Download (PDF,6 MB) - Antidiskriminierungsstelle

page 148 chapter IV
through regulations on compensation. In the case of
‘soft’ criteria, sustainability should be improved by incentives;
otherwise, lobby groups make sure that only a
minimum acceptable to all concerned becomes law.” It
was an intelligent legal measure and a good incentive
system if companies were compelled to practise transparency
and this was accompanied by corresponding
certification, said Georg Jochum. “For example, it could
be made compulsory for company reports to indicate
the percentage of women in corporate management
positions. If a company fails to provide the information,
it must bear the reversal of the onus of proof; otherwise,
it could be liable to pay compensation.”
“It would be more effective than statutory regulations to
include certain goals in the corporate targets, such as a
balance between women and men,” said one Congress
participant. “That would soon lead to success.” Margit
Osterloh agreed on this point. After all, goal-setting
agreements were a tool commonly used in management,
and one that could, of course, also be applied to
diversity or other sustainability factors. Target parameters
had several advantages: “They are explicit, they are
tailored to the individual company and its situation, and
they are defined for a specific period and reviewed.”
Charlotte Gaitanides came out in favour of statutory
regulations: “I don’t think sustainability criteria stipulated
in EU Directives would be harmful. Nor can I see
why the Anti-Discrimination Directives are said to
have harmed equal rights. Legal regulations are not
the only strategy, and there is certainly a need for
accom panying measures. But the state sometimes has
to help get things moving.” A Congress participant ex-