Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack
GMAT Club

 It is currently 26 Mar 2017, 18:01

### 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

# As an experienced labor organizer and the former head of one

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1367
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 638 [0], given: 10

As an experienced labor organizer and the former head of one [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jul 2008, 19:05
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

1. As an experienced labor organizer and the former head of one of the nation’s most powerful labor unions, Grayson is an excellent choice to chair the new council on business-labor relations.
Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the conclusion above?
(A) The new council must have the support of the nation’s labor leaders if it is to succeed.
(B) During his years as a labor leader, Grayson established a record of good relations with business leaders.
(C) The chair of the new council must be a person who can communicate directly with the leaders of the nation’s largest labor unions.
(D) Most of the other members of the new council will be representatives of business management interests.
(E) An understanding of the needs and problems of labor is the only qualification necessary for the job of chairing the new council.

Lets see if our views match
This CR contains several answer choices that strengthen the conclusion. You need to justify why your answer choice is best among the others. You need to state the differentiating factor.

PS: Iam compiling a log of question types and the reasoning tested behind the question.This will serve as a template to identify the question type

Last edited by goalsnr on 03 Jul 2008, 19:43, edited 1 time in total.
If you have any questions
New!
Manager
Joined: 22 Jun 2008
Posts: 101
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 107 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

03 Jul 2008, 19:12
goalsnr wrote:
1. As an experienced labor organizer and the former head of one of the nation’s most powerful labor unions, Grayson is an excellent choice to chair the new council on business-labor relations.
Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the conclusion above?
(A) The new council must have the support of the nation’s labor leaders if it is to succeed.
(B) During his years as a labor leader, Grayson established a record of good relations with business leaders.
(C) The chair of the new council must be a person who can communicate directly with the leaders of the nation’s largest labor unions.
(D) Most of the other members of the new council will be representatives of business management interests.
(E) An understanding of the needs and problems of labor is the only qualification necessary for the job of chairing the new council.

Lets see if our views match
This CR contains several answer choices that strengthen the conclusion. You need to justify why your answer choice is best among the others. You need to state the differentiating factor.

PS: Iam compiling a log of question types and the reasoning tested behing the question.This will serve as a template to identify the question type

Good initiation.
I went for B. The question stem throws some background (experience) information on Grayson, and concludes with the statement saying that he is the best choice for chair of new council on BUSINESS-LABOR RELATION. B & E are more strengthening the argument than others. But in E, the statement confines itself with "only qualification", which makes it less attractive than the choice B which mentions previous good relationship established and maintained by Grayson. Any other thoughts?
Director
Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 537
Schools: Stern, McCombs, Marshall, Wharton
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 160 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

03 Jul 2008, 19:34
Premise: Grayson is an experienced labor organizer.

Premise: Grayson is a former head of a powerful union.

Conclusion: Grayson is an excellent choice to chair new council on business-labor relations.

In order to strengthen the conclusion we need to show that being a experience and/or former head of a powerful union are qualifications that make Grayson a good choice to chair the business-labor relations council.

(E) An understanding of the needs and problems of labor is the only qualification necessary for the job of chairing the new council.

There is only only qualification for being the chair of the council. Grayson has this one qualification and therefore is qualified to be the chair.

(A) The new council must have the support of the nation’s labor leaders if it is to succeed.
We don't know if Grayson has the support of the nation's labor leaders
(B) During his years as a labor leader, Grayson established a record of good relations with business leaders.
We don't know that good relations with business leaders are qualifications to be a chair
(C) The chair of the new council must be a person who can communicate directly with the leaders of the nation’s largest labor unions.
We don't know if Grayson can communicate directly with these leaders.
(D) Most of the other members of the new council will be representatives of business management interests.
Irrelevant
Director
Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 537
Schools: Stern, McCombs, Marshall, Wharton
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 160 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

03 Jul 2008, 19:42
goalsnr wrote:
Lets see if our views match
This CR contains several answer choices that strengthen the conclusion. You need to justify why your answer choice is best among the others. You need to state the differentiating factor.

PS: Iam compiling a log of question types and the reasoning tested behing the question.This will serve as a template to identify the question type

It is my understanding that there is only one correct answer on the GMAT. As a result they do not have answers where one is "more" right than another. If the question asks which answer strengthens the argument, there will only be the one answer that actually strengthens. So if you think two answers actually strengthen the conclusion then your logic is incorrect for one the answer choices.
VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1367
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 638 [0], given: 10

### Show Tags

03 Jul 2008, 19:46
gixxer1000 wrote:
goalsnr wrote:
Lets see if our views match
This CR contains several answer choices that strengthen the conclusion. You need to justify why your answer choice is best among the others. You need to state the differentiating factor.

PS: Iam compiling a log of question types and the reasoning tested behing the question.This will serve as a template to identify the question type

It is my understanding that there is only one correct answer on the GMAT. As a result they do not have answers where one is "more" right than another. If the question asks which answer strengthens the argument, there will only be the one answer that actually strengthens. So if you think two answers actually strengthen the conclusion then your logic is incorrect for one the answer choices.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the conclusion above?
>>>Well I agree there will only one answer for a given question? But dont we end up with 2-3 contenders before we POE to the final answer. The whole point here is to eliminate the false answers from the contender list
VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1367
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 638 [0], given: 10

### Show Tags

06 Jul 2008, 08:00
Conclusion:Grayson is an excellent choice to chair the new council on business-labor relations
Premise/evidence: experienced labor organizer and the former head of one of the nation’s most powerful labor unions, .

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the conclusion above?
- A statement that will support the existing evidence or bring in new supporting evidence will strengthen the conclusion.

(A) The new council must have the support of the nation’s labor leaders if it is to succeed.
>>>strengthens
(B) During his years as a labor leader, Grayson established a record of good relations with business leaders.
>>>strengthens
(C) The chair of the new council must be a person who can communicate directly with the leaders of the nation’s largest labor unions.
>>>strengthens
(D) Most of the other members of the new council will be representatives of business management interests.
>>>Irrelevant
(E) An understanding of the needs and problems of labor is the only qualification necessary for the job of chairing the new council.
>>>strengthens

A,B,C,E -strengthen the argument by telling why Grayson can be a good candidate for a post.

But there is a subtle difference here.
A,B,C - talk about Grayson's achievements in the past and they may or may not be important/useful/valid for his current post.For example the choices say Grayson had good realtions with the unions, business leaders. But we can't say if these relations are still good and will help in his new post.

E clearly identify's his skill set and why its best for the job.

PS :The whole idea here is to develop a strategic reasoning to identify the type of question and increase speed on the V section.
Director
Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 537
Schools: Stern, McCombs, Marshall, Wharton
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 160 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Jul 2008, 05:48
goalsnr wrote:
Conclusion:Grayson is an excellent choice to chair the new council on business-labor relations
Premise/evidence: experienced labor organizer and the former head of one of the nation’s most powerful labor unions, .

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the conclusion above?
- A statement that will support the existing evidence or bring in new supporting evidence will strengthen the conclusion.

(A) The new council must have the support of the nation’s labor leaders if it is to succeed.
>>>strengthens
(B) During his years as a labor leader, Grayson established a record of good relations with business leaders.
>>>strengthens
(C) The chair of the new council must be a person who can communicate directly with the leaders of the nation’s largest labor unions.
>>>strengthens
(D) Most of the other members of the new council will be representatives of business management interests.
>>>Irrelevant
(E) An understanding of the needs and problems of labor is the only qualification necessary for the job of chairing the new council.
>>>strengthens

A,B,C,E -strengthen the argument by telling why Grayson can be a good candidate for a post.

But there is a subtle difference here.
A,B,C - talk about Grayson's achievements in the past and they may or may not be important/useful/valid for his current post.For example the choices say Grayson had good realtions with the unions, business leaders. But we can't say if these relations are still good and will help in his new post.

E clearly identify's his skill set and why its best for the job.

PS :The whole idea here is to develop a strategic reasoning to identify the type of question and increase speed on the V section.

A, B, and C do not strengthen the argument. I'm mainly going off of Veritas Prep information, but again we were taught that there is only one answer that strengthens the argument. The others answer choices are just distractions.

For example:

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the conclusion above?

(A) The new council must have the support of the nation’s labor leaders if it is to succeed.

We only know two facts.

1) Grayson is an experienced labor organizer.
2) Grayson is a former head of a powerful union.

We do NOT know if Grayson has support of the nation's labor leaders. Just because he was the former head of a powerful union and an experienced labor organizer does NOT mean that he has the support of the nations labor leaders. Therefore this does NOT strengthen the argument.

Just because the stem says "which strengthens the MOST" does not mean that more than one will actually strengthen. There is no way to quantify intangible items. It would be different if this was math and the question was which is greater than 4, 5 or 20. Well both 5 and 20 is greater than 4 but 20 is more. You can't do the same for word problems. If you narrow it down to two or more answers that strengthen the problem you can be assured that there is only one that actually strengthens it and the other(s) are just distractions.

Another example:

(B) During his years as a labor leader, Grayson established a record of good relations with business leaders.

Again the only facts we know are:

1) Grayson is an experienced labor organizer.
2) Grayson is a former head of a powerful union.

Nowhere in the argument does it say that a good record with business leaders help you to be a good head of council. That was actually answer A which should be disregarded when looking at B. So this does NOT strengthen the argument either.
VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1367
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 638 [0], given: 10

### Show Tags

07 Jul 2008, 06:42
gixxer1000 wrote:
goalsnr wrote:
Conclusion:Grayson is an excellent choice to chair the new council on business-labor relations
Premise/evidence: experienced labor organizer and the former head of one of the nation’s most powerful labor unions, .

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the conclusion above?
- A statement that will support the existing evidence or bring in new supporting evidence will strengthen the conclusion.

(A) The new council must have the support of the nation’s labor leaders if it is to succeed.
>>>strengthens
(B) During his years as a labor leader, Grayson established a record of good relations with business leaders.
>>>strengthens
(C) The chair of the new council must be a person who can communicate directly with the leaders of the nation’s largest labor unions.
>>>strengthens
(D) Most of the other members of the new council will be representatives of business management interests.
>>>Irrelevant
(E) An understanding of the needs and problems of labor is the only qualification necessary for the job of chairing the new council.
>>>strengthens

A,B,C,E -strengthen the argument by telling why Grayson can be a good candidate for a post.

But there is a subtle difference here.
A,B,C - talk about Grayson's achievements in the past and they may or may not be important/useful/valid for his current post.For example the choices say Grayson had good realtions with the unions, business leaders. But we can't say if these relations are still good and will help in his new post.

E clearly identify's his skill set and why its best for the job.

PS :The whole idea here is to develop a strategic reasoning to identify the type of question and increase speed on the V section.

A, B, and C do not strengthen the argument. I'm mainly going off of Veritas Prep information, but again we were taught that there is only one answer that strengthens the argument. The others answer choices are just distractions.

For example:

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the conclusion above?

(A) The new council must have the support of the nation’s labor leaders if it is to succeed.

We only know two facts.

1) Grayson is an experienced labor organizer.
2) Grayson is a former head of a powerful union.

We do NOT know if Grayson has support of the nation's labor leaders. Just because he was the former head of a powerful union and an experienced labor organizer does NOT mean that he has the support of the nations labor leaders. Therefore this does NOT strengthen the argument.

Just because the stem says "which strengthens the MOST" does not mean that more than one will actually strengthen. There is no way to quantify intangible items. It would be different if this was math and the question was which is greater than 4, 5 or 20. Well both 5 and 20 is greater than 4 but 20 is more. You can't do the same for word problems. If you narrow it down to two or more answers that strengthen the problem you can be assured that there is only one that actually strengthens it and the other(s) are just distractions.

Another example:

(B) During his years as a labor leader, Grayson established a record of good relations with business leaders.

Again the only facts we know are:

1) Grayson is an experienced labor organizer.
2) Grayson is a former head of a powerful union.

Nowhere in the argument does it say that a good record with business leaders help you to be a good head of council. That was actually answer A which should be disregarded when looking at B. So this does NOT strengthen the argument either.

We only know two facts.

1) Grayson is an experienced labor organizer.
2) Grayson is a former head of a powerful union.

We do NOT know if Grayson has support of the nation's labor leaders. Just because he was the former head of a powerful union and an experienced labor organizer does NOT mean that he has the support of the nations labor leaders. Therefore this does NOT strengthen the argument
.

According to the GMAT critical reasoning Bible ,for strengthen /weaken type of questions the answer choices may contain new information or info outside the argument to support/break the argument.
Director
Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 537
Schools: Stern, McCombs, Marshall, Wharton
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 160 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Jul 2008, 06:53
goalsnr wrote:
We only know two facts.

1) Grayson is an experienced labor organizer.
2) Grayson is a former head of a powerful union.

We do NOT know if Grayson has support of the nation's labor leaders. Just because he was the former head of a powerful union and an experienced labor organizer does NOT mean that he has the support of the nations labor leaders. Therefore this does NOT strengthen the argument
.

According to the GMAT critical reasoning Bible ,for strengthen /weaken type of questions the answer choices may contain new information or info outside the argument to support/break the argument.

Only when used by itself. You CANNOT use information from (A) to show that (B) is correct. And the only way that we could argue that (B) strengthens is if we use the information from (A). Therefore NEITHER (A) or (B) strengthen the argument by themselves.
Manager
Joined: 04 Jun 2008
Posts: 159
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 78 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Jul 2008, 07:30
1. As an experienced labor organizer and the former head of one of the nation’s most powerful labor unions, Grayson is an excellent choice to chair the new council on business-labor relations.

we have to figure out an advantage Grayson has that other contenders don't have that makes him the obvious choice for the position.
B looks good to me.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the conclusion above?
(A) The new council must have the support of the nation’s labor leaders if it is to succeed.
support of the nation’s labor leaders may not help Grayson for the position of head of business-labor relations.
(B) During his years as a labor leader, Grayson established a record of good relations with business leaders.
(C) The chair of the new council must be a person who can communicate directly with the leaders of the nation’s largest labor unions.
this does not make grayson a perfect choice.other contenders for the position might be enjoying very good relations with other leaders.
(D) Most of the other members of the new council will be representatives of business management interests.
irrelevant...other contenders are also equally qualified for the position.
(E) An understanding of the needs and problems of labor is the only qualification necessary for the job of chairing the new council.
other contenders are also equally qualified for the position.

IMO B
Director
Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 537
Schools: Stern, McCombs, Marshall, Wharton
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 160 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Jul 2008, 07:39
chan4312 wrote:
1. As an experienced labor organizer and the former head of one of the nation’s most powerful labor unions, Grayson is an excellent choice to chair the new council on business-labor relations.

we have to figure out an advantage Grayson has that other contenders don't have that makes him the obvious choice for the position.
B looks good to me.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the conclusion above?
(A) The new council must have the support of the nation’s labor leaders if it is to succeed.
support of the nation’s labor leaders may not help Grayson for the position of head of business-labor relations.
(B) During his years as a labor leader, Grayson established a record of good relations with business leaders.
(C) The chair of the new council must be a person who can communicate directly with the leaders of the nation’s largest labor unions.
this does not make grayson a perfect choice.other contenders for the position might be enjoying very good relations with other leaders.
(D) Most of the other members of the new council will be representatives of business management interests.
irrelevant...other contenders are also equally qualified for the position.
(E) An understanding of the needs and problems of labor is the only qualification necessary for the job of chairing the new council.
other contenders are also equally qualified for the position.

IMO B

How do you know that a good record relations with business leaders make him qualified? Being the chair of the council may have nothing to do with having these good relations. In fact you could argue that these relations could be negative and that you don't want a chairperson with these relations because they may do what's best for the business and not the people.

We just need to strengthen the conclusion that he would be an excellent choice.

E) Tells us that his is qualified and definitely strengthens that conclusion. Where does it say that there are other people that understand the needs and problems of labor. And even if there were other people who did and where qualified that does not take away from the fact that Grayson is qualified and therefore and excellent choice. Maybe there are more than one excellent choices.
Re: CR-Grayson   [#permalink] 07 Jul 2008, 07:39
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
4 As an experienced labor organizer and the former head of one 18 29 Aug 2008, 05:18
As an experienced labor organizer and the former head of one 6 07 Jan 2008, 16:55
As an experienced labor organizer and the former head of one 9 19 Jul 2007, 09:51
As an experienced labor organizer and the former head of one 6 22 Jun 2007, 12:23
As an experienced labor organizer and the former head of one 21 15 May 2007, 05:26
Display posts from previous: Sort by