Analysis of FCHR Charges of Discrimination
With Incidences of Retaliation

Fact #1: A primary charge of marital status discrimination coincides with a [secondary] charge of retaliation at a rate that’s greater than any other primary charge.

Evidenced by the 45% incidence rate (see Graph A; see “%” row); which is the highest rate.

Fact #2: When looking at all retaliation cases, a primary charge of sex discrimination appears more frequently than expected.

Evidenced by the 35% incidence rate contrasted with the 25% incidence rate (compare Graph B with Graph C; compare “% retal” row with “reference” row)

Takeaway #1: Retaliation is attached to charges of marital discrimination at an alarmingly high rate (45%).

Takeaway #2: All-in-all, charges of retaliation vary based on the ‘primary’ charge of discrimination. This further evidences the fact that people do not file discrimination complaints willy-nilly.

Note #1: The second table is derived from calculations of the first table.

The "%" row was calculated by dividing the "w/retal" row by the "all" row.

The "% retal" row was calculated by dividing the "w/retal" row by the "all+retal" data point.

The "reference" row was calculated by dividing the "all" row by the "all+total" data point.

*Asterisk: This data denotes cases that were cases of retaliation only (ie, they did not feature any other basis).

Additional: Diving deeper into each primary charge can help illuminate how discrimination complaints get charged. For example, you can analyze statistical metrics for each of the following charges:
(a) age discrimination;
(b) color discrimination;
(c) disability discrimination;
(d) familial status discrimination;
(e) marital status discrimination;
(f) national origin discrimination;
(g) race discrimination;
(h) religion discrimination;
(i) retaliation;
(j) sex discrimination; and/or
(k) unknown/miscellaneous forms of discrimination;