Remote Work as a Protective Shield Against Gender Discrimination in the Laboratory Workplace

As laboratory professionals continue to grapple with the changing dynamics of hybrid and in-person work, a compelling new study from the University of Toronto’s Rotman School of Management sheds light on a critical issue: the impact of work location on gender discrimination. For women in laboratory environments, where collaboration, precision, and communication are essential, the workplace experience can be deeply affected by interpersonal dynamics—including those shaped by gender.

Associate Professor, Rotman School of Management
Credit: University of Toronto

A recent survey of over 1,000 professional women revealed that remote work significantly reduces the incidence of gender discrimination. This finding has important implications for labs and scientific organizations trying to balance the benefits of in-person collaboration with the need to ensure a respectful and inclusive workplace.

Key Findings from the Study

The research, conducted by Professors Laura Doering and András Tilcsik, included female professionals in hybrid roles, ranging in age from 18 to 75. These women were asked to report how often they experienced 11 specific forms of gender-based slights and offenses. The differences in discrimination experienced on-site versus remotely were striking:

Workplace Setting	% Experiencing Gender Discrimination
On-site (in-person)	31%
Remote (work from home)	17%

Even more telling, when the researchers ran statistical probability models, they found that:

Women working primarily with men had a 58% likelihood of experiencing discrimination on-site versus 26% when remote.
Women under 30 were more vulnerable: 31% experienced discrimination on-site compared to 14% remotely.

These numbers highlight the substantial protective effect that remote work offers against everyday gender discrimination.

Forms of Gender Discrimination Reported

The survey asked participants to report their experiences across a range of subtle and overt forms of discrimination, including:

Inappropriate or sexualized attention
Being interrupted or talked over during meetings
Having ideas ignored or co-opted
Being assigned menial or irrelevant tasks
Exclusion from work-related social interactions
Being addressed with sexist or belittling language

For laboratory professionals—where teamwork, intellectual contribution, and attention to detail are vital—such behaviors can hinder productivity, morale, and scientific progress.

Why Remote Work Creates a Protective Environment

The researchers describe remote work as a “protective shield” or “refuge.” The digital format of communication can reduce the frequency and impact of microaggressions or discriminatory behaviors that often occur in face-to-face settings.

Here are a few reasons why remote work may help mitigate gender discrimination:

Reduced Informal Interactions: Remote work minimizes watercooler chatter, hallway meetings, and informal social dynamics where bias often surfaces.
Equalized Communication Channels: Platforms like email, Slack, and Zoom offer structured turn-taking and written records, allowing all voices to be heard.
Increased Autonomy: Employees working remotely have greater control over their work environment, which can buffer them against toxic behavior.
Documentation and Accountability: Written communication leaves a paper trail, discouraging inappropriate behavior.

Implications for Laboratory Leaders and Managers

For lab directors, team leaders, and HR professionals, the study underscores the need for intentional decision-making when determining workplace policies. While in-person work promotes collaboration and hands-on learning, it can also open the door to increased exposure to discrimination—especially for younger women and those in male-dominated teams.

Recommendations for Lab Managers:

Maintain Remote or Hybrid Options: Flexibility in work arrangements can offer protection for those at greater risk of gender discrimination.
Create Safe In-Person Environments: Implement regular training, anonymous reporting systems, and active bystander programs to address gender bias.
Monitor Team Dynamics: Pay special attention to how mixed-gender teams interact and ensure that contributions are equitably acknowledged.
Mentorship Programs: Foster formal mentorships to counteract exclusion and support career development.

Addressing the Root Cause: Bias in STEM

While remote work reduces exposure to discrimination, it is not a cure-all. The underlying issue—gender bias in the workplace—requires direct intervention.

As Professor Doering noted, “It’s important to consider why women would be experiencing gender discrimination in the first place.” Simply offering remote roles without addressing systemic bias could reinforce gender segregation and impede long-term equity.

Laboratory environments are not immune to broader societal patterns of inequality. Addressing these challenges means:

Conducting regular climate surveys to understand employee experiences
Diversifying hiring panels and leadership positions
Ensuring pay equity and transparency
Encouraging male allies to speak up against gender bias

The Cost of Inaction

Ignoring the reality of on-site gender discrimination can have serious consequences for laboratories:

Burnout and Turnover: Talented scientists may leave due to toxic environments, leading to costly recruitment and onboarding cycles.
Reduced Innovation: Diverse teams perform better, but only if all members feel safe and heard.
Damaged Reputation: Word travels fast in the scientific community, and labs known for poor culture may struggle to attract top talent.

Balancing Collaboration and Inclusion

It’s undeniable that in-person lab work offers unique advantages:

Real-time problem solving
Hands-on training for technical equipment
Stronger informal mentorship
Faster iteration of experiments and protocols

However, these benefits must be balanced with the risks of exclusion and bias. Hybrid models—when executed thoughtfully—can provide a middle ground. By giving employees autonomy and supporting inclusive culture-building, lab organizations can promote both performance and well-being.

Conclusion: Building Better Workplaces for Women in Science

The University of Toronto study makes one thing clear: where we work influences how we are treated. For women in laboratory settings, remote work has proven to be more than a convenience—it’s a buffer against discrimination that can sap morale, hinder careers, and undermine organizational performance.

Still, the ultimate goal should not be to hide women away from hostile environments but to change those environments altogether. Remote work can be part of a comprehensive strategy—but not the only one.

By taking action now—through inclusive leadership, flexible work models, and a commitment to equity—laboratory professionals can shape a workplace where everyone, regardless of gender, is empowered to contribute fully.