A law requiring companies to offer employees unpaid time off : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club App Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

It is currently 08 Dec 2016, 09:42
GMAT Club Tests

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

A law requiring companies to offer employees unpaid time off

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 07 Dec 2007
Posts: 4
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

A law requiring companies to offer employees unpaid time off [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Dec 2007, 12:31
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

75% (02:13) correct 25% (01:21) wrong based on 23 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

A law requiring companies to offer employees unpaid time off to care for their children will harm the economic competitiveness of our nation’s businesses. Companies must be free to set their own employment policies without mandated parental-leave regulations.
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion of the argument above?

(A) A parental-leave law will serve to strengthen the family as a social institution in this country.
(B) Many businesses in this country already offer employees some form of parental leave.
(C) Some of the countries with the most economically competitive businesses have strong parental-leave regulations.
(D) Only companies with one hundred or more employees would be subject to the proposed parental-leave law.
(E) In most polls, a majority of citizens say they favor passage of a parental-leave law.
Request Expert Reply
If you have any questions
you can ask an expert
New!
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 08 Jun 2007
Posts: 583
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 97 [0], given: 0

Re: New CR : Law requiring companies... [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Dec 2007, 12:39
its_vishalsinha wrote:
A law requiring companies to offer employees unpaid time off to care for their children will harm the economic competitiveness of our nation’s businesses. Companies must be free to set their own employment policies without mandated parental-leave regulations.
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion of the argument above?

(A) A parental-leave law will serve to strengthen the family as a social institution in this country.
(B) Many businesses in this country already offer employees some form of parental leave.
(C) Some of the countries with the most economically competitive businesses have strong parental-leave regulations.
(D) Only companies with one hundred or more employees would be subject to the proposed parental-leave law.
(E) In most polls, a majority of citizens say they favor passage of a parental-leave law.


Argument is economic compe...will suffer ,,if we have parental-leave law.
Only C says that in some countries business is competitive...and have strong p-l law too ..this weakens the argument.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 08 Dec 2007
Posts: 10
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

On a contrary [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Dec 2007, 12:59
Some countries with economic competitive business provide parental-leave law does not mean that providing parental law will benefit the country in the passage too.
In my opinion it should be 'B'. Since many businesses already offers some form of parental leave, setting a parental leave law will not actually effect these companies too much, so the economy of the country will not suffer....
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 04 Nov 2007
Posts: 52
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 0

Re: On a contrary [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Dec 2007, 13:11
bulls wrote:
Some countries with economic competitive business provide parental-leave law does not mean that providing parental law will benefit the country in the passage too.
In my opinion it should be 'B'. Since many businesses already offers some form of parental leave, setting a parental leave law will not actually effect these companies too much, so the economy of the country will not suffer....


I made the same mistake here. However, answer should be C. Eventhough many businesses in the country offer parental-leave, but neither the passage nor the statement in B indicates that it does harm or no harm to the country's economy. Thus, we can't assume that the country's economy is "competitive" eventhough many business already offer parental leave. In other words, we can't conclude from this statement that the parental-leave law has no effect on the competitiveness of the econmy; we need this in order to weaken the argument.

Choice C clearly shows that in many countries with the most competitive economies, parental-leave law has no real effect on the competitiveness of the economy. Since this is true, it is a fact that would weaken the argument.
CEO
CEO
User avatar
Joined: 29 Mar 2007
Posts: 2583
Followers: 19

Kudos [?]: 409 [0], given: 0

Re: New CR : Law requiring companies... [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Dec 2007, 23:47
its_vishalsinha wrote:
A law requiring companies to offer employees unpaid time off to care for their children will harm the economic competitiveness of our nation’s businesses. Companies must be free to set their own employment policies without mandated parental-leave regulations.
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion of the argument above?

(A) A parental-leave law will serve to strengthen the family as a social institution in this country.
(B) Many businesses in this country already offer employees some form of parental leave.
(C) Some of the countries with the most economically competitive businesses have strong parental-leave regulations.
(D) Only companies with one hundred or more employees would be subject to the proposed parental-leave law.
(E) In most polls, a majority of citizens say they favor passage of a parental-leave law.


Def. C. nothing else weakens the argument.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 14 Nov 2011
Posts: 40
Location: Kenya
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 245

Re: A law requiring companies to offer employees unpaid time off [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Feb 2016, 11:20
C clearly weakens the conclusion by directly attacking it...easy one
Re: A law requiring companies to offer employees unpaid time off   [#permalink] 28 Feb 2016, 11:20
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
8 Many companies have recently required their employees to pay gmatbull 12 24 Nov 2012, 03:20
1 A law requiring companies to offer employees unpaid time off rlevochkin 11 17 Mar 2010, 23:30
Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and goalsnr 11 14 Jul 2008, 17:49
Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and prasannar 7 10 Mar 2008, 01:18
Time yourself 2 mins Laws requiring the use of headlights ivymba 0 01 Oct 2013, 10:57
Display posts from previous: Sort by

A law requiring companies to offer employees unpaid time off

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


cron

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.