Quote:
Employees that get a thorough medical examination twice a year take fewer sick days. Even employees who get examined only once a year take less sick time than those who do not get checked. Therefore, if companies instituted in-house medical examination programs, the absentee rate in those companies would decrease significantly.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?
A. Employees who get medical check ups during working hours occasionally feel ill for short periods of time after the examination.
B. Employees who are frequently absent are the least likely to cooperate with a corporate medical program.
C. Employees who get a thorough medical examination once a week in their company's medical program usually also get checked by their private doctor.
D. Employees who get examined in their company's in-house medical program use their working time no more productively than those who do not get examined.
E. Employees who get medical examinations during working hours take slightly longer lunch breaks than employees who do not get examinations.
ARGUMENT
[prem] Employees who get medical exams take less sick time than those who get no exams;
[con] So if employees got examined in-house, then absentee rate would decrease significantly.
WEAKEN
A. "employees after in-house checkups feel ill short after" this doesn't necessarily mean that the rate would not fall;
C. "employees get checked once a week in-house also get checked elsewhere" irrelevant;
D. "employees who get checked in-house use their time as productively as those who are not checked" irrelevant;
E. "employees who get checked in-house take longer breaks" this doesn't necessarily mean that the rate would not fall;
Answer (B): if employees who are frequently absent don't cooperate with the program, then the rate will not decrease.