It is clear that none of the volleyball players at yesterday’s office

It is clear that none of the volleyball players at yesterday’s office beach party came to work today since everyone who played volleyball at that party got badly sunburned and no one at work today is even slightly sunburned.
Which one of the following exhibits a pattern of reasoning that most closely parallels that in the argument above?

Author concludes that whomsoever(volleyball players) was at yesterday's beach party didn't come to office today with a reasoning that everyone who played got badly sunburned. So, as no one present in office has sunburns, no volleyball player came.
played volleyball at beach party > sunburned > no one who played come to office today.
The argument doesn't mention if there were people at the party who might not have played at all even if they attended the party. Similarly it is not clear whether people without even participating in the beach party are absent today. So a two way flaw is possible.

(A) Since everyone employed by TRF who was given the opportunity to purchase dental insurance did so and everyone who purchased dental insurance saw a dentist, it is clear that no one who failed to see a dentist is employed by TRF. - WRONG. Any TRF employee, given the opportunity to buy dental insurance, who bought dental insurance visited dentist. Possible flaw is that those who were not given the opportunity may or may not have visited the dentist. There is no two way error here.

(B) Since no one who was promoted during the past year failed to attend the awards banquet, evidently none of the office managers attended the banquet this year since they were all denied promotion. - WRONG. So everyone who got promoted last year attended the awards banquet. No manager attends so no promotion was given to any of them. It is not clear whether there was any manager who was not even eligible for promotion. So someone not eligible who didn't attend cannot be denied promotion.

(C) Since the Donnely report was not finished on time, no one in John’s group could have been assigned to contribute to that report since everyone in John’s group has a reputation for getting assignments in on time. - WRONG. It is very straight forward argument that everyone in John’s group finishes assignments on time. Since no one from John's group worked upon the report it wasn't finished on time. There might be others working on the report but we are not concerned about that.

(D) Everyone with an office on the second floor works directly for the president and, as a result, no one with a second floor office will take a July vacation because no one who works for the president will be able to take time off during July. - CORRECT. So basically people who work for president wouldn't be able to take time off in July. All these people have there offices on 2nd floor and they work directly for president. So people with there office on 2nd floor wouldn't be able to take vacations in July. Working for president > No time off in July > no vacation in July.

(E) Since all of the people who are now on the MXM Corporation payroll have been employed in the same job for the past five years, it is clear that no one who frequently changes jobs is likely to be hired by MXM. - WRONG. Although other options do refer about future but this one, the way it is reasoned, doesn't strictly show that conclusion is definitely possible.

IMO Answer D.