Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 02:26 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 02:26
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2   3   4   5   
555-605 Level|   Assumption|                     
User avatar
avigutman
User avatar
Joined: 17 Jul 2019
Last visit: 30 Sep 2025
Posts: 1,293
Own Kudos:
1,930
Given Kudos: 66
Location: Canada
Schools: NYU Stern (WA)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V45
GMAT 2: 780 Q50 V47
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: NYU Stern (WA)
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Posts: 1,293
Kudos: 1,930
Editorial: Our city's public transportation agency is facing a budget 28 Feb 2023, 10:03
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2
avigutman

How would you rephrase the conclusion, in your own words, jabhatta2?

avigutman hmm - i am almost tempted to just drop the phrase "for their union to accept" completely and making the conclusion MUCH EASIER

Re-phrased conclusion - Thus, employees should accept the cuts in retirement benefits.

If the blue was instead the conclusion -- what the union itself does / what the union itself thinks / what the unions own interests are -- become moot.

But dropping phrase to 'oversimply' an argument is a dangerous strategy as it has led to problems in OTHER CR questions.
Show more
That's right, jabhatta2, it's a dangerous strategy, and I would not recommend it. I think the reason you're tempted to do so is because you already know now that doing so would lead you to the correct answer. But then you're not learning anything from this problem or from your mistake, and therefore it will have been a waste of your time.
That's why I'm asking, when you first read the argument, what was your interpretation of the conclusion? How would you have rephrased it, at the time, in your own words?
User avatar
jabhatta2
User avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,294
Own Kudos:
317
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,294
Kudos: 317
Editorial: Our city's public transportation agency is facing a budget 28 Feb 2023, 10:40
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
avigutman

That's right, jabhatta2, it's a dangerous strategy, and I would not recommend it. I think the reason you're tempted to do so is because you already know now that doing so would lead you to the correct answer. But then you're not learning anything from this problem or from your mistake, and therefore it will have been a waste of your time.
That's why I'm asking, when you first read the argument, what was your interpretation of the conclusion? How would you have rephrased it, at the time, in your own words?
Show more

Hi avigutman - when i first read the problem (this was maybe 3 months ago) - i thought the conclusion was really the blue. i.e. The employees should ACCEPT.

During a 2 min per question test - I tend to 're-phrase the essence of the argument in 20 words or less' a lot and in this case -- the strategy is working

In other CR questions - it has led to wrong OA.
User avatar
avigutman
User avatar
Joined: 17 Jul 2019
Last visit: 30 Sep 2025
Posts: 1,293
Own Kudos:
1,930
Given Kudos: 66
Location: Canada
Schools: NYU Stern (WA)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V45
GMAT 2: 780 Q50 V47
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: NYU Stern (WA)
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Posts: 1,293
Kudos: 1,930
Editorial: Our city's public transportation agency is facing a budget 28 Feb 2023, 11:08
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2
When i first read the problem (this was maybe 3 months ago) - i thought the conclusion was really the blue. i.e. The employees should ACCEPT.
Show more
Then why did you have a hard time analyzing answer choice (A), jabhatta2?
User avatar
ReedArnoldMPREP
User avatar
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 30 Apr 2021
Last visit: 20 Dec 2024
Posts: 521
Own Kudos:
536
 [2]
Given Kudos: 37
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V47
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V47
Posts: 521
Kudos: 536
 [2]
Editorial: Our city's public transportation agency is facing a budget 01 Mar 2023, 08:52
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2
avigutman

How would you rephrase the conclusion, in your own words, jabhatta2?

avigutman hmm - i am almost tempted to just drop the phrase "for their union to accept" completely and making the conclusion MUCH EASIER

Re-phrased conclusion - Thus, employees should accept the cuts in retirement benefits.

If the blue was instead the conclusion -- what the union itself does / what the union itself thinks / what the unions own interests are -- become moot.

But dropping phrase to 'oversimply' an argument is a dangerous strategy as it has led to problems in OTHER CR questions.
Show more

Hey Jabhatta,

It's funny you mention the LSAT, here, because I don't like this question for the GMAT because it does feel so much like an LSAT question! But, it is an OG GMAT question, and every now and then, they go down this road.

It is a necessary assumption question.

The conclusion is: "Employees best interest is for union to accept retirement cuts."

Premise:
1). There is a budget shortfall.
2). Very generous retirement benefits fastest growing part of budget
3). If budget shortfall not fixed, less transportation, many employees will lose jobs.

So, I ask myself my usual question: "How could conclusion be false, but premises be true?"

So I'm wondering: why would it NOT be in their best interest to cut retirement benefits, even though all those premises are true?

Well, one think I note is that it's never explicitly made clear that cutting retirement benefits... solves the shortfall. Meaning, we could cut retirement benefits, there could STILL be a shortfall, jobs could STILL get lost, and then on TOP of that the retirement benefits are less! That's not in the employees best interest.
The author's big assumption is that cutting retirement benefits will save the jobs... or at least, that NOT cutting benefits will result in lost jobs... (these are, in fact, logically different).

A says "If cutting benefits in employees best interest, union should not accept."

The 'should' here alone makes me a little queasy... Nothing in the argument is about what people SHOULD or SHOULDN'T do, but about what IS or IS NOT in the employees' interest... The question isn't about *ethics* but about *efficacy*. That alone makes A out of scope.

E says, "If accepting cuts to retirement does not save jobs, union will not do it. "

That's nice of the union, but that does not really confirm that cutting retirement benefits WILL save jobs. And similar to A, just as the argument is not about 'Should or should not,' the argument is also not about what the union WILL or WILL NOT do. It's about what WILL or WILL NOT be in the employee's interest. That is the *entire scope* we care about. Not whether the union SHOULD or WILL act in the employees' best interest, but what WOULD BE the employees' best interest.

As an analogy, consider the argument:

"Steak has a lot of protein, so it is in Reed's best interest to eat lots of steak."

The pertinent question is "Is eating lots of steak in Reed's best interest, since steak has protein?"

The question is NOT: "Should Reed do what is in his best interest?" or "Will Reed do what is in best interest?" So saying "Reed will do what is in his best interest" or "Reed should do what is in his best interest" has no bearing on whether eating lots of steak is in his best interest.

D is the best answer. It shows that cutting benefits would STOP the shortfall, so at the very least, a shortfall wouldn't be the cause of any lost jobs (in the purest logic, it's still possible there will be 'job loss' in the world of 'D', but D deals with the primary cause of job-loss we're concerned with, here: the budget shortfall).
User avatar
jabhatta2
User avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,294
Own Kudos:
317
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,294
Kudos: 317
Editorial: Our city's public transportation agency is facing a budget 01 Mar 2023, 12:05
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi ReedArnoldMPREP – thank you so much. Just wanted to focus on the analogy as I think it is a very good one.

ReedArnoldMPREP

"Steak has a lot of protein, so it is in Reed's best interest to eat lots of steak."
Show more

Created analogous choices just to discuss this analogy a bit more.

Argument : Steak has a lot of protein, so it is in Reed's best interest to eat lots of steak

(a) Reed should eat steak if doing so would be in his best interest
(d) Eating steak will help resolve Reed’s protein deficit
(e) Reed will not eat protein if doing so will not allow Reed to cover for his protein deficit


ReedArnoldMPREP

The pertinent question is "Is eating lots of steak in Reed's best interest, since steak has protein?"
The question is NOT: "Should Reed do what is in his best interest?" or "Will Reed do what is in best interest?" So saying "Reed will do what is in his best interest" or "Reed should do what is in his best interest" has no bearing on whether eating lots of steak is in his best interest.
Show more

Initially I struggled to parse between the 3 different questions (Red vs blue) The 3 questions are essentially the same if you ask me.

Some other questions -

  • WILL Reed do what is in Reed's best interest
  • COULD Reed do what is in Reed's best interest
  • SHOULD Reed do what is in Reed's best interest
  • CAN Reed do what is in Reed's best interest

-- all should be "YES" in order for the conclusion to be given.
------------------------------------------------

With some deeper thinking – I think “Will / Could / should / can ” strengthen the conclusion

That being said, the most pertinent question in Red (posted above) is not accurate if you ask me

The biggest question is ---
Is eating protein, something to do for Reed’s best interest.
User avatar
ReedArnoldMPREP
User avatar
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 30 Apr 2021
Last visit: 20 Dec 2024
Posts: 521
Own Kudos:
536
Given Kudos: 37
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V47
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V47
Posts: 521
Kudos: 536
Editorial: Our city's public transportation agency is facing a budget 01 Mar 2023, 13:53
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2
Hi ReedArnoldMPREP – thank you so much. Just wanted to focus on the analogy as I think it is a very good one.

ReedArnoldMPREP

"Steak has a lot of protein, so it is in Reed's best interest to eat lots of steak."

Created analogous choices just to discuss this analogy a bit more.

Argument : Steak has a lot of protein, so it is in Reed's best interest to eat lots of steak

(a) Reed should eat steak if doing so would be in his best interest
(d) Eating steak will help resolve Reed’s protein deficit
(e) Reed will not eat protein if doing so will not allow Reed to cover for his protein deficit


ReedArnoldMPREP

The pertinent question is "Is eating lots of steak in Reed's best interest, since steak has protein?"
The question is NOT: "Should Reed do what is in his best interest?" or "Will Reed do what is in best interest?" So saying "Reed will do what is in his best interest" or "Reed should do what is in his best interest" has no bearing on whether eating lots of steak is in his best interest.

Initially I struggled to parse between the 3 different questions (Red vs blue) The 3 questions are essentially the same if you ask me.

Some other questions -

  • WILL Reed do what is in Reed's best interest
  • COULD Reed do what is in Reed's best interest
  • SHOULD Reed do what is in Reed's best interest
  • CAN Reed do what is in Reed's best interest

-- all should be "YES" in order for the conclusion to be given.
------------------------------------------------

With some deeper thinking – I think “Will / Could / should / can ” strengthen the conclusion

That being said, the most pertinent question in Red (posted above) is not accurate if you ask me

The biggest question is ---
Is eating protein, something to do for Reed’s best interest.
Show more

I don't know much to say here except keep wrestling with this, because your thinking is confused.

Quote:
Initially I struggled to parse between the 3 different questions (Red vs blue) The 3 questions are essentially the same if you ask me.

Some other questions -

WILL Reed do what is in Reed's best interest
COULD Reed do what is in Reed's best interest
SHOULD Reed do what is in Reed's best interest
CAN Reed do what is in Reed's best interest

-- all should be "YES" in order for the conclusion to be given.
Show more

These are all fundamentally different questions (except maybe COULD and CAN? Those seem pretty close to identical.)

None of these need to be 'YES' for the conclusion given (eating steak is in Reed's best interest) to be true.

My suspicion is you are operating under a very understandable, hardwired assumption: "People SHOULD do what is in their best interest."

So if it's in their best interest to eat lots of steak, they SHOULD eat lots of steak. But again, the question is not SHOULD Reed do what is in his best interest, but WHAT ACTUALLY IS IN his best interest.

The question is: "Is it in Reed's best interest to eat lots of steak, or is it in Reed's best interest to NOT eat lots of steak."

That's it. That's the entire question. Whether Reed SHOULD or WILL DO what is in his best interest (whether that's eat lots of steak or NOT eat lots of steak) is another matter entirely, and is out of scope.

Quote:

With some deeper thinking – I think “Will / Could / should / can ” strengthen the conclusion
Show more

For the reasons stated just above, none of these are relevant to the argument in question.

Quote:
That being said, the most pertinent question in Red (posted above) is not accurate if you ask me
Show more

Keep digging, because that is the most pertinent question (not sure what you mean by 'accurate', though).

Quote:
The biggest question is ---
Is eating protein, something to do for Reed’s best interest.
Show more

That's part of it, because if eating protein is not in Reed's best interest than eating steak is not in his best interest. But it's also pertinent to ask if there is a reason eating steak is not in Reed's interest, even though it has a lot of protein (and maybe Reed should eat lots of protein). So if Reed is allergic to cow, eating steak is not in his best interest, even if the protein would be good for him. (This is getting a little away from the main points, though).
User avatar
lionx7
User avatar
Joined: 09 Apr 2023
Last visit: 18 Apr 2025
Posts: 11
Own Kudos:
4
Given Kudos: 87
Posts: 11
Kudos: 4
Editorial: Our city's public transportation agency is facing a budget 18 Dec 2023, 11:44
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I had some problems with this question and although it says on OG that this is an "Easy" question. The explanations here did not satisfy me, so here is my explanation that helped me:

B. The only feasible way for the agency to resolve the budget shortfall would involve cutting transportation service and eliminating jobs.

-> If this is true, then why the hell should retirement benefits be cut at all? It makes no sense to cut them if the only way to solve the problem anyway is to cut transportation costs and eliminate jobs.

E. The transportation employees' union will not accept cuts in retirement benefits if doing so will not allow more transportation employees to keep their jobs.

-> The argument suggests cuts in retirement beneftis as a solution because otherwise jobs will have to be eliminated. This answer here, however, essentially says the following: We cut retirement benefits, but still keep laying people off, but a few less. Why the hell should employees accept that? It doesn't solve the problem, people are still being laid off.

D. Cutting the retirement benefits would help resolve the agency's budget shortfall.

-> Negate: Cutting the retirement benefits would NOT help resolve the agency's budget shortfall.

The argument for cutting the retirement benefits would fall apart. Why the hell would you propose a solution (cutting the retirement benefits) if it doesn't solve the problem? Therefore, D MUST be right. Otherwise the argument is moot.
User avatar
pearrrrrrr
User avatar
Joined: 30 May 2023
Last visit: 26 May 2025
Posts: 54
Own Kudos:
17
Given Kudos: 306
Posts: 54
Kudos: 17
Editorial: Our city's public transportation agency is facing a budget 25 Dec 2023, 00:06
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I’m curious about choice E. The transportation employees' union will not accept cuts in retirement benefits if doing so will not allow more transportation employees to keep their jobs.

>> let’s put choice E in other way, say the union will cut retirement benefits even if doing so will not allow employees to keep their jobs. The argument will be weaken because it’s a LOSE-LOSE situation
LOSE1: retirement benefits are cut
LOSE2: employees can’t keep their jobs
this situation, for sure, can’t be in the employees' best interest. So, we need to assume that choice E hold true.

That’s my thought why I don’t understand that choice E is wrong. Can anyone help explain please?

KarishmaB
iamsiddharthkapoor
I selected option B because if the statement in it is not true, then that means there is/are other ways to resolve the deficit than to cut transportation services, causing loss in jobs, so in such a case there's no need for the employee union to accept cuts in retirement benefits.

Can anyone tell me what's the gap in my reasoning?

Our city's public transportation agency is facing a budget shortfall.
The fastest growing part of the budget has been employee retirement benefits, which are very high.
If budget shortfall is not resolved, transportation service will be cut, and many transportation employees will lose their jobs.

Conclusion: Thus, it would be in the employees' best interest for their union to accept cuts in retirement benefits (which will resolve budget shortfall)

Basically the argument is saying that budget shortfall is increasing while the retirement benefits are too generous. So cut down retirement benefits to take care of shortfall. Else, services will be cut and people will lose their jobs. Hence it is in people's best interest to cut retirement benefits.

We are looking for an assumption - a missing necessary premise

A. The transportation employees' union should not accept cuts in retirement benefits if doing so would not be in the employees' best interest.

Not necessary. We don't need to establish that cuts should not be accepted otherwise.

B. The only feasible way for the agency to resolve the budget shortfall would involve cutting transportation service and eliminating jobs.

Not so. Cutting retirement benefits is a way to resolve budget shortfall and is already discussed in the argument. There could be others. The argument tells us that if the budget shortfall is not resolved, then it will lead to cutting services and eliminating jobs.

C. Other things being equal, it is in the transportation employees' interest to have exceptionally generous retirement benefits.

No. The argument implies that retaining jobs is in the employees' best interest.

D. Cutting the retirement benefits would help resolve the agency's budget shortfall.

Correct. The argument assumes that cutting retirement benefits will fix the problem. That budget shortfall based job cuts will not happen in that case.

E. The transportation employees' union will not accept cuts in retirement benefits if doing so will not allow more transportation employees to keep their jobs.

No, we don't know the conditions under which retirement benefit cuts may or may not be accepted. What the union will do, we don't know. The argument only talks about what it should do.

Answer (D)
Show more

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
Diwen2000
User avatar
Joined: 29 Jan 2024
Last visit: 21 Oct 2025
Posts: 15
Own Kudos:
5
Given Kudos: 16
Posts: 15
Kudos: 5
Editorial: Our city's public transportation agency is facing a budget 08 Mar 2024, 01:42
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hey. I am OK with the answer but I have a question about the phrase.

What does "in someone's best interest" mean?

I googled and the dictionary said that "in someone's best interest" means "benefit someone". But some other explanations said that it means "most beneficial for someone". I wonder which meaning is correct? Is there a supelative meaning in this phrase?

Thanks!
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,445
Own Kudos:
69,781
 [1]
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,445
Kudos: 69,781
 [1]
Editorial: Our city's public transportation agency is facing a budget 11 Apr 2024, 08:57
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Diwen2000
Hey. I am OK with the answer but I have a question about the phrase.

What does "in someone's best interest" mean?

I googled and the dictionary said that "in someone's best interest" means "benefit someone". But some other explanations said that it means "most beneficial for someone". I wonder which meaning is correct? Is there a supelative meaning in this phrase?

Thanks!
Show more
­Fascinating question! As with many idioms, there isn't necessarily one correct definition -- and this one can be used in either of the two ways that you mentioned.

In this passage, phrase "in someone's best interest" means the best outcome for a person given the circumstances. So there is a superlative aspect to the phrase -- but it is tempered by the context.

Perhaps the absolute best outcome for employees would be to give them each a million dollars and send them off to the Bahamas. Sadly, that's not an option on the table. Given the circumstances, the outcome laid out in the passage is in their best interests.

I hope that helps!­
User avatar
Diwen2000
User avatar
Joined: 29 Jan 2024
Last visit: 21 Oct 2025
Posts: 15
Own Kudos:
5
Given Kudos: 16
Posts: 15
Kudos: 5
Editorial: Our city's public transportation agency is facing a budget 12 Apr 2024, 01:06
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
 
GMATNinja

Diwen2000
Hey. I am OK with the answer but I have a question about the phrase.

What does "in someone's best interest" mean?

I googled and the dictionary said that "in someone's best interest" means "benefit someone". But some other explanations said that it means "most beneficial for someone". I wonder which meaning is correct? Is there a supelative meaning in this phrase?

Thanks!
­Fascinating question! As with many idioms, there isn't necessarily one correct definition -- and this one can be used in either of the two ways that you mentioned.

In this passage, phrase "in someone's best interest" means the best outcome for a person given the circumstances. So there is a superlative aspect to the phrase -- but it is tempered by the context.

Perhaps the absolute best outcome for employees would be to give them each a million dollars and send them off to the Bahamas. Sadly, that's not an option on the table. Given the circumstances, the outcome laid out in the passage is in their best interests.

I hope that helps!­
Show more
­Thanks GMATNinja
Your answer clarifies just what I am confused about. It helps a lot.
Also, I appreciate it that you find the question fascinating. I guess only international students raise these vocabulary questions haha~
User avatar
PReciSioN
User avatar
Joined: 17 Dec 2023
Last visit: 14 Apr 2025
Posts: 95
Own Kudos:
77
Given Kudos: 47
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 795 Q90 V90 DI88
GMAT Focus 1: 795 Q90 V90 DI88
Posts: 95
Kudos: 77
Editorial: Our city's public transportation agency is facing a budget 12 Apr 2024, 10:08
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I believe these 3 are assumptions made by the argument, and would make the argument valid if all 3 are added.

1) Cuts in retirement benefits (along with other measures, if required) is enough to resolve budget shortfall.

2) If the budget shortfall is resolved, the jobs will not be cut. (note that this does not directly follow from the given statement that "Unless budget shortfall is resolved, jobs will be cut")

3) It is in the employees (collective employees) best interests to prefer saving 'many' (how much is many? 10 employees out of 100k employees? 10 out of 20?) jobs over accepting cuts in retirement benefits for all the employees.

I believe that all 3 are necessary, and together they are sufficient to make the argument completely valid. Am I right in thinking this? MartyMurray GMATNinja KarishmaB ?­
User avatar
RonPurewal
User avatar
Joined: 15 Nov 2013
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 116
Own Kudos:
1,118
 [1]
Given Kudos: 5
GMAT Focus 1: 805 Q90 V90 DI90
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
GMAT Focus 1: 805 Q90 V90 DI90
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 116
Kudos: 1,118
 [1]
Editorial: Our city's public transportation agency is facing a budget 12 Apr 2024, 11:50
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Diwen2000
Hey. I am OK with the answer but I have a question about the phrase.

What does "in someone's best interest" mean?

I googled and the dictionary said that "in someone's best interest" means "benefit someone". But some other explanations said that it means "most beneficial for someone". I wonder which meaning is correct? Is there a supelative meaning in this phrase?

Thanks!
Show more
Official GMAT questions will not use words in ways that are tricky, counterintuitive, or misleading.  Accordingly, GMAT passages will not use any phrases—idiomatic or otherwise—whose interpretation contradicts the literal meaning of the words.

In this case, you can trust that someone's "best interest" really does mean "the best available course of action, out of a given set of choices" or "the option that will give the best possible result".  
It's true that "best interest" is used colloquially/informally to mean just "something you're strongly advised to do", without necessarily referring to a Nash equilibrium or highest-yielding course of action or whatever, but the GMAT won't use the phrase that way because that interpretation contradicts the literal significance of the word "best".
User avatar
stackskillz
User avatar
Joined: 28 Feb 2022
Last visit: 11 Jul 2025
Posts: 62
Own Kudos:
13
Given Kudos: 165
Posts: 62
Kudos: 13
Editorial: Our city's public transportation agency is facing a budget 13 Apr 2024, 05:43
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Conc: Thus, it would be in the employees' best interest for their union to accept cuts in retirement benefits.
To answer the assumption question - We need to know the answer to the following, i.e., Is accepting cuts in the best interest of employees?

(A) The transportation employees' union should not accept cuts in retirement benefits if doing so would not be in the employees' best interest - The question we need to answer isn't whether employees should or shouldn't accept cuts, but whether the cuts are in their interest or not. Drop

(B) The only feasible way for the agency to resolve the budget shortfall would involve cutting transportation service and eliminating jobs - What is the feasible way for resolving budget shortfall? As per the passage, we know elimination of jobs is not the only way. Also whether the aim l is achieved by eliminating jobs or reducing benefits, it doesn't answer the question, Is this in the best interest of employees? Drop

(C) Other things being equal, it is in the transportation employees' interest to have exceptionally generous retirement benefits - We're told it's not in the employee's best interest to have generous benefits. This can be confirmed using a quick negation test of the option itself - "It is not in employee's best interest to have exceptionally generous benefits." Seems to be in line with the conclusion.  Drop

(D) Cutting the retirement benefits would help resolve the agency's budget shortfall. Would cutting the retirement benefits help solve agency's budget shortfall? Yes, since it's assumed that solving for employment is better than generous benefits. Let's test that with a quick negation, i.e., ... it doesn't resolve the budget shortfall. Okay, in that case - It's not in employee's best interest, since the transportation agency will have to shutdown it's operation and eliminate jobs anyway and accepting the cut in benefits would hurt the employees even more. Keep

(E) The transportation employees' union will not accept cuts in retirement benefits if doing so will not allow more transportation employees to keep their jobs - Will the transportation employees accept the cuts? That would depend a lot on the conditions of the agreement. However, does this tell us it's in their best interest? Nope. This option tells us the action the trasnportation employees might take, not what is in their best interest. Drop
User avatar
Diwen2000
User avatar
Joined: 29 Jan 2024
Last visit: 21 Oct 2025
Posts: 15
Own Kudos:
5
Given Kudos: 16
Posts: 15
Kudos: 5
Editorial: Our city's public transportation agency is facing a budget 14 Apr 2024, 06:47
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
 
RonPurewal

Diwen2000
Hey. I am OK with the answer but I have a question about the phrase.

What does "in someone's best interest" mean?

I googled and the dictionary said that "in someone's best interest" means "benefit someone". But some other explanations said that it means "most beneficial for someone". I wonder which meaning is correct? Is there a supelative meaning in this phrase?

Thanks!
Official GMAT questions will not use words in ways that are tricky, counterintuitive, or misleading.  Accordingly, GMAT passages will not use any phrases—idiomatic or otherwise—whose interpretation contradicts the literal meaning of the words.

In this case, you can trust that someone's "best interest" really does mean "the best available course of action, out of a given set of choices" or "the option that will give the best possible result".  
It's true that "best interest" is used colloquially/informally to mean just "something you're strongly advised to do", without necessarily referring to a Nash equilibrium or highest-yielding course of action or whatever, but the GMAT won't use the phrase that way because that interpretation contradicts the literal significance of the word "best".
Show more
­Thank you, RonPurewal, for providing a general rule for GMAT vocabulary! I will add this to my GMAT notes~~
User avatar
lavanya.18
User avatar
Joined: 21 Apr 2024
Last visit: 12 Mar 2025
Posts: 127
Own Kudos:
87
Given Kudos: 679
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, General Management
Schools: ESSEC MiM "27 HEC MiM "27 IE LBS MiM "26 INSEAD MiM "26
GPA: 7.5
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: ESSEC MiM "27 HEC MiM "27 IE LBS MiM "26 INSEAD MiM "26
Posts: 127
Kudos: 87
Editorial: Our city's public transportation agency is facing a budget 23 Aug 2024, 10:41
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I was confused in the end between B and D. My gut was saying it was D, but I don't know why I chose B (must be because I'm tired rn). Also, should not need to listen to my gut but use my analytical skills to work from wrong to right, through elimination.
User avatar
ADisHere
User avatar
Joined: 31 Aug 2023
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 127
Own Kudos:
65
Given Kudos: 421
Location: India
Schools: ISB '27 ISB
GMAT Focus 1: 685 Q86 V81 DI82
Schools: ISB '27 ISB
GMAT Focus 1: 685 Q86 V81 DI82
Posts: 127
Kudos: 65
Editorial: Our city's public transportation agency is facing a budget 23 Sep 2024, 06:00
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
KarishmaB

Quote:

Editorial: Our city's public transportation agency is facing a budget shortfall. The fastest growing part of the budget has been employee retirement benefits, which are exceptionally generous. Unless the budget shortfall is resolved, transportation service will be cut, and many transportation employees will lose their jobs. Thus, it would be in the employees' best interest for their union to accept cuts in retirement benefits.

Which of the following is an assumption the editorial's argument requires?

(A) The transportation employees' union should not accept cuts in retirement benefits if doing so would not be in the employees' best interest.
(B) The only feasible way for the agency to resolve the budget shortfall would involve cutting transportation service and eliminating jobs.
(C) Other things being equal, it is in the transportation employees' interest to have exceptionally generous retirement benefits.
(D) Cutting the retirement benefits would help resolve the agency's budget shortfall.
(E) The transportation employees' union will not accept cuts in retirement benefits if doing so will not allow more transportation employees to keep their jobs.

Premises:
Our city's public transportation agency is facing a budget shortfall.
The fastest growing part of the budget has been employee retirement benefits, which are very high.
If budget shortfall is not resolved, transportation service will be cut, and many transportation employees will lose their jobs.

Conclusion: Thus, it would be in the employees' best interest for their union to accept cuts in retirement benefits (which will resolve budget shortfall)

Basically the argument is saying that budget shortfall is increasing while the retirement benefits are too generous. So cut down retirement benefits to take care of shortfall. Else, services will be cut and people will lose their jobs. Hence it is in people's best interest to cut retirement benefits.

We are looking for an assumption - a missing necessary premise

A. The transportation employees' union should not accept cuts in retirement benefits if doing so would not be in the employees' best interest.

Do we need this to be true? No. We don't need to establish that cuts should not be accepted otherwise. It is not required for our current argument. We are not dealing with - what should they do if the cuts are not in their best interests? Our argument only talks about this case in which it is claiming that the cuts are in their best interests.

B. The only feasible way for the agency to resolve the budget shortfall would involve cutting transportation service and eliminating jobs.

Not so. Cutting retirement benefits is a way to resolve budget shortfall and is already discussed in the argument. There could be others. The argument tells us that if the budget shortfall is not resolved, then it will lead to cutting services and eliminating jobs.

C. Other things being equal, it is in the transportation employees' interest to have exceptionally generous retirement benefits.

No. The argument implies that retaining jobs is in the employees' best interest.

D. Cutting the retirement benefits would help resolve the agency's budget shortfall.

Correct. The argument assumes that cutting retirement benefits will fix the problem. That budget shortfall based job cuts will not happen in that case.

E. The transportation employees' union will not accept cuts in retirement benefits if doing so will not allow more transportation employees to keep their jobs.

No, we don't know the conditions under which retirement benefit cuts may or may not be accepted. What the union will do, we don't know. The argument only talks about what it SHOULD do. The argument is not assuming that the employees will not accept cuts if doing so will not allow more of them to keep their jobs. The argument is giving advice to the union on what they should do. The argument is not making any assumptions about what they will accept or not accept.

Answer (D)­­

Videos on assumption questions: https://youtu.be/O0ROJfljRLU
A pair of difficult assumption questions: https://youtu.be/ZQnhC4d5ODU
A Hard Assumption Ques: https://youtu.be/0j4tovGifIg
Show more
Hi, I had a doubt i very well understood the answer as well and got it correct
but I would like to know how to negate the first option when there are double negatives
would it be
A- The transportation employees' union should accept cuts in retirement benefits if doing so would not be in the employees' best interest.
or
B- The transportation employees' union should accept cuts in retirement benefits if doing so would be in the employees' best interest.
User avatar
MoPouyan
User avatar
Joined: 23 Mar 2021
Last visit: 07 Feb 2025
Posts: 17
Own Kudos:
4
Given Kudos: 198
Posts: 17
Kudos: 4
Editorial: Our city's public transportation agency is facing a budget 07 Nov 2024, 09:44
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Argument Overview:
  • The public transportation agency has a budget shortfall.
  • Employee retirement benefits are the fastest-growing part of the budget and are very generous.
  • If the budget shortfall is not resolved, transportation services will be cut, leading to job losses.
  • Conclusion: It is in the employees' best interest for the union to accept cuts in retirement benefits.
Logical Requirements:
  • Assumption: Cutting retirement benefits will help resolve the budget shortfall.
  • If this assumption is false, the argument's conclusion that accepting cuts is in the employees' best interest falls apart.
Analysis of Answer Choices:
  • (A): Irrelevant. Discusses what the union should do, not what is assumed for the argument.
  • (B): Incorrect. Contradicts the argument's assumption by implying job cuts are the only solution.
  • (C): Incorrect. Weakens the argument by suggesting it is in the employees' interest to have generous benefits, which is contrary to accepting cuts.
  • (D): Correct. States the necessary assumption that cutting benefits would help resolve the shortfall, supporting the argument's logic.
  • (E): Irrelevant. Focuses on union motivations rather than the assumption needed for the argument to hold.
    The correct answer is (D) as it directly states the assumption needed for the argument to be valid.
User avatar
kabirgandhi
User avatar
Joined: 11 Oct 2024
Last visit: 17 Nov 2025
Posts: 72
Own Kudos:
9
Given Kudos: 81
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 645 Q85 V84 DI77
Products:
My Reviews GMAT Club Tests
GMAT Focus 1: 645 Q85 V84 DI77
Posts: 72
Kudos: 9
Editorial: Our city's public transportation agency is facing a budget 09 Jul 2025, 04:28
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The reasoning behind D makes perfect sense, however, I was confused between answer choices B and D till the end. B tells us that the only feasible way to resolve the budget shortfall would involve cutting transportation and eliminating jobs. If we negate this - if there is in fact another way to resolve the budget surplus, then they would not need to cut jobs at all, making it so that accepting cuts in retirement benefits would not necessarly be in their best interests
GMATNinja
samgyupsal
Hi experts, MartyTargetTestPrep GMATNinja AjiteshArun

The answer is definitely D, but I can't seem to understand exactly why A is incorrect. Is it because the choice flips employees' interest and the union's acceptance and negates both? Therefore, it talks about NOT accepting cuts in benefits, therefore straying away from the point of the argument - i.e., what the union should accept.

I originally ruled out this option because it states "the transportation employees' union SHOULD not accept cuts...if doing so...." Why should something that the union should or should not be assumed?
The question asks for an assumption REQUIRED by the argument. So, as you look through the answer choices, you're looking for something that MUST be true in order for the author's argument to hold water.

The author concludes that "it would be in the employees' best interest for their union to accept cuts in retirement benefits."

The reasoning behind this conclusion is:
  • There is a budget shortfall
  • The fastest growing piece of the budget is retirement benefits
  • If the budget shortfall is not resolved, a bunch of transportation employees will lose their jobs

So, which answer choice MUST be true in order to conclude that ""it would be in the employees' best interest for their union to accept cuts in retirement benefits"?

Here's (A):
Quote:
(A) The transportation employees' union should not accept cuts in retirement benefits if doing so would not be in the employees' best interest.
This doesn't absolutely HAVE to be true in order for the author to reach his/her conclusion. Perhaps there IS a circumstance under which it makes sense for the union to accept retirement cuts, even if it's not in the employees' best interests.

Maybe, for example, the cut in retirement benefits would directly fund some other really important project (building a new hospital or something). In this case, it's possible that the transportation union SHOULD support the cut in benefits even though it ISN'T in the best interests of the employees.

That doesn't impact the author's conclusion that it WOULD be in the best interest of the employees to accept THESE particular cuts in retirement benefits.

Because the argument doesn't depend on (A), (A) is not the correct answer.

Compare that to (D):
Quote:
(D) Cutting the retirement benefits would help resolve the agency's budget shortfall.
From the passage, we know that if the budget shortfall is not resolved, many transportation employees will lose their jobs. From this, the author concludes that it would be in the employees' best interests for their union to accept cuts in retirement benefits.

(D) provides a necessary link between the author's conclusion and the evidence of the passage -- in order to conclude that it is in the employees' best interest to accept the cuts, we NEED to know that the cuts will actually help resolve the budget shortfall.

Because (D) MUST be true in order for the author's argument to hold, (D) is the correct answer.

I hope that helps!
Show more
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,445
Own Kudos:
69,781
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,445
Kudos: 69,781
Editorial: Our city's public transportation agency is facing a budget 24 Jul 2025, 14:21
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
kabirgandhi
The reasoning behind D makes perfect sense, however, I was confused between answer choices B and D till the end. B tells us that the only feasible way to resolve the budget shortfall would involve cutting transportation and eliminating jobs. If we negate this - if there is in fact another way to resolve the budget surplus, then they would not need to cut jobs at all, making it so that accepting cuts in retirement benefits would not necessarly be in their best interests
Show more
"If we negate this - if there is in fact another way to resolve the budget surplus..." - Yes indeed: cutting retirement benefits!

If (B) is assumed, that would mean that cutting retirement benefits could not possibly resolve the budget surplus. That in turn means that many transportation employees would lose their jobs, even though they accepted the cuts to their retirement benefits.

Clearly that isn't in their best interest, so (B) doesn't work.

I hope that helps!
   1   2   3   4   5   
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
miag
188 posts