Download (PDF,6 MB) - Antidiskriminierungsstelle

page 133 chapter III
rection was lacking. “Our politicians must decide
whether they want to regulate things themselves,
whether they want to gear themselves to the recommendations
of the Code or not. If they do not accept
these recommendations, they will have to give the
public an explanation of their reasons.” The Corporate
Governance Code Commission had achieved a lot in recent
years, he said. “It has laid the foundations for corporate
governance and will not entertain the idea of
merely closing a few gaps that the politicians forgot.”
One Congress participant, the managing director of a
generations-old family business, voiced a sceptical
view regarding the principle of voluntariness and the
importance of values. “The concept of ‘values’ is very
flexible. When playing games – and also when running
businesses – you don’t necessarily need values,
but rules.” That even applied to family-owned businesses,
she said. “I don’t believe people are simply
good. So, businesses need rules. We were already talking
about values five years ago – but perhaps the value
there was money and profit.”
Of course we needed rules, replied Klaus-Peter Müller,
but not necessarily laws, because they were too restrictive,
and often too complex in Germany. “The Code defines
rules, and companies have to explain why they
fail to adhere to them. For example, one of the rules is
that you can only sit on an advisory board up to a maximum
age of 72. If the Code were transformed into a
law exactly as it stands, advisory board members
would always have to stand down after reaching the
age of 72, even if there were good reasons for them
continuing their work. It is for situations like this that