251
posted ago by Cesare_Borgia ago by Cesare_Borgia +251 / -0

If you're a publicly traded company you have a duty to make as much money for your shareholders as possible. Hiring based on metrics like skin color or sexual orientation doesn't do that and arguably does the opposite.

Why the people running these companies haven't been sued by shareholders I can only imagine is because of the fear of appearing racist. I wonder if those of us owning mutual funds that have shares in these companies would have standing.

Comments (9)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
3
Brickapede2 3 points ago +3 / -0

Because of the “business judgment rule.” They need only claim that, in their business judgment, they are maximizing profits by bending to social pressure.

3
Cesare_Borgia [S] 3 points ago +3 / -0

Interesting, thanks for the reply and info!

3
Brickapede2 3 points ago +3 / -0

You’re welcome.

I have thought through your argument before. I do think corporate kowtowing to the left (including hiring on color) is, in fact, a breach of fiduciary duty. Sadly, however, it seems to be a dead end, legally speaking.

Spez: And the business judgment rule is a little more complicated than I described (for example, a plaintiff can disarm it using certain arguments, none of which seem applicable here).