Connect with us

Business

Future CEOs, erased: the economic cost of losing Black women in the workforce

Published

on



The year 2025 will be remembered for a stunning reversal in workforce equity: almost 300,000 Black women exited the labor force—thinning a pipeline that was already too narrow.

This isn’t a seasonal fluctuation or statistical footnote. It’s a strategic failure with long-term consequences.

Black women have long been a cornerstone of America’s economic engine—driving participation, powering key industries, and anchoring family incomes. Now, that foundation is fracturing. And the fallout is more than short-term—it’s a direct threat to corporate succession planning, innovation, and growth. The U.S. economy has always depended on Black women’s labor. In fact, no group of women in America has historically had higher labor force participation than Black women. Yet today, we’re watching them disappear from the workforce at an alarming rate—with little alarm and even less intervention.

The consequence? A corporate succession crisis in slow motion. Because when companies lose Black women today, they aren’t just losing high-performing contributors—they’re forfeiting the very leaders their future stability depends on.

The leadership cliff Is getting steeper

In 2025, Black women account for approximately 6.4% of the U.S. workforce. But they make up just 0.4% of Fortune 500 CEOs.

That’s not a representation gap. That’s a pipeline collapse.

And the exits we’re witnessing this year threaten to push that collapse into freefall. Between February and June 2025, Black women’s labor force participation dropped by 1.8 percentage points—a decline that translates to an estimated $37.2 billion in lost GDP. In February alone, Black women lost 266,000—the sharpest decline of any demographic that month.

If we’re serious about building inclusive leadership, that number should set off alarms in every boardroom in America.

Because companies cannot diversify the C-suite with talent that’s no longer in the building.

This isn’t a theoretical concern. Today’s middle managers are tomorrow’s senior vice presidents. Today’s directors become future CEOs. And the current rate of attrition is effectively erasing Black women from that trajectory before they even reach the inflection point.

What’s driving the exodus—and why it’s compounding

The reasons Black women are leaving the workforce aren’t mysterious. They’re measurable, structural, and cumulative.

1. Disinvestment in DEI is acting like a demand signal. After years of progress (however incremental), 2025 is the year many companies quietly reversed course. DEI programs were deprioritized or dismantled. Corporate partnerships with Black-led organizations were paused or cut entirely. In the public sector, Black women in federal employment declined by nearly 33%, compared to just a 3.7% drop in the broader federal government workforce. When inclusion becomes optional, Black women read between the lines: you’re not wanted here.

2. Black women are bearing the brunt of layoffs—again. In sectors like education, government, and healthcare, Black women are overrepresented in roles most vulnerable to cuts and underrepresented in roles most likely to be protected. April’s jobs report showed this clearly. These aren’t just job losses—they’re career disruptions. And in a system that rewards uninterrupted tenure, they stall upward mobility.

3. The psychological toll of bias and burnout is accelerating exit velocity. Black women face some of the highest rates of bias, isolation, and microaggressions in the workplace. Many have described being “worn out from discrimination in corporate America,” a key reason why Black women are increasingly choosing entrepreneurship—not as a passion project, but as a survival strategy.

4. Structural inflexibility is forcing unnecessary trade-offs.

More than 51% of Black households with children under 18 are led by breadwinner moms, yet these women earn just 44 cents for every dollar paid to white breadwinner dads. Black women are overrepresented in rigid, low-wage occupations—like home health aide and administrative support—that lack paid leave, schedule flexibility, and caregiving support. As a result, they face impossible trade-offs: they’re more likely than white women to be penalized professionally for caregiving despite being equally ambitious in their careers.

5. Political backlash has made equity itself a liability.

The politicization of DEI has created a chilling effect across sectors. In 2025, companies that once made public commitments to racial justice are staying quiet—or backpedaling. At Walmart, shareholders warned that abandoning equity programs could “erode long-term value.” The cost of retreat isn’t just reputational. It’s financial.

The cost of corporate complacency

Let’s be clear: this is not just a diversity problem. This is a productivity, profitability, and performance problem.

The exodus of Black women from the workforce is draining companies of essential talent, perspective, and leadership potential. It’s also leaving money on the table—lots of it.

Consider this:

Closing the earnings gap for Black women could generate an additional $300 billion in U.S. GDP and create 1.2 million jobs.

● Companies with more diverse executive teams are more likely to outperform on innovation and earnings.

56% of Gen Z workers say they won’t accept a job offer from a company with no visible leadership diversity.

And yet, many companies are minimizing rather than mobilizing. Some are treating this workforce departure as a blip. A moment that will self-correct.

It won’t.

Leadership pipelines don’t bounce back on their own. Once they erode, they take decades to repair. And every high-potential employee who exits the workforce today is one less candidate in the board room tomorrow.

What must change—and why now

Companies that want to compete in the future must act now to retain and accelerate Black women’s talent. That means:

● Tracking attrition and promotion by race and gender—at all levels, not just entry roles.

● Enforcing pay transparency and correcting compensation gaps.

● Investing in sponsorship programs that give Black women access to power, not just advice.

Standing firm on equity commitments, even when politically inconvenient.

Above all, it means recognizing this moment for what it is: a turning point.

Black women have shown up for the economy time and time again. They’ve led, built, innovated, and persisted. If companies fail to show up for them now, they’ll be gambling with their own future—undermining innovation, growth, and resilience.

Because when Black women leave the workforce, we don’t just lose productivity.

We lose future CEOs.

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.

Fortune Global Forum returns Oct. 26–27, 2025 in Riyadh. CEOs and global leaders will gather for a dynamic, invitation-only event shaping the future of business. Apply for an invitation.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Meet 25 rising execs inside the Fortune 500

Published

on



Good morning. Major technology shifts often spur the rise of a new generation of leaders. Satya Nadella’s track record in building Microsoft’s cloud business earned him the top job in 2014. Arvind Krishna’s early bet on cloud and AI made him an obvious choice to run IBM, as did Ginni Rometty’s reputation in disruptive technologies before him. Doug McMillion’s push for e-commerce proved pivotal in becoming CEO of Walmart and transforming the retailer while there. Go back to 1989 and a digital-first Stan Bergman was champing at the bit to transform Henry Schein.

But technical savvy alone does not a leader make. For a glimpse of who’s likely to take the lead in this next era for the Fortune 500, check out theFortune Next to Lead list that’s out this morning. My colleague Ruth Umoh spent months talking to board directors, management consultants, leadership advisors, recruiters, and current and former CEOs to identify 25 rising executives inside the Fortune 500 who exhibit the skills and mindset of a new breed of CEO. 

Candidates were evaluated across several dimensions, from the scale and impact of their role with the enterprise to their vision and influence beyond the company. There’s Josh D’Amaro of Disney, who oversees a worldwide experiences division embarking on a $60 billion expansion of parks, resorts, cruise ships, and next-generation guest experiences. Within Microsoft, Scott Guthrie’s record at Azure has put him at the center of the company’s cloud and AI strategy. Donna Langley at NBCUniversal is redefining the studio’s multi-platform strategy, while General Motors’ Mark Reuss oversees a broad operational portfolio, from engineering and manufacturing to battery strategy and global markets, making him a central architect of GM’s long-term competitiveness. Keep an eye, too, on Marianne Lake of JPMorgan Chase and Kate Gutmann of UPS.

As always, I’d love to hear your thoughts on candidates you think deserve a spot, and what qualities you think will determine success in the next generation of Fortune 500 CEOs.

Contact CEO Daily via Diane Brady at diane.brady@fortune.com

Top news

New jobs data

Today is a quirky jobs day that will shed some light on the state of the U.S. economy. The Bureau of Labor Statistics is releasing jobs numbers for November and October. But the data will be patchy because of disruptions caused by the government shutdown; there will be no October unemployment report, for instance. “We’re going to have to look at [the data] carefully and with a somewhat skeptical eye” because it may be “distorted by very technical factors,” Fed Chair Jerome Powell said.

PayPal as a bank

PayPal is taking advantage of the Trump administration’s looser rules towards fintech companies and applying to become a bank. The payments company says the designation will allow it to lend more to small businesses. 

Introducing the U.S. ‘tech force’

The Trump Administration on Monday unveiled what it’s calling the U.S. “tech force” of 1,000 early career engineers and other specialists to research and develop AI and financial products for the federal government. Companies like Nvidia, Palantir, Amazon and Google will partner with the government on the initiative and second some of their own top talent to join its ranks. 

Ford’s EV bust

Ford will record a $19.5 billion impairment for the rollback of parts of its EV strategy. The Detroit carmaker is contending with lower-than-expected demand for EVs and plans to halt production of some pure electric vehicles in favor of hybrid models. 

Fed Chair finalists

President Trump could announce his pick for Fed chair before Christmas. Fortune’s Eleanor Pringle introduces us to the finalists and dissects their on-record opinions about the running of the central bank. This weekend, prediction markets were betting that the race had narrowed to a Kevin vs. Kevin contest

McKinsey gets lean

McKinsey is planning to shirk its non-client facing departments by about 10% in coming months as it contends with a slowdown in its traditional services and flatlining revenue. Governments in China and Saudi Arabia, for instance, have cut back on using consulting firms. 

Companies’ ‘93-7 split’ 

Bill Briggs, Deloitte’s chief technology officer, told Fortune’s Nick Lichtenberg that companies are pouring 93% of their AI budget into technology and only 7% into the people expected to use it. That lopsided investment is all wrong, Briggs says, since it focuses on the physical “ingredients” of AI and not the culture, workflow, and training needed to make the technology effective.

The markets

S&P 500 futures are down 0.25% this morning. The last session closed down 0.16%. STOXX Europe 600 was down 0.05% in early trading. The U.K.’s FTSE 100 was down 0.46% in early trading. Japan’s Nikkei 225 was down 1.56%. China’s CSI 300 was down 1.2%. The South Korea KOSPI was down 2.24%. India’s NIFTY 50 was down 0.64%. Bitcoin went to $87K.

Around the watercooler

Google cofounder Sergey Brin said he was ‘spiraling’ before returning to work on Gemini—and staying retired ‘would’ve been a big mistake’ by Marco Quiroz-Gutierrez

Former Meta integrity chief says new report reveals ‘disappointing’ ad fraud epidemic at the social-media giant by Lily Mae Lazarus

‘I had to take 60 meetings’: Jeff Bezos says ‘the hardest thing I’ve ever done’ was raising the first million dollars of seed capital for Amazon by Dave Smith

What happens to old AI chips? They’re still put to good use and don’t depreciate that fast, analyst says by Jason Ma

CEO Daily is compiled and edited by Claire Zillman and Lee Clifford.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

80% of American Christmas trees are fake. They’re also tariffed

Published

on



On a recent December day, Mark Latino and a handful of his workers spun sheets of vinyl into tinsel for Christmas tree branches. They worked on a custom-made machine that’s nearly a century old, churning out strands of bright silver tinsel along its 35-foot (10-meter) length.

Latino is the CEO of Lee Display, a Fairfield, California-based company that his great-grandfather founded in 1902. Back then, it specialized in handmade velvet and silk flowers for hats. Now, it’s one of the only companies in the United States that still makes artificial Christmas trees, producing around 10,000 each year.

Tariffs and trees

Tariffs shone a twinkling light this year on fake Christmas trees — and the extent to which America depends on other countries for its plastic fir trees.

Prices for fake trees rose 10% to 15% this year due to the new import taxes, according to the American Christmas Tree Association, a trade group. Tree sellers cut their orders and paid higher tariffs for the stock they brought in.

Despite those issues, tree companies say they aren’t likely to shift large-scale production back to the U.S. after decades in Asia. Fake trees are labor-intensive and require holiday lights and other components the U.S. doesn’t make, said Chris Butler, CEO of the National Tree Co., which sells more than 1 million artificial trees each year.

Americans are also very price-sensitive when it comes to holiday décor, Butler said.

“Putting a ‘Made in the U.S.A.’ sticker on the box won’t do any good if it’s twice as expensive,” Butler said. “If it’s 20% more expensive, it won’t sell.”

Americans prefer fake trees

About 80% of the U.S. residents who put up a Christmas tree this year planned to use a fake one, according to the American Christmas Tree Association. That percentage has been unchanged for at least 15 years.

Mac Harman, the founder and CEO of Balsam Brands, which sells hundreds of thousands of Balsam Hill trees each year, said Americans like to set up their trees on Thanksgiving and leave them up for weeks, which dries out fresh-cut trees. Others prefer fake trees because they’re allergic to the mold spores on real trees, he said.

Americans also like convenience; 80% of the fake trees sold each year have the lights already strung on them, Butler said.

That preference is one reason artificial tree production shifted away from the U.S., first to Thailand in the early 1990s and to China about a decade later. Winding lights around the branches is time-consuming and tedious, Harman said.

“Where are we going to get 15,000 people in America who want to string lights on Christmas trees?” Harman said.

Labor-intensive work

It takes an hour or two to make an artificial Christmas tree, from molding and cutting the needles to tying branches together and attaching the lights, Butler said. Workers in China, where 90% of fake trees are made, are paid $1.50 to $2 per hour, he said.

Harman said the workers who wrap the lights on Balsam Hill’s trees are so efficient “it’s like watching an Olympian.”

One of Balsam Brands’ Chinese partners employs 15,000 to 20,000 people; another in Indonesia has up to 10,000, he said. Many are seasonal workers, since orders for Christmas décor slow down between October and February.

Balsam Brands, which is based in Redwood City, California, studied whether it could make faux trees in Ohio during the first Trump administration, when President Donald Trump threatened -– but eventually delayed –- tariffs on imported Christmas décor, Harman said.

The company hired consultants and considered automating some work. But it concluded a tree that currently sells for $800 would cost $3,000 if it was made in the U.S. Harman said Balsam couldn’t even find a U.S. company to make the pair of gloves it includes in each box for fluffing out branches.

American-made trees

Lee Display employs three or four people for most of the year, adding more during the holiday rush to help with installations and displays. About half its business is making custom displays for companies such as Macy’s, while the other half is selling directly to consumers.

Latino said he likes that he can produce an order quickly instead of waiting for it to ship from overseas.

“You have more control over it. I like to think that everything here is either my fault or my mistake or my careful planning and skill,” he said.

The tariffs still affected Lee Display. Latino’s son James, who leads business development and marketing, said the company didn’t import lights or decorations from China this year and relied on items it already had in stock. It’s getting low on lights, so next year it will have to pay more to import them, he said.

Responding to tariffs

Some artificial tree companies are branching out so they’re less reliant on China. National Tree Co., which is based in Cranford, New Jersey, moved some manufacturing to Cambodia in 2024, and could source all its trees from outside China by next year if it wanted to, Butler said.

But diversifying their suppliers didn’t make those companies immune from the impact of tariffs either. In April, the Trump administration threatened a 49% tariff against products from Cambodia. That rate was eventually reduced to 19%. Tariffs on artificial trees from China also bounced around but now average 20%, according to the American Christmas Tree Association.

Butler said his company imported fewer trees this year and also raised prices by 10%. He said he used a lot of the money to offer customer discounts since demand was weak because of consumer worries about the economy.

“It’s a discretionary item. People say, ‘I can wait one more year,’” Butler said.

Balsam Brands cut its workforce by 10%, canceled travel, froze raises and even stopped serving lunch in the office once a week to absorb the impact of tariffs, Harman said. It also raised tree prices by 10%.

Harman said his sales are down 5% to 10% this year in the U.S. but up 10% or more in Germany, Australia, Canada and France. That tells him tariffs have decreased U.S. demand.

“If a merry Christmas is measured in how many decorations people put up, by that measure it’s going to be a slightly less merry Christmas,” he said.

___

AP Video Journalist Terry Chea contributed from Fairfield, California.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Jim Carrey nearly quit ‘Grinch’ — Then the founder of SEAL Team Six came to the rescue

Published

on



For his role in the movie How the Grinch Stole Christmas, which came out in 2000, Jim Carrey’s tortuous costume and makeup had him on the verge of walking away from a $20 million paycheck.

In an interview with Vulture, the actor said the first day of makeup took eight hours. He nearly quit and suffered from panic attacks after having to wear painful green contacts, makeup that made him breathe through his mouth the whole time, and a full body suit made of itchy yak hair. But before he walked away, producer Brian Grazer hired the founder of SEAL Team Six to help Carrey suck it up.

“Richard Marcinko was a gentleman that trained CIA officers and special-ops people how to endure torture. He gave me a litany of things that I could do when I began to spiral. Like punch myself in the leg as hard as I can. Have a friend that I trust and punch him in the arm. Eat everything in sight. Changing patterns in the room,” Carrey told Vulture in the interview, which was published on Friday.

“If there’s a TV on when you start to spiral, turn it off and turn the radio on. Smoke cigarettes as much as possible. There are pictures of me as the Grinch sitting in a director’s chair with a long cigarette holder. I had to have the holder, because the yak hair would catch on fire if it got too close,” he added.

Carrey said he later learned that Marcinko was the founding officer of SEAL Team Six, the famed special-operations unit. Marcinko passed away at age 81 in December 2021.

Director Ron Howard and Grazer, who were also part of the Vulture interview, recalled Carrey struggling onset because of his Grinch costume.

Howard said the pain he endured was less physical than mental as the makeup was “destroying” Carrey’s skin. It was determined by medical professionals that Carrey couldn’t work in the makeup five days in a row, so he would have a day off or only be off-camera feeding dialogue on Wednesdays, he added.

“Jim started having panic attacks. I would see him lying down on the floor in between setups with a brown paper bag. Literally on the floor. He was miserable,” Howard said.

Carrey even offered to return his entire $20 million paycheck, with interest, Grazer said. But, instead Grazer found Marcinko. 

“I said, ‘Listen, you can quit on Monday, but just spend time with this guy on the weekend,’” Grazer said.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.