sandman13 wrote:
Please reformat the question. Here you go:
A shortage of orders for Manto Aircraft’s airliners has led analysts to predict that the manufacturer will have to lay off workers. The new order that Consolidated Airlines has just made for 20 of Manto’s Model TX jets does not provide a reason for the analysts to revise their predictions, because simultaneously with its new order, Consolidated canceled its existing order for an equal number of Manto’s larger, more expensive Model Z jets.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
A. Manto relies more heavily on outside subcontractors to provide the labor to manufacture the Model Z than it does for the Model TX.
B. The Manto employees who currently work to manufacture the Model Z are not proficient at manufacturing the Model TX.
C. Manto includes all required maintenance work for the first five years in the price of each jet it sells.
D. Manto has had to lay off workers several times within the past ten years but has typically rehired many of the workers when it subsequently received new orders.
E. A large number of the airliners in Consolidated’s fleet are at the beginning of their expected service life.
Prediction - Shortage of orders will lead to lay offs in Manto
Consolidated airline has ordered 20 Model TX jets.
Consolidated has cancelled its previous order of 20 Model Z jets.
Conclusion: The new order by Consolidated Airlines does not provide a reason to revise the prediction.
Basically the argument says that with the new order, nothing has changed since a previous similar order has been cancelled. So people will still be laid off. We need to weaken this.
A. Manto relies more heavily on outside subcontractors to provide the labor to manufacture the Model Z than it does for the Model TX.
This says that making Model Tx is different from making Model Z. Model Z needs more outside subcontractors while Model TX uses more in-house workforce. In we need to make Model Tis now, we will need the in-house workforce and hence lay offs may not happen.
This does weaken our conclusion. The new order may provide a reason for revision of the prediction.
B. The Manto employees who currently work to manufacture the Model Z are not proficient at manufacturing the Model TX.
This gives us a reason why some current workforce may be laid off (and new people hired or subcontractors used). Hence it does not weaken our conclusion.
C. Manto includes all required maintenance work for the first five years in the price of each jet it sells.
Irrelevant.
D. Manto has had to lay off workers several times within the past ten years but has typically rehired many of the workers when it subsequently received new orders.
Again, irrelevant. Will it lay off now or not is the question. Whether it will re-hire, is not relevant.
E. A large number of the airliners in Consolidated’s fleet are at the beginning of their expected service life.
Manto has got an order from Consolidated. Whether there will be more orders or not from Consolidated is irrelevant. We only have to judge the impact of this new order and cancelling of the old on our prediction.
If Consolidated's fleet is new and it is unlikely to give more orders, it doesn't matter. Manto can get orders from other airlines.
If Consolidated's fleet is old and it is likely to buy new planes, it again doesn't matter, It could buy from someone other than Manto.
All in all, the situation of Consolidated's fleet is irrelevant.
Answer (A)