Belgium’s federal government has agreed to introduce mandatory gender quotas for the executive teams of autonomous state-owned companies, expanding existing equality rules beyond boards of directors for the first time.
The measure will require that at least 33% of members of executive committees at state-owned firms be women. Companies affected include major public enterprises such as the postal group bpost and the national railway operator SNCB-NMBS.
The decision was taken last week as part of broader discussions within the federal coalition on equality and public-sector governance. While no firm deadline has yet been set, compliance will be expected “in the short term,” according to Equal Opportunities Minister Rob Beenders of the socialist Vooruit party.
Until now, Belgium’s gender quota legislation has focused primarily on boards of directors. The extension to executive committees marks a significant shift, as these bodies are directly responsible for day-to-day management and strategic decision-making.
Beenders described the move as a necessary step to tackle persistent gender imbalances at the highest operational levels of public companies. “Too often, women reach the boardroom but remain excluded from real executive power,” he said.
The practical impact of the new rule will differ widely between companies. At the bpost group, recently rebranded as Bnode, only two of the ten executive directors are currently women, meaning substantial changes will be required to meet the threshold.
By contrast, SNCB-NMBS already complies with the proposed quota. Three women sit on its nine-member executive team, placing the railway company above the 33% requirement and making it an example of existing progress within the public sector.
Belgium has long been seen as a pioneer in the use of quotas to improve gender balance in leadership. Since the introduction of mandatory quotas for boards of directors in 2011, female representation has risen sharply.
According to government figures, the share of women on boards increased from less than 10% in 2008 to more than 37% today. Supporters of quotas argue that this demonstrates their effectiveness in breaking entrenched patterns of exclusion.
Beenders said quotas should be viewed as a temporary but necessary instrument. “They are not an end in themselves,” he said, “but a way to remove long-standing barriers that prevent women from advancing to top positions.”
However, the proposal has not been without controversy. The minister initially pushed for stricter rules, including a 40% quota and an extension of the system to large private-sector companies.
Those plans encountered resistance from several coalition partners, particularly from more liberal parties. Critics argued that binding quotas interfere too heavily in corporate governance and undermine the principle of appointing leaders based solely on merit.
Opponents also warned that extending quotas to the private sector could discourage investment or create administrative burdens for businesses already facing economic uncertainty.
Following negotiations, the government opted for a compromise. The quota was lowered to 33%, and the scope was limited to autonomous state-owned companies, where the state already plays a direct role as shareholder.
Supporters of the compromise say it balances the need for progress with political and economic realities. “The state should lead by example,” said one government source, adding that public companies are a logical starting point for such reforms.
The draft legislation will now be sent to the Council of State and other advisory bodies for legal and technical review. Only after this process will it be submitted to parliament for debate and final approval.
If adopted, the law would place Belgium among a growing number of European countries using binding measures to promote gender equality in executive leadership, particularly within the public sector.
As the parliamentary process unfolds, the debate over quotas versus merit-based selection is expected to intensify. For now, the government has signalled that gender balance in executive power is no longer optional, but a matter of public policy.
