: 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.
: 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)
Retaliation is attached to charges of marital discrimination at an alarmingly high rate (45%).
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.
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.
This data denotes cases that were cases of retaliation only
(ie, they did not feature any other basis).
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;
(j) sex discrimination; and/or
(k) unknown/miscellaneous forms of discrimination;