Sunday, 16 March 2025

The EU Directive on Women on Corporate Boards: Steering Out of the Limitations and Leveraging Opportunities


 

Dr Joy A. Debski, Lecturer in Law, School of Law and Social Sciences, Robert Gordon University

Photo credit: André Corboz, via Wikimedia Commons

 

Synoptic Data Inquiry and Understanding the Directive

Although women constitute about 51% of overall population in the EU, statistics show a rather concerning reality that despite accounting for about 60% of recent university graduates, women only account for 32.2% of board members and 8% of board chairs. Conversely, women hold more part-time and lower-paid jobs, with 27.8% employed part-time compared to only 7% for men, indicating limited engagement in key economic roles. These results point to a considerably low engagement of the women workforce in critical economic roles.

The conversations and efforts to mitigate the gender gap of women on boards within the European Union (EU) led to the Union’s Gender Balance on Corporate Boards Directive (directive) 2022. Member States had until December 28, 2024, to implement the directive, and companies (listed companies) must meet the targets set out in the Directive by June 30, 2026. The directive sets the target that at least 40% of non-executive director positions or 33% of all director positions be held by the underrepresented sex (women). The directive, however, accommodates some limitations, such as the provision that the priority of women, when they are equally qualified with men, should not have automatic application. Hence, the provision can be displaced by a candidate’s lack of predetermined qualifications and the operation of other diversity goals that the company seeks to attain (which must be objectively set and not be of retrospective application) – paragraph 40 to the preamble of the directive. The compulsory quota targets, even though influential, may not ensure continued inclusion after the quota is met.

The Directive aligns itself with existing frameworks such as Article 157 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (on equal pay) and paragraphs 49 and 58 to the preamble of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive 2022/2464, which seek to minimize the gender gap of women in professional roles.  

Through its legislation, the EU is attempting to bridge the gender gap. However, women now have their roles in ensuring that the goals of the directive for a fairer and more diverse corporate environment in the EU are realized. Women need to be informed of the inherent limitations, and they can harness the benefits of diversity in advancing their careers.

Steering Out of the Limitations and Leveraging Opportunities

Enhance Qualifications and Skills: Despite the boldness of the directive, especially regarding the priority rule, equal qualifications of candidates must first be met before the consideration of applying priority to women candidates. (all things being equal). This makes it imperative that women must “accelerate action” and decisively engage in preparations that align with corporate board roles, in order to increase competitiveness. Hence, thoughtful investment in professional development, such as undertaking chartered secretary and governance professional qualifying exams organised by specialist and accredited institutions, may be a crucial step to take in preparation for management roles. Additionally, board-relevant skill acquisition (such as professional experience in managerial tasks, international experience, leadership financial literacy, strategic planning, governance, etc) are strongly advised. Paragraph 39 to the preamble of the directive points to this clearly.

Pursue Board Positions: The directive as transposed by Member States must be followed by decisive career actions by the female population, boldly disregarding assumptions about (fear of) traditional discrimination. With the directive promoting a minimum quota representation of women in directorship positions to address inequalities, women should actively pursue roles in corporate boards beyond listed companies after acquiring board-level qualifications and experience. Despite the odds (non-automatic application), the priority rule for equally qualified candidates crafts a more favourable environment for women to be considered for these positions.

Monitoring Company Compliance: women should themselves, be the first defenders of the provisions of the directive by being diligent with the recruitment process and proactive in their inquiries about set recruitment standards. Knowledge of how exactly the directive is transposed by the country that pertains the candidate is important.  This will aid in checkmating companies against absolute non-compliance and unjustified application of exceptions to choose against female candidates for board roles – see the requirement of the directive in paragraphs 42 – 44 of the directive’s preamble.

Explore litigious avenues: The directive empowers members of the underrepresented sex to demand the company to provide their criteria for selection into the board. Hence, upon any detection of discrimination or non-compliance with the directive, or the non-disclosure of full criteria or misleading disclosure; a valid recourse to court is possible.  The application of positive action measures (as an instance) in the protection of underrepresented sex in recruitment, has obtained judicial interpretive attention that makes it permissible in some instances. For instance, in the case of Marschall v Land Nordrhein- Westfalen (2000), upon the positive action measure being challenged, the court ruled that the positive action measure which favoured women is permissible  (as long as the recruitment and assessment criteria were objectively met)  and its application does not amount to automatic preference over men.  The earlier case of Kalanke v Freie Hansestadt Bremen further strengthens a stance against absolute application of the positive action measure. While the possibility of approaching the court upon non-justified misapplication of the priority rule is noted, these two cases are of guidance to any litigious move in determining the permissiveness and appropriate application of the positive action measure or otherwise.

Other strategies include ensuring professional visibility, participating in specialized training programs designed for prospective corporate board members, and strategically networking with women advocacy groups, for awareness and support for rights enforcement. Also, women who are current board members and CEOs must endeavour to mentor and support ideas of inclusiveness in their different capacities.

Conclusion

On a wider economic justification of gender equality, the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) forecasts that by the year 2050, increased EU (GDP) per capita of 6.1 - 9.6% (EUR1.95 to EUR3.15 trillion), will be on account of improving gender equality. This further envisages the creation of about 10.5 million jobs in 2050. To achieve this positive reality within the context of EU Directive 2022/2381, listed (and other) companies within the EU must be poised to bridge the employment gap between women and their counterparts in their Boards. While the efforts of the directive hinges on quota targets and deadlines, long-term cultural changes toward inclusivity in corporate governance are recommended, and women have critical roles to play in the directive’s broader success. The laws are in your favour; what are you doing better to take benefit?

 

No comments:

Post a Comment