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 hwo has ever been treating for a drinking problem from holding a safety=sensitive job.

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

Some companies place employees who are being treated for drinking problems in residential programs and allow them several weeks of paid sick leave

Many accidents in the workplace are the result of errors by employees who do not hold safety-sensitive jobs.

Workers who would permanently lose their jos if they sought treatment for a drinking problem try instead to conceal their problem and continue working for as long as possible.

People who hld safety-sentive jobs are subject to stresses that can exacerbate any personal problems they may have, including drinking problems.

Some industrial accidents are caused by equipment failure rather than by emplyer error.

Please provide some details with your choice.
_________________

GMAT the final frontie!!!.

C

if people get fired by admitting that they have a problem and come to treatment, then they will not come to treatment or admit that they have a problem. Therefore you will have a bunch of people working with problems, and they create safety hazards.

My answer is C. From the argument, the conclusion of the author is "any employers who try to reduce accident should not put any treated employees in safety-sensitive job". We have to find the answer choice that destroy this conclusion. Only choice C does the job. If the employees hide their drinking problem, the accident will not be reduced.

What is the OA.

I think that it's important to see that the premise talks about 'Industrial accidents', while the conclusion talks about 'accidents'.

Since we want to weakern the argument, we need to look at the CONCLUSION only and see which answer choice talks about 'accidents'.

If many accidents are caused by errors rather than by alcohol, then the recommendation that employers bar anyone with a drinking problem is weakened.

Answer is B.

I think D undermines the argument since it provides other cause to industrial accidents, the stress from the job, not the drinking problem.
_________________

haveaniceday

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

Some companies place employees who are being treated for drinking problems in residential programs and allow them several weeks of paid sick leave
No connection with the question stem - Drop it

Many accidents in the workplace are the result of errors by employees who do not hold safety-sensitive jobs.
"many" does not give enough information. and i think it goes against the premise of the question - drop it

Workers who would permanently lose their jos if they sought treatment for a drinking problem try instead to conceal their problem and continue working for as long as possible.
If there is no record of any treatment of drinking problem, the employer wont bar workers from working in safety-sensetive jobs and still have the risk of accidents - keep it

People who hld safety-sentive jobs are subject to stresses that can exacerbate any personal problems they may have, including drinking problems.
This is a tricky / trap options. It says that stress can increase the risk of drinking problem (which employee already had). please see the word "exacerbate". it doesnt say that due to stress employee will start drinking. So in my opinion this option actually supports the conclusion. It gives another reason to emplyer not to put peeple with prior drinking problems on this job. Drop it

Some industrial accidents are caused by equipment failure rather than by emplyer error.
"some" doesnt give enough information - Drop it

IMO C should be the answer on this one

i tried negating C and the argument would not hold
_________________

The world is continuous, but the mind is discrete

It's the "some industrial accidents" that makes the conclusion hazy.

Option D. What is the OA?

OA Please