1 Department of Psychology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada.
2 John Molson School of Business, Concordia University, Montreal, Canada.
3 Haskayne School of Business, University of Calgary, Scurfield Hall 456, Calgary, AB T2N 1N4 Canada.
4 Smith School of Business, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada.
5 Department of National Defence, Government of Canada, Calgary, Canada.

This study investigates the link between intimate partner violence (IPV) and work withdrawal (including absence frequency, partial absenteeism, and turnover intentions) in the context of partners' interference with victims at work and family supportive supervision of victims at work. Using the work-home resources model, we propose that (1) partner interference with victims at work will worsen the relationship between IPV and work withdrawal, and (2) family supportive supervision of victims at work will alleviate this relationship. Our analysis of a sample of 249 female employees found a three-way interaction between IPV, partner interference, and family supportive supervision on victims' absence frequency: IPV victims whose partners interfered with their work had lower absence frequency when they received high (compared to low) levels of family supportive supervision at work. Importantly, family supportive supervision was only related to lower absence frequency when both IPV and partner interference were present. This suggests that organizations have a unique opportunity to reduce the negative effects of IPV and partner interference not only for the victim but also for other employees who are indirectly affected. Our findings have significant implications for organizations, which have ethical, legal, and practical responsibilities to create a safe working environment for all employees.