Guys,

Could you try the CRbelow? Please explain your answer.

Q19. Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people in safety-sensitive jobs have drinking problems than when none do. Since, even after treatment, people who have had drinking problems are somewhat more likely than other people to have drinking problems in the future, any employer trying to reduce the risk of accidents should bar anyone who has ever been treated for a drinking problem from holding a safety-sensitive job.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument above?

A. Some companies place employees who are being treated for drinking problems in residential programs and allow them several weeks of paid sick leave.
B. Many accidents in the workplace are the result of errors by employees who do not hold safety-sensitive jobs.
C. Workers who would permanently lose their jobs if they sought treatment for a drinking problem try instead to conceal their problem and continue working for as long as possible.
D. People who hold safety-sensitive jobs are subject to stresses that can exacerbate any personal problems they may have, including drinking problems.
E. Some industrial accidents are caused by equipment failure rather than by employee error.

I like C

I pick answer B.

HereтАЩs how I interpret the stem:

Accidents are *more* common when *some* of the people in high-risk jobs have drinking problems. To reduce risk of accidents, employers should keep people with drinking problems away from high-risk jobs.

Things to consider:
To most effectively reduce risk, we should target those who cause the most accidents. The stem says that accidents are more common but doesnтАЩt say that high-risk people cause most of the accidents. Also, more common can be a little more or a lot more.

Why Choice B:
If many of the accidents are caused by employees who donтАЩt hold high-risk jobs, then eliminating those people with drinking problems from high-risk positions wonтАЩt really help reduce risk of accidents.

Why I didnтАЩt pick the following:
Choice A тАУ Irrelevant.
Choice C - The employer didnтАЩt say it would fire the people with drinking problem, but just switch them to low-risk jobs.
Choice D тАУ This supports the employerтАЩs argument to keep the drunks out of those high-risk jobs.
Choice E тАУ Only *some* accidents are caused by equipment failure, which means most are still caused by people (and possibly the people with drinking problem); this sort of supports the argument.

This is C

D is focusing on only a subset of people
any personal problems they may have

C says people (all) will hide the problem as a result increase the risk of accident
_________________

AimHigher

Guys,

Thank you all for your explanations.

By POE, my pick was B. But the Referenced (Not official ) key is C. I think C is correct because (as AimHigher saysтАж) it takes into consideration ALL the employees.

I think it is not B, because "most" and "many" can have different meanings depending on the context. Here you are assuming that "many" means "most". Further, many is a relative term. For me 2 can be many. And for somebody else, many can be 2000 incidents.

what does "bar" in the statement means? Is it removing from jobs or shifting to low-risk jobs? I think it means removing from jobs. Hence, employees might hide information on their drinking habits. And suggested approach will not work. C is weakening the conclusion and is the answer.

D is strengthening the conclusion to a certain extent. When there is stress, people who received treatment for drinking problems will again turn to drinking. Hence, they should be barred.

I am thinking D''

Double D's.
_________________

Success is my only option, failure is not -- Eminem

Seems like C.

B and D are equal in some sense. They both give an alternative source of accidents than alcoholic worker. So I would chose neither.