Tradefair & Financials
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
On 4th July 2017 Stonewall published its
Top 12 Global Employers for 2017
"The list celebrates the pioneering efforts of leading organisations to create inclusive workplaces and advances equality for LGBT people wherever they are in the world"
•Accenture
•Baker & McKenzie
•Barclays
•BP plc
•Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer
•Herbert Smith Freehills
•HSBC
•Pinsent Masons
•RBS
•Simmons & Simmons
•Thomson Reuters
•Vodafone
Tomorrow I'll get the share prices for this lot for 04.07.2017, and later compare them to the share prices on 04.07.2018
In theory they should do badly. Having a Corporate Director of Inclusion isn't going to make you any more productive, and to be good for your bottom line it's got to make you more productive than the cost of having someone in that post answering questionnaires from bandit charities.
Top 12 Global Employers for 2017
"The list celebrates the pioneering efforts of leading organisations to create inclusive workplaces and advances equality for LGBT people wherever they are in the world"
•Accenture
•Baker & McKenzie
•Barclays
•BP plc
•Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer
•Herbert Smith Freehills
•HSBC
•Pinsent Masons
•RBS
•Simmons & Simmons
•Thomson Reuters
•Vodafone
Tomorrow I'll get the share prices for this lot for 04.07.2017, and later compare them to the share prices on 04.07.2018
In theory they should do badly. Having a Corporate Director of Inclusion isn't going to make you any more productive, and to be good for your bottom line it's got to make you more productive than the cost of having someone in that post answering questionnaires from bandit charities.
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 4
|
By:
why should they do badly in theory? if a corporate director of inclusion introduces a policy that lgbt employees heartily approve of they may well become more productive then, as long as the non lgbt employees dont become less productive, the company will benefit. such a policy may well also lead to more lgbt people buying their goods and services too, again as long as it doesnt put non lgbt customers off, profits may increase too. good luck to anyone trying to disaggregate all this and work out what profit is down to this policy and what isnt. never mind the affect on the share price.
the concept of 'minority stress' looks at how people from stigmatized groups suffer high levels of stress, anxiety and drug & alcohol abuse. this will make them less productive whilst at work. policies that are more inclusive, if successful, are likely to lead to increased productivity and so greater profits. you are saying that if these companies do badly (or well for that matter) compared to the rest of the stock market then this is solely due to their lgbt policies. you are grossly over simplifying complicated matters imo. |
|
By:
I take it you are not a fan of murdered MP Jo Cox who said "We are far more united and have far more in common with each other than things that divide us" and that the other directors could not have come up with the same or better good policies. We should have special regard for certain groups that do not have things in common with everyone else.
|
|
By:
The story so far:
04/07/2017 Now •Accenture 124.00 160.11 •Baker & McKenzie Not listed publicly •Barclays 206.95 194.5 •BP plc 450 534.8 •Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer Not listed publicly •Herbert Smith Freehills Not listed publicly •HSBC 721.7 791.7 •Pinsent Masons Not listed publicly •RBS 255.8 302.4 •Simmons & Simmons Not listed publicly •Thomson Reuters46.3 43.59 •Vodafone 217.3 229.35 For those with a public listing the average price has increased 9.9%. We'll see where they are on 04.07.2018 |
|
By:
If this works ill get replaced by the gay fella thats looking to get promoted at work.
I better update my cv. |