a 2019 McKinsey study highlighting gender diversity issues in executive roles, with women holding only 21% of such positions. California's SB 826 law, enacted in 2018, mandates publicly held companies to include at least one woman on their boards by the end of 2019. The law has led to a 23% increase in female board members in California, outpacing the national average. However, small companies face challenges meeting the quota due to budget constraints. Comparisons with Norway's similar mandate suggest limited broader impact on gender equality. Judicial Watch is challenging SB 826, claiming it violates the California Constitution's prohibition on gender-based quotas. Despite potential legal issues, companies must comply with the law, which will require more female executives by the end of 2020.

What was the main goal of California's SB 826 law introduced in 2018?

• To penalize companies with gender pay gaps

• To provide financial incentives for companies hiring female executives

• To increase the number of women in executive roles across all companies

• To mandate at least one woman on the board of publicly held companies

How did the number of female executives in California change after the SB 826 mandate?

• It increased more rapidly than the national average

• It remained the same

• It increased at the same rate as the national average

• It decreased significantly

What challenge do smaller companies face in meeting the SB 826 quota?

• Resistance from male executives

• Smaller budgets

• Lack of qualified female candidates

• Legal restrictions

What was the outcome of a similar gender mandate in Norway?

• It led to equal pay for all women in companies

• Only women in boardrooms benefited

• It was overturned due to legal challenges

• It had no impact on gender diversity

What is the basis of Judicial Watch's lawsuit against SB 826?

• It does not provide enough time for compliance

• It violates the California Constitution by creating gender-based quotas

• It unfairly targets small businesses

• It conflicts with federal gender equality laws