Table 6
Impacts and consequences of work-related discriminatory behaviours experienced in the past 12 months, by category of behaviour and gender, 2020


Table 6
Impacts and consequences of work-related discriminatory behaviours experienced in the past 12 months, by category of behaviour and gender, 2020
Table summary
This table displays the results of Impacts and consequences of work-related discriminatory behaviours experienced in the past 12 months. The information is grouped by Impacts and consequences (appearing as row headers), Discrimination on the basis of gender, sexual orientation, or gender identity, Women, Men, percent and 95% confidence interval, calculated using from and to units of measure (appearing as column headers).
Impacts and consequences Discrimination on the basis of gender, sexual orientation, or gender identity
WomenTable 6 Note † Men
percent 95% confidence interval percent 95% confidence interval
from to from to
Personal and emotional impacts
Avoided or wanted to avoid specific people at work 49 43 55 36 26 49
Avoided or wanted to avoid specific locations or tasks at work 31 26 37 29 18 43
Wanted to miss work or work fewer hours 23 18 28 22 13 34
Missed work or worked fewer hours 15 11 19 6Note * 3 12
Had difficulty doing your work 27 22 32 26 16 41
Turned down a job opportunity 9 6 13 13 6 26
Experienced a loss of trust in the person in authority at work or in your company or organization 39 34 45 31 21 44
Wanted to change your job, transfer or quit 34 28 40 28 19 40
Changed your job, transferred or quit 12 9 17 13 6 24
Avoided optional work-related social functions 23 19 28 17 11 25
Experienced negative emotional impact 42 36 48 39 28 51
Experienced negative impact on your personal or social life 19 15 24 16 8 27
Sought support services 12 8 16 3Note * 1 5
Used drugs or alcohol to cope with the experience 6 4 8 9 4 22
Impacts in the past month
Had nightmares about it or thought about it when you did not want to 15 11 19 14 6 30
Tried hard not to think about it or went out of your way to avoid situations that reminded you of it 24 19 29 15 10 23
Felt constantly on guard, watchful or easily startled 19 15 24 17 11 26
Felt numb or detached from others, activities or your surroundings 13 10 18 13 8 22
Three or four of the above impactsTable 6 Note 1 10 7 13 9 5 15
Spoke to anyone associated with work about any of the behaviours
YesTable 6 Note 2 48 42 54 35 24 47
The person or people responsible 29 21 38 Note F: too unreliable to be published Note F: too unreliable to be published Note F: too unreliable to be published
A supervisor, boss, or senior manager 50 41 58 Note F: too unreliable to be published Note F: too unreliable to be published Note F: too unreliable to be published
Another co-worker, including one of your employees 67 59 75 Note F: too unreliable to be published Note F: too unreliable to be published Note F: too unreliable to be published
A human resources advisor or corporate security officer 7 4 11 Note F: too unreliable to be published Note F: too unreliable to be published Note F: too unreliable to be published
A union representative 6 3 11 Note F: too unreliable to be published Note F: too unreliable to be published Note F: too unreliable to be published
An ombudsperson or someone responsible for the welfare of employees Note F: too unreliable to be published Note F: too unreliable to be published Note F: too unreliable to be published Note F: too unreliable to be published Note F: too unreliable to be published Note F: too unreliable to be published
Someone else associated with your work Note F: too unreliable to be published Note F: too unreliable to be published Note F: too unreliable to be published Note F: too unreliable to be published Note F: too unreliable to be published Note F: too unreliable to be published
No 49 43 55 64Note * 52 75
Filed a formal complaint or grievance
YesTable 6 Note 2 7 4 11 10 4 23
No 92 88 95 90 77 96
Experienced negative consequences after speaking to someoneTable 6 Note 3
YesTable 6 Note 2 21 15 28 Note F: too unreliable to be published Note F: too unreliable to be published Note F: too unreliable to be published
No 76 69 82 Note F: too unreliable to be published Note F: too unreliable to be published Note F: too unreliable to be published
F too unreliable to be published
Note *

significantly different from reference category (p < 0.05)

Return to note * referrer

Note †

reference category

Return to note † referrer

Note 1

These questions are based on the Primary Care PTSD Screen (PC-PTSD) tool, a front-line assessment tool used to identify individuals who should be referred to further psychological and psychiatric treatment for the disorder. The tool is designed to assess whether an individual demonstrates key effects related to the core PTSD symptoms of re-experiencing, numbing, avoidance and hyperarousal. If an individual answers ‘yes’ to any three of the four questions, the presence of PTSD is suspected. It is crucial to note that the PC-PTSD is not a diagnostic tool, and a suspicion of PTSD is not the same as a diagnosis. In a clinical setting, a positive score on the PC-PTSD would indicate that the patient should be referred for more in-depth assessment and possible diagnosis.

Return to note 1 referrer

Note 2

Includes respondents who said "yes" or "for some behaviours yes, for others no". Responses of "don't know" are not shown but are included in calculations.

Return to note 2 referrer

Note 3

Based on respondents who spoke to someone about at least one behaviour.

Return to note 3 referrer

Note: Includes those who experienced (targeted, directed at them personally) discriminatory behaviours in the past 12 months. Includes behaviours which occurred in the workplace and outside the workplace involving coworkers. The terms "women" and "men" include trans and cisgender women and men. Percent calculations are based on unrounded estimates and exclude missing responses.
Source: Statistics Canada, Survey on Sexual Misconduct at Work.
Date modified: