Companies who employ more women in senior roles are much more likely to dismiss men accused of sexually or physically abusing their colleagues, according to analysis of international and UK data.

Men were more likely to get sacked for abusing a male colleague rather than a female colleague, according to a recent Finnish study, cited in research about the economic impact of violence against women and girls gathered by the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS).

It found that in female-managed organisations (those with a higher than average number of women in high-earning positions) were “significantly more likely to dismiss perpetrators”, while male-managed ones were more likely to see the victim of abuse leave the company.

The IFS cited studies that found women who are sexually or physically assaulted at work experience a major hit to their careers, “including job loss, reduced hours and lower income”. One study found that women who move in with an abusive partner see their earnings drop by an average of 12%. “These losses persist even after the relationship ends, indicating long-term damage to labour market attachment and career progression,” said the IFS.

Please note this article comes out of Great Britain where the usage of the word ‘dismiss’ means fired.

  • JamesTBagg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    The second paragraph makes it more clear when they say “sacked” but they could just use plain language.

    • Ravel@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 minutes ago

      But the second is talking about abuses against males. If anything, using two words “dismissed, and sacked” one in each paragraph, makes it even more confusing. Felt like it was saying women in senior positions protected women less (dismissed abusers) while protecting men more (sacking abusers). Just say sacked both times.

      • JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        I would argue that British English is one of the least plain languages out there, and just about the only thing brits don’t prefer plain.

        • NiHaDuncan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          15 hours ago

          You should explore more languages. English is really quite direct when compared to many other languages; the English could have had a lot more fun with the language but they decided to be boring.

    • aceshigh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      The second paragraph is about male and male abuse - they get sacked. Male and female abuse - they don’t get sacked as much.