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

It is currently 22 Oct 2014, 21:39

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

Letter to the editor: After Baerton s factory closed, there

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 649
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 51 [0], given: 0

Letter to the editor: After Baerton s factory closed, there [#permalink] New post 13 Nov 2007, 08:37
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
Letter to the editor: After Baerton’s factory closed, there was a sharp increase in the number of claims filed for job-related injury compensation by the factory’s former employees, Hence there is reason to believe that most of those who filed for compensation after the factory closed were just out to gain benefits they did not deserve, and filed only to help them weather their job loss.

Each of the following, if true, weakens the argument above EXCEPT:

(A) Workers cannot file for compensation for many job-related injuries, such as hearings loss from factory noise, until they have left the job.
(B) In the years before the factory closed, the factory’s managers dismissed several employees who had filed injury claims.
(C) Most workers who receive an injury on the job file for compensation on the day they suffer the injury.
(D) Workers who incur partial disabilities due to injuries on the job often do not file for compensation because they would have to stop working to receive compensation but cannot afford to live on that compensation alone.
(E) Workers who are aware that they will soon be laid off from a job often become depressed, making them more prone to job-related injuries.

Please explain your answers.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 497
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 80 [0], given: 1

 [#permalink] New post 13 Nov 2007, 08:51
I think only B is irrevelant.

All others can weaken the argument.

A) weakens it.
C) weakens it (you might suffer from the injury days later after injury on the job)
D) weakens it (before they didn't apply because they cannot live with only the compensation, they have to keep working. Now that the factory is closing, they cannot keep working; therefore, they need to file for compensation.)
E) weakens it (workers worried about out of job and get depressed and prone to injury, they might injury themselves on the last day of job; therefore, claim the benefit after the factory is closed.)
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Posts: 302
Location: Phoenix, AZ, USA
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: Job-related injury compensation [#permalink] New post 13 Nov 2007, 09:40
[quote="eyunni"]Letter to the editor: After Baerton’s factory closed, there was a sharp increase in the number of claims filed for job-related injury compensation by the factory’s former employees, Hence there is reason to believe that most of those who filed for compensation after the factory closed were just out to gain benefits they did not deserve, and filed only to help them weather their job loss.

Each of the following, if true, weakens the argument above EXCEPT:

(A) Workers cannot file for compensation for many job-related injuries, such as hearings loss from factory noise, until they have left the job.
Weakens
(B) In the years before the factory closed, the factory’s managers dismissed several employees who had filed injury claims.
This meas perople were getting injured but did not file for fear of loss
(C) Most workers who receive an injury on the job file for compensation on the day they suffer the injury.
Strenghthens
(D) Workers who incur partial disabilities due to injuries on the job often do not file for compensation because they would have to stop working to receive compensation but cannot afford to live on that compensation alone.
Weekens
(E) Workers who are aware that they will soon be laid off from a job often become depressed, making them more prone to job-related injuries.
Weekensquote]
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 09 Jul 2007
Posts: 1111
Location: London
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 68 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: Job-related injury compensation [#permalink] New post 13 Nov 2007, 11:57
eyunni wrote:
Letter to the editor: After Baerton’s factory closed, there was a sharp increase in the number of claims filed for job-related injury compensation by the factory’s former employees, Hence there is reason to believe that most of those who filed for compensation after the factory closed were just out to gain benefits they did not deserve, and filed only to help them weather their job loss.

Each of the following, if true, weakens the argument above EXCEPT:

(A) Workers cannot file for compensation for many job-related injuries, such as hearings loss from factory noise, until they have left the job.
(B) In the years before the factory closed, the factory’s managers dismissed several employees who had filed injury claims.
(C) Most workers who receive an injury on the job file for compensation on the day they suffer the injury.-- since workers normally get compentation while on duty, there should not be any reason for further compensation other than being a benefit thief- this one strengthens
(D) Workers who incur partial disabilities due to injuries on the job often do not file for compensation because they would have to stop working to receive compensation but cannot afford to live on that compensation alone.
(E) Workers who are aware that they will soon be laid off from a job often become depressed, making them more prone to job-related injuries.

Please explain your answers.


C for me
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 649
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 51 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 13 Nov 2007, 12:03
yes. OA is C.
  [#permalink] 13 Nov 2007, 12:03
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
1 Experts publish their posts in the topic Three factories were closed and one of them was owned royQV 5 04 Aug 2014, 09:16
Letters were received by the editors of the newspaper that gmacvik 7 28 Jan 2007, 18:26
Letter to the editor: After Baerton s factory closed, there old_dream_1976 7 08 Jun 2006, 19:42
A letter submitted to the editor of a national newsmagazine old_dream_1976 6 07 Apr 2006, 14:16
A letter submitted to the editor of a national newsmagazine giddi77 10 24 Jan 2006, 01:28
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Letter to the editor: After Baerton s factory closed, there

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


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®.