prev item | table of contents | next item |
field | age | col | dis | fam | mar | nator | race | relig | retal | sex | unk | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
all | 966 | 233 | 1,420 | 64 | 112 | 525 | 1,794 | 176 | 1,234 | 1,170 | 52 | 4,668 |
w/retal | 272 | 83 | 281 | 2 | 50 | 145 | 482 | 63 | 171* | 433 | 14 | 1,234 |
field | age | col | dis | fam | mar | nator | race | relig | retal | sex | unk | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
% | 28% | 36% | 20% | 3% | 45% | 28% | 27% | 36% | 14%* | 37% | 27% | 26% |
% retal | 22% | 7% | 23% | 0% | 4% | 12% | 39% | 5% | 14% | 35% | 1% | 100% |
reference | 21% | 5% | 30% | 1% | 2% | 11% | 38% | 4% | 26% | 25% | 1% | 100% |
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%).
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.