It is currently 22 Sep 2017, 15:54

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# A law requiring companies to offer employees unpaid time off

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5039

Kudos [?]: 424 [0], given: 0

Location: Singapore
A law requiring companies to offer employees unpaid time off [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Aug 2005, 09:20
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

100% (01:33) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 10 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

A law requiring companies to offer employees unpaid time off to care for their children will harm the economic competitiveness of our nationâ€™s businesses. Companies must be free to set their own employment policies without mandated parental-leave regulations.
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion of the argument above?

(A) A parental-leave law will serve to strengthen the family as a social institution in this country.
(B) Many businesses in this country already offer employees some form of parental leave.
(C) Some of the countries with the most economically competitive businesses have strong parental-leave regulations.
(D) Only companies with one hundred or more employees would be subject to the proposed parental-leave law.
(E) In most polls, a majority of citizens say they favor passage of a parental-leave law.

Kudos [?]: 424 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Nov 2004
Posts: 482

Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 0

Location: Chicago

### Show Tags

31 Aug 2005, 09:37
IMO C, in that case the parental regulation does not affect the economic competetiveness..
_________________

Fear Mediocrity, Respect Ignorance

Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 28 Jun 2005
Posts: 213

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

### Show Tags

31 Aug 2005, 10:09
C'

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

Senior Manager
Joined: 22 Jun 2005
Posts: 361

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 0

Location: London

### Show Tags

31 Aug 2005, 10:12
I think C is the best choice.

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 01 Jun 2005
Posts: 69

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

31 Aug 2005, 11:30
I will go for C.

Assumption: Parental leave will harm the economic competiveness of national business.

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 26

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

### Show Tags

31 Aug 2005, 11:31
waving between C and E.

Quote:
(C) Some of the countries with the most economically competitive businesses have strong parental-leave regulations.
well, only some countries(with strong law) are competitive out of most.

Quote:
(E) In most polls, a majority of citizens say they favor passage of a parental-leave law.
citizens are OK(more favour) with the strong law. even if the law is liberal and they should be OK(not sure of favour) too. hence they do work happily which helps competitive business.

I will go for E.

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

Manager
Joined: 21 Apr 2005
Posts: 164

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

Location: Atlanta , GA

### Show Tags

31 Aug 2005, 11:39
"C"

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Posts: 331

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 12

### Show Tags

01 Sep 2005, 03:19
C.

GA

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 12

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5039

Kudos [?]: 424 [0], given: 0

Location: Singapore

### Show Tags

01 Sep 2005, 08:54
OA is C.

Kudos [?]: 424 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 16 Oct 2003
Posts: 1800

Kudos [?]: 170 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

01 Sep 2005, 21:08
Got C.

Kudos [?]: 170 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 31 Aug 2011
Posts: 224

Kudos [?]: 245 [0], given: 56

Re: A law requiring companies to offer employees unpaid time off [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Dec 2012, 06:35
why not B for this one ? C says some countries, some means more than one , if it said most countries i would say C but only a few and if it hurts others then its not good

B is better because if many business are currently offering this and it has done no harm therefore it wont do any harm if all do this . the difference is some and many . . .
_________________

If you found my contribution helpful, please click the +1 Kudos button on the left, I kinda need some =)

Kudos [?]: 245 [0], given: 56

Manager
Joined: 09 Nov 2012
Posts: 169

Kudos [?]: 73 [0], given: 29

GMAT 1: 700 Q43 V42
Re: A law requiring companies to offer employees unpaid time off [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Dec 2012, 09:30
C

The conclusion is that a company cannot be economically competitive if said company offers parental leave. Answer choice C states that some of the world's most economically competitive companies offer parental leave, which strengthens the argument. Therefore, C is correct.
_________________

If my post helped you, please consider giving me kudos.

Kudos [?]: 73 [0], given: 29

Re: A law requiring companies to offer employees unpaid time off   [#permalink] 17 Dec 2012, 09:30
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
8 The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's 20 27 Apr 2017, 19:36
Some firms offer all their employees partial ownership of the company 1 25 Mar 2017, 09:53
10 Many companies have recently required their employees to pay 14 09 Sep 2017, 12:54
1 A law requiring companies to offer employees unpaid time off 11 15 Apr 2014, 00:07
A law requiring companies to offer employees unpaid time off 5 28 Feb 2016, 12:20
Display posts from previous: Sort by