EC 'Rejects' Law To Boost Women On Boards
The European Commission has stopped short of imposing legally-binding quotas to bolster the number of women on company boards.
Commission Vice President Viviane Reding wants a target set instead to have women comprise at least 40% of the boards of publicly-traded European companies by 2020.
State-owned companies will have an earlier deadline of 2018 under the plan, which is yet to be fully endorsed and is subject to alteration.
The current proposals would demand that from 2016, companies where women make up less than 40% would have to choose qualified women to fill vacancies or face penalties, but it would be up to individual EU countries what penalties there would be for failure.
She suggested punishments could include fines or the annulment of the appointment of a male board member.
At present, women make up 15% of the board membership of Europe's largest companies. "This is a waste of talent," Ms Reding said.
Ms Reding faced a storm of protest over plans to write the 40% target into law - with some women's groups arguing the best person for the job should get the post.
While agreeing women are under-represented, they suggested positive disrimination to correct the imbalance risked alienating male counterparts.
Fiona Hotston Moore, a corporate partner at the accountants Reeves, told Sky News that "unconscious bias" was the biggest obstacle to the problem as self-regulation had failed.
She called for temporary quotas to help improve the imbalance.
But in giving his response to the European Commission's directive, the Business Secretary, Vince Cable made it clear that self-regulation was to continue.
He said: "The UK welcomes the Commission's decision not to impose mandatory quotas for women on boards.
"We remain fully committed to increasing women's representation in UK boardrooms but along with like-minded Member States, we have consistently argued that measures are best considered at national level.
"We believe that the UK's business-led, self-regulatory model, as set out in the Davies Review, is the best approach for us."
what do you think?
Quite right women should stay at home and cook their hard working men dinner ,there are enough Old women on the boards already look at the mess we are in.(hope the missus dose not read this) .
This comment has been removed for violations of our Terms and Conditions.
By the way - my lady says jump and I, of course, reply how high darling - with age we get to know our place
I've got my wife just exactly where she wants me!
Shame men cant earn enough now to keep us at home
Yes Jo right on the button :))
Why don't they leave companies to run their own affairs if they want to interfere then let them hold a stake and then they can ruin the companies just like they have the member states. Lets get out of this fiasco some time soon.
If only. The EU try to micro manage everything that moves usually to the detriment of whatever it is they are messing with.
Ther is no such thing as positive discrimination which the equal opportunities industry constantly go on about where inbalances exist. It is simply discrimination against a different group of people.
Socialist rubbish i.e. more government & more taxes to pay. lets have free capitalist markets please & less taxes
I saw a woman on a side board once.
I've got a joke about the definition of 'condescending', but you women probably wouldn't get it.
heh heh, nice one.
They oppose this but support terrorists - lets get out of Europe
Jobs should go on merit not gender
Grant go on give us your joke takes a lot to offend me
re-read it Diane
Diane, you literally don't get it...heh heh.
Bet your thinking typical women just tired had a hard day at the office sorry shop
Yes diane we are thinking typical woman.ha ha. I take it your not on the board at your office without being condescending.lol
This is exactly the sort of nanny state rubbish that turns people off the eu. We really need to get out, fast.
Can't get round the inconistency of the EU - how do they square this decision on the insurance industry that prevents them allowing lower premiums for a section of society that has better driving/claims histories. Not saying which group this affects but we all know don't we! Either we treat every human being the same (which we arn't) or we be sensible and accept our differences - can't cherry pick!
A woman who has got onto the board by hard work and talent is a match for any man on a board Those who are appointed to fill a quota are a waste of space and will undermine woman board members appointed due to tallent
Michael. Precisely! Promotion on merit every time over quotas. If they are good enough they should be in
Totally agree Michael. You appoint the best person for the job, regardless of gender, race, colour or creed, not to have 2.8 women, 3.6 blacks, 1.7 Christians etc.
This sound much like when Blair/Brown went on about having x amount of women as mp's. Forcing us to employ women over men is'nt doing all this girl power and women in general any good, if women want to be at the top they will want to be seen as doing it on their own with no advantage over men. There is load's of capable wimen out there willing to take on the men in boardrooms, just need them to step up to the table!