According to many analysts, labor-management relations in the United

Question 4

The first paragraph tells us that "the twin shocks of nonunion competition in this country and low-cost, high-quality imports from abroad are forcing unions to look more favorably at a variety of management demands". In other words, those "twin shocks" are forcing unions to be more open to making labor concessions to management.

The second paragraph describes some of the positive consequences of labor concessions to management (i.e. profit sharing, retraining rights, job-security guarantees, and more say on the shop floor). Then, the third and fourth paragraphs describe some of the negative consequences of labor concessions to management (i.e. financing plant relocations, moving the U.S. social structure toward that of a less-developed nation, and causing unions to engage in a futile competition with Third World pay levels).

So the first paragraph tells us WHY unions are more willing to make labor concessions management, and the rest of the passage describes the potential positive and negative effects of making such concessions. Thus, we can say that the passage is primarily concerned with the consequences of labor concessions to management (C).


Hi Sonal, regarding your first question, I think you may have misinterpreted choice (C): "to management" describes the "labor concessions" themselves, not the consequences. The unions and laborers are the ones making labor concessions to management. The passage is concerned with the consequences of such concessions.

Question 5

This sentence does not disprove that there is a "new cooperative relationship between the two sides and even to concessions from labor". The author is concerned with the consequences of these new developments and does not dispute that the relationship between the two sides has become more cooperative.

Instead, the sentence presents a hypothesis: if proposals for [X, Y, and Z] continue to gain credence, then, according to opponents, the U.S. social structure will move toward that of a less-developed nation. This is what the opponents BELIEVE will happen. Because it has not happened yet, it is only a hypothesis at this point. So (D) is the best answer.

I hope that helps!
_________________

Question 1

Plant relocations are first referenced in the first sentence of the third paragraph. Then the second sentence of that paragraph states that "companies make investment decisions to fit their strategic plans and their profit objectives".

Given the context, we can infer that a plant relocation decision would qualify as an investment decision. So, if companies make plant relocation decisions to "fit their strategic plans and their profit objectives", such decisions would certainly be made to serve the interests of those companies. In other words, we could describe such decisions as "self-serving".

More importantly, there is nothing in the passage suggesting that such decisions are (A) capricious (fickle/unpredictable), (C) naive (lacking informed judgment), (D) impulsive, or (E) illogical. By process of elimination, (B) is the best choice for question #1.

Question 2

Paragraph two tells us that participation in major corporate decisions is something that unions MAY win with concession bargaining. This implies that (A) is something that has NOT been true of US industry in the past. Eliminate (A).


There is nothing in the passage to support this choice. Quality circles are mentioned as an example of shop floor techniques, but even those are only mentioned in a discussion of possible benefits from concession bargaining. Eliminate (B).


Paragraph four starts with, "Wage-related concessions have come under particular attack, since opponents believe that high union wages underlay much of the success of United States industry in this century." From this, we can infer that union workers have had relatively high wages in the past. Hang on to (C).


In paragraph four, we have, "If... two-tier wage systems... continue to gain credence..." Thus, two-tier wage systems represent something that is currently gaining credence, not something that has been the norm in the past. Eliminate (D).


Referencing paragraph four again, we are told that, "[opponents of concessions] point out that a long-standing principle, shared by both management and labor, has been that workers should earn wages that give them the income they need to buy what they make." Since this has been a long-standing principle, we can infer that workers have been earning wages that give them the income they need to buy what they make. This contradicts choice (E), so eliminate this one.

(C) is the best answer for question #2.


(E) is in fact the correct answer to question 6!
_________________

Question 4

Let's start by identifying the author's purpose in each paragraph:

• P1: To introduce an idea about labor-management relations. More specifically, the idea that adversarialism between management and labor is being replaced by a new situation where labor makes concessions to management.
• P2: To explain why proponents support labor concessions (i.e. because they lead to positive consequences like profit sharing and job-security guarantees).
• P3: To explain why opponents don't like like labor concessions (i.e. because they do not save jobs, etc.).
• P4: To give further reasons why opponents don't like labor concessions (i.e. because high union wages underlie the success of US industry).

Let's now consider the question and answer choice (C):


The passage starts by introducing the idea that labor is currently making more concessions to management. It then discusses why proponents like these concessions (because they have positive consequences), and why opponents don't like them (because they have negative consequences).

So it makes sense to say the author's primary concern is discussing the "consequences of labor concessions to management."

Hold on to (C).

Let's now consider (E):


The first paragraph mentions that non-union competition is one reason that unions are making more concessions to management. But that isn't the primary concern of the passage as a whole. It's just an explanation for the main idea of the first paragraph.

Furthermore, the passage doesn't really discuss "union bargaining strategies." That is, we don't know what methods the unions use when negotiating with management. We just know that they are making more concessions these days.

For both those reasons, we can eliminate (E).

That leaves us with (C), which is correct.

I hope that helps!
_________________

All correct in 12mins 30 seconds

Para 1- new cooperative relationship, concessions from labor
Para 2- proponent's view
Para 3- opponent's view
Para 4- high union wages underlay much of the success of United States, If proposals for pay cuts, two-tier wage systems, and subminimum wages for young workers continue to gain credence, opponents believe the U.S. social structure will move toward that of a less-developed nation

1. It can be inferred from the passage that opponents of labor concessions would most likely describe many plant-relocation decisions made by United States companies as

A. capricious - althought i want not sure about the meaning of this option, I could figure out the answer
B. self-serving - Correct
C. naive - incorrect
D. impulsive - incorrect- it is anything but impulsive
E. illogical- incorrect

Opponents of these concessions from labor argue that such concessions do not save jobs, but either prolong the agony of dying plants or finance the plant relocations that employers had intended anyway.
Moreover, unrestrained by either loyalty to their work force or political or legislative constraints on their mobility, the companies eventually cut and run, concessions or no concessions.

2. It can be inferred from the passage that, until recently, which of the following has been true of United States industry in the twentieth century?
C. Union workers have been paid relatively high wages. - Correct

They point out that a long-standing principle, shared by both management and labor, has been that workers should earn wages that give them the income they need to buy what they make. Moreover, high wages have given workers the buying power to propel the economy forward.

3. The passage provides information to answer which of the following questions?
A. What has caused unions to consider wage restraints and reduced benefits?

These analysts say the twin shocks of nonunion competition in this country and low-cost, high-quality imports from abroad are forcing unions to look more favorably at a variety of management demands

4. The passage is primarily concerned with the
A. reasons for adversarialism between labor and management- incorrect, the reasons are not stated
B. importance of cooperative labor-management relations - incorrect
C. consequences of labor concessions to management - Correct
D. effects of foreign competition on the United States economy- incorrect, foreign competition is just one of the factors mentioned in para 1
E. effects of nonunion competition on union bargaining strategies- incorrect, nonunion competition is just one of the factors mentioned in para 1

5. The sentence “If proposals for pay cuts … unskilled laborers” serves primarily to
D. present a hypothesis
If proposals for pay cuts, two-tier wage systems, and subminimum wages for young workers continue to gain credence, opponents believe the U.S. social structure will move toward that of a less-developed nation: a small group of wealthy investors, a sizable but still minority bloc of elite professionals and highly skilled employees, and a huge mass of marginal workers and unskilled laborers.

6. It can be inferred from the passage that opponents of labor concessions believe that if concession bargaining continues, then
E. the social structure of the United States will be negatively affected - Correct, same as question 5

7. According to the author, “Sophisticated proponents” of concessions do which of the following?
B. Emphasize the benefits unions can gain by granting concessions.

In return for their concessions, they point out, some unions have bargained for profit sharing, retraining rights, and job¬-security guarantees.
Unions can also trade concessions for more say on the shop floor, where techniques such as quality circles and quality-of-work-life programs promise workers greater control over their own jobs. Unions may even win a voice in investment and pricing strategy, plant location, and other major corporate policy decisions previously reserved to management.
_________________

Hi GMATNinja

Please help in solving question 1 and 2.

Thanks

2. It can be inferred from the passage that, until recently, which of the following has been true of United States industry in the twentieth century?

A. Unions have consistently participated in major corporate policy decisions.

B. Maintaining adequate quality control in manufacturing processes has been a principal problem.

C. Union workers have been paid relatively high wages.=> "Wage-related concessions have come under particular attack, since opponents believe that high union wages underlay much of the success of United States industry in this century"

D. Two-tier wage systems have been the norm.

E. Goods produced have been priced beyond the means of most workers.
_________________

6. It can be inferred from the passage that opponents of labor concessions believe that if concession bargaining continues, then

A. plants will close instead of relocating

B. young workers will need continued job retraining

C. professional workers will outnumber marginal workers

D. wealthy investors will invest in Third World countries instead of the United States

E. the social structure of the United States will be negatively affected=> If proposals for pay cuts, two-tier wage systems, and subminimum wages for young workers continue to gain credence, opponents believe the U.S. social structure will move toward that of a less-developed nation: a small group of wealthy investors, a sizable but still minority bloc of elite professionals and highly skilled employees, and a huge mass of marginal workers and unskilled laborers. Further, they argue that if unions willingly engage in concession bargaining on the false grounds that labor costs are the source of a company's problems, unions will find themselves competing with Third World pay levels—a competition they cannot win.
_________________

4. The passage is primarily concerned with the

A. reasons for adversarialism between labor and management

B. importance of cooperative labor-management relations

C. consequences of labor concessions to management

D. effects of foreign competition on the United States economy

E. effects of nonunion competition on union bargaining strategies



Hi,

I need to understand why is the answer to question 4 C. I did not mark the answer C since it states that passage is primarily concerned with "consequences of labor concessions to management" whereas the also provides information about the consequences of labor concessions on the unions and laborers. Since I thought this option only gives a particially correct answer I did not mark this.

And I got answer A that too through the process of elimination and I am not quite sure about the answer. Please help me understand where am I going wrong. And how to correct the thought process so I do not repeat the same mistake again.



5. The sentence “If proposals for pay cuts … unskilled laborers” serves primarily to

A. disprove a theory

B. clarify an ambiguity

C. reconcile opposing views

D. present a hypothesis

E. contradict accepted data

For Question 5 I was confused between 2 answer choices A and D. I chose A. The reason for choosing A was I thought that the passage is presenting a certain view on cooperative labor-management relations
. And The sentence “If proposals for pay cuts … unskilled laborers” is disproving that theory but stating the opposite of intended effect. @GMATNinjaPlease let me know where did I go wrong.

Thank You
Sonal

I like the way you explain things, I'm confused in question 4
Option C states the primary purpose like this, consequences of concessions on management, however I eliminated it based on some really stupid reason, reason being the consequences on management are only discussed in para 1 other paras are just talking about the profit/loss of labour if they agree to the concessions.
Could you kindly see where I went wrong and explain in your way how I should've done it?
_________________

For question 6, why is D not the correct answer?

The last line of the passage clearly says that if the concession bargaining continues, then they will have to compete with third world wages- a competition they cannot win. This means that wealthy investors will start invest in third world countries instead of the states

Is there any flaw in my reasoning? Or is E just a better choice? If yes, why?

Hello Skywalker18,
Regarding question 4.
Option D has been mentioned in the first as well the last para; however the point in C option is mentioned here n there in bits and pieces.
Could you please help me out in figuring out what makes C so evident that people would mark it without getting confused!
Thanks

I'm glad to hear that this helped you understand questions 1 and 2!

It seems like you're trying to map the content of each paragraph to overall purpose of the passage (e.g., P1 says X, P2 says Y, P3 says Z... so the correct answer choice must cover X, Y, and Z).

This is a bad strategy because the the primary purpose or primary concern of a passage is NOT simply the sum of WHAT was said. Rather, the primary concern of of a passage is the overarching reason WHY the author wrote the passage.

It is still useful to clearly understand the purpose of each individual paragraph, but ultimately we're looking for that big-picture reason that is driving the author to write this passage in the first place.

Put another way: If the passage is structured so that one paragraph sets up a question, then two paragraphs explore potential answers or challenges to that question, then the passage is still primarily concerned with the question.

I hope this clarifies the approach, and enables you to understand Q4 in a new light.

For more, you could check out this article for some broad RC skills and tips, or you might enjoy this video.

I hope this helps a bit!
_________________

Hi,
please help in solving the inference question #1.

You will not get vocabulary questions on GMAT
_________________

hi GMATNinja AndrewN sir

What are your suggestions on solving question in which we need to find which option is true and each option is spread across paragraph. Example question no. 2 here. It took me over 3 minutes and still end up in choosing E.

Hello, imSKR. I will refrain from discussing question two above, since GMATNinja and others have already done so satisfactorily. But in general, you want to make sure you spend enough time reading the passage to grasp how the paragraphs play off of each other so that you know where to look for information. In this case, if the question asks about U.S. industry in the 20th century, then I will look to find information on U.S. industry in the 20th century—until recently, that is. You should not have to labor over each answer choice. Some of them are easier to pick off than others. Moreover, you do not need to make a definitive call as soon as you lay eyes on an answer choice. It is okay to think in terms of likeliness, more likely or less likely, the first time you go through the answers, and to come back to those you deem more likely (or at least reasonable) in a second pass.

- Andrew
_________________

AndrewN - Request you to please help me with this. My understanding of the 4th paragraph of the passage is as follows:

Quoting below a part of the P4 where I am getting confused:
"If proposals for pay cuts, two-tier wage systems, and subminimum wages for young workers continue to gain credence, opponents believe the U.S. social structure will move toward that of a less-developed nation: a small group of wealthy investors, a sizable but still minority bloc of elite professionals and highly skilled employees, and a huge mass of marginal workers and unskilled laborers."
Here opponents of the labor concession are highlighting the negative effects in case the new labor concession doesn't get implemented. It conveys as if they are supporting the new labor concession (but they are opponents). What am I missing in my interpretation?.

Previous sentences have already set tones of opponents:
Wage-related concessions have come under particular attack, since opponents believe that high union wages underlay much of the success of United States industry in this century.
Addition information :
They point out that a long-standing principle, shared by both management and labor, has been that workers should earn wages that give them the income they need to buy what they make. Moreover, high wages have given workers the buying power to propel the economy forward.

I just add my few cents, hope it maybe of some help:)
I understood the below sentence as :

If proposals for pay cuts, two-tier wage systems, and subminimum wages for young workers continue to gain credence, opponents believe the U.S. social structure will move toward that of a less-developed nation
//sentence meaning: If this law concession is passed then US would move towards structure of a less developed nation. It means opponents don't favor this law.

<Explanation of less developed nation> after COLON

:

a small group of wealthy investors, a sizable but still minority bloc of elite professionals and highly skilled employees, and a huge mass of marginal workers and unskilled laborers.
<Additional Information; by now tone of opponents is understood>
Further, they argue that if unions willingly engage in concession bargaining on the false grounds that labor costs are the source of a company's problems, unions will find themselves competing with Third World pay levels—a competition they cannot win.

Thank you so much mSKR
This clarifies my doubt. Appreciate your response!