Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 23 Oct 2014, 00:56

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.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

For a local government to outlaw all strikes by its workers

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 09 Jun 2005
Posts: 141
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

For a local government to outlaw all strikes by its workers [#permalink] New post 17 Jun 2005, 03:33
4
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

37% (03:01) correct 63% (02:02) wrong based on 131 sessions
For a local government to outlaw all strikes by its workers is a costly mistake, because all its labor disputes must then be settled by binding arbitration, without any negotiated public-sector labor settlements guiding the arbitrators. Strikes should be outlawed only for categories of public-sector workers for whose services no acceptable substitute exists.

The statements above best support which of the following conclusions?

(A) Where public-service workers are permitted to strike, contract negotiations with those workers are typically settled without a strike.

(B) Where strikes by all categories of pubic-sector workers are outlawed, no acceptable substitutes for the services provided by any of those workers are available.

(C) Binding arbitration tends to be more advantageous for public-service workers where it is the only available means of settling labor disputes with such workers.

(D) Most categories of public-sector workers have no counterparts in the private sector.

(E) A strike by workers in a local government is unlikely to be settled without help from an arbitrator.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 06 Jun 2005
Posts: 16
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 17 Jun 2005, 08:25
This one is hard. My guess is C by process of elimination. I think the other ones either are out of scope or aren't necessarily supported by the information in the passage.
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 11 Mar 2005
Posts: 726
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 17 Jun 2005, 09:44
A covers only one aspect
B is also extreme.. Although it is mentioned in the argument but not for all categories....
C look good
D is out of scope
E also covers one aspect.

C it is..
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 03 Nov 2004
Posts: 870
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 17 Jun 2005, 11:52
One more for C
SVP
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 1743
Location: Dhaka
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 47 [0], given: 0

For a local government to outlaw all strikes by its workers [#permalink] New post 02 Nov 2005, 13:10
20. For a local government to outlaw all strikes by its workers is a costly mistake, because all its labor disputes must then be settled by binding arbitration, without any negotiated public-sector labor settlements guiding the arbitrators. Strikes should be outlawed only for categories of public-sector workers for whose services no acceptable substitute exists.
The statements above best support which of the following conclusions?
(A) Where public-service workers are permitted to strike, contract negotiations with those workers are typically settled without a strike.
(B) Where strikes by all categories of pubic-sector workers are outlawed, no acceptable substitutes for the services provided by any of those workers are available.
(C) Binding arbitration tends to be more advantageous for public-service workers where it is the only available means of settling labor disputes with such workers.
(D) Most categories of public-sector workers have no counterparts in the private sector.
(E) A strike by workers in a local government is unlikely to be settled without help from an arbitrator.
_________________

hey ya......

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 04 Sep 2005
Posts: 142
Location: Fringes of the Boreal, Canada
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 02 Nov 2005, 16:43
I'm awful at these but I like C in this case.

The passage states that it would be costly for a local government to disallow the striking rights of public sector workers because there is no governmental entity involved in the binding arbitration process. This suggests that there is better representation on the public workers side creating an advantage in arbitration process.....please God be right :roll:
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Posts: 503
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 02 Nov 2005, 19:04
I vote for C.

A - Out of scope. Contract negotiations??
B - Incorrect. This only a suggestion in the argument.
C - Costly mistake for local goverment.Hence correct.
D - Incorrect. Argument is not talking og the public sector
E - Incorrect. Assumes that the local goverment has already outlawed the strikes.

What is the OA??
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 04 Sep 2005
Posts: 142
Location: Fringes of the Boreal, Canada
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 03 Nov 2005, 19:23
Are we going to get an answer for this?
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 07 Jul 2005
Posts: 405
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 03 Nov 2005, 22:25
a) Out of scope
b)
c) No
d) Out of scope
e) Out of scope

Best answer is B. The stimulus concludes that strikes should be outlawed for public sector workers who have no substitutes. The extension to this conclusion is B.
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Posts: 1126
Location: London, UK
Schools: Tuck'08
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 03 Nov 2005, 22:30
Between A and B for me
I would go for A
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Posts: 1126
Location: London, UK
Schools: Tuck'08
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 03 Nov 2005, 22:31
double post..sorry
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 07 Aug 2005
Posts: 102
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 04 Nov 2005, 01:21
I would go for C
SVP
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2003
Posts: 1816
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 04 Nov 2005, 08:50
C

"Costly Mistake" is the key here. It means that the other party benefits.
SVP
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 1743
Location: Dhaka
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 47 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 04 Nov 2005, 21:19
good job once again OA is C.
_________________

hey ya......

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 662
Location: London
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 0

For a local government to outlaw all strikes by its workers [#permalink] New post 05 Apr 2006, 06:22
For a local government to outlaw all strikes by its workers is a costly mistake, because all its labor disputes must then be settled by binding arbitration, without any negotiated public-sector labor settlements guiding the arbitrators. Strikes should be outlawed only for categories of public-sector workers for whose services no acceptable substitute exists.

The statements above best support which of the following conclusions?

(A) Where public-service workers are permitted to strike, contract negotiations with those workers are typically settled without a strike.
(B) Where strikes by all categories of pubic-sector workers are outlawed, no acceptable substitutes for the services provided by any of those workers are available.
(C) Binding arbitration tends to be more advantageous for public-service workers where it is the only available means of settling labor disputes with such workers.
(D) Most categories of public-sector workers have no counterparts in the private sector.
(E) A strike by workers in a local government is unlikely to be settled without help from an arbitrator.


Please explain your answer.
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 21 Mar 2006
Posts: 1136
Location: Bangalore
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 05 Apr 2006, 10:15
Is it A? Really confusing! :shock:
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 28 Dec 2005
Posts: 118
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 05 Apr 2006, 10:36
I pick E.

My reasoning is that statement concludes that strikes should only be outlawed for public sector workers. If strikes are outlawed for public sector workers, then all labor disputes are settled by outside arbitrators.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 30 Jan 2006
Posts: 146
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 05 Apr 2006, 10:43
I’m leaning towards C or B. But I’ll go with C.

A – nothing is stated to support this. Instead, it states that only when strikes are banned must workers negotiate via binding arbitration (a form of court, I guess).

B – Supported by the last sentence. Could be this one as well… Not sure.

C – The first sentence explains that outlawing strikes is a costly mistake for the reason that the dispute would then have to be settled by binding arbitration. So C can be inferred from this, i.e. binding arbitration is advantageous when it’s the only available means of settling the dispute.

D – Private sector is irrelevant here.

E – workers in local government is out of scope.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 170
Followers: 25

Kudos [?]: 103 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 05 Apr 2006, 10:57
I will go for B.

The evidence provided in the text does not talk about "advatages".
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 29 Dec 2005
Posts: 1351
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 28 [0], given: 0

Re: CR strike [#permalink] New post 05 Apr 2006, 11:01
C. becasue it is the only choice that supports the conclusion. Rest all either donot support or related to the conclusion.
Re: CR strike   [#permalink] 05 Apr 2006, 11:01
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
For a local government to outlaw all strikes by its workers fanatico 3 09 Mar 2011, 21:50
For a local government to outlaw all strikes by its workers abhi758 5 27 Aug 2009, 08:52
For a local government to outlaw all strikes by its workers spriya 7 24 Jul 2008, 11:03
For a local government to outlaw all strikes by its workers remgeo 0 06 Apr 2006, 06:44
For a local government to outlaw all strikes by its workers nakib77 0 04 Nov 2005, 21:19
Display posts from previous: Sort by

For a local government to outlaw all strikes by its workers

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Go to page    1   2   3    Next  [ 47 posts ] 



cron

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| 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®.