E

Comparison of employees laid off vs hired in last two years.

Posted from my mobile device

A. equivalent to the hiring in
Wrong comparison employees with hiring

B. the equivalent of those hired in
Equivalent is wrong usage , employees were not same but the number was equivalent

C. as many as the hiring of
Wrong comparison employees with hiring

D. as many as the hiring in
Wrong comparison employees with hiring

E. as many as were hired in
As many as (employees) were hired in -correct

The correct answer is E.

E presents the correct comparison between the laid off and those who were hired in the last year.

According to a defense ministry circular, the Military Engineering Services has laid-off almost 10,000 employees, about equivalent to the hiring in the department in the last two years.

Equivalent is not the right word here. And as it's in past tense, IMO E.




A. equivalent to the hiring in

B. the equivalent of those hired in

C. as many as the hiring of

D. as many as the hiring in

E. as many as were hired in

Posted from my mobile device

According to a defense ministry circular, the Military Engineering Services has laid-off almost 10,000 employees, about equivalent to the hiring in the department in the last two years.


A. equivalent to the hiring in
- "about equivalent" - redundant

B. the equivalent of those hired in
- "about the equivalent" - redundant

C. as many as the hiring of
- as many as the hiring of- shows incorrect comparison

D. as many as the hiring in
- as many as the hiring in - shows incorrect comparison

E. as many as were hired in
- correct.

Answer E

According to a defense ministry circular, the Military Engineering Services has laid-off almost 10,000 employees, about equivalent to the hiring in the department in the last two years.


A. equivalent to the hiring in

About and equivalent are redundant in nature in this context. So option A is wrong.

B. the equivalent of those hired in

About and equivalent are redundant in nature in this context. So option B is wrong.

C. as many as the hiring of

“The hiring of ..” is the incorrect usage as per the context of the argument. So option C is wrong.

D. as many as the hiring in

“The hiring in ..” is the incorrect usage as per the context of the argument. So option D is wrong.


E. as many as were hired in

“As many as were hired..in last 2 years” is the correct usage of sentence and makes the sentence structural and logical. So option E is correct.

Posted from my mobile device

According to a defense ministry circular, the Military Engineering Services has laid-off almost 10,000 employees, about equivalent to the hiring in the department in the last two years.


A. equivalent to the hiring in- Incorrect. Use of equivalent is wrong.

B. the equivalent of those hired in- Incorrect. use of equivalent is wrong.

C. as many as the hiring of- Incorrect. Use of " the hiring of" is incorrect comparison.

D. as many as the hiring in- Incorrect. Use of "the hiring in" is incorrect comparison.

E. as many as were hired in- Correct choice. laid off and hired is the correct comparison.

According to a defense ministry circular, the Military Engineering Services has laid-off almost 10,000 employees, about equivalent to the hiring in the department in the last two years.


A. equivalent to the hiring in
Incorrect Compares employees to hiring

B. the equivalent of those hired in
Incorrect those seems little dubious, comparison error

C. as many as the hiring of
Incorrect: comparison of employees to hiring

D. as many as the hiring in
Incorrect Wordy and awkward

E. as many as were hired in
correct comparison
IMO E

I think E is the best ong a others.

Posted from my mobile device

According to a defense ministry circular, the Military Engineering Services has laid-off almost 10,000 employees, about equivalent to the hiring in the department in the last two years.


A. equivalent to the hiring in -- equivalent is used for exact number comparison, not people

B. the equivalent of those hired in -- same as A

C. as many as the hiring of -- people are compared to hiring

D. as many as the hiring in -- same as C

E. as many as were hired in -- CORRECT, people to people comparison

The answer should be E, IMO.

According to a defense ministry circular, the Military Engineering Services has laid-off almost 10,000 employees, about equivalent to the hiring in the department in the last two years.


A. equivalent to the hiring in
Incorrect: equivalent is not used to compare numbers

B. the equivalent of those hired in
Incorrect: same as A

C. as many as the hiring of
Incorrect: incorrect comparison. The Number of employees is compared with hiring

D. as many as the hiring in
Incorrect: Same as C

E. as many as were hired in
Correct: Correct comparison. The Number of employees laid off is compared with the number of employees hired

Posted from my mobile device

According to a defense ministry circular, the Military Engineering Services has laid-off almost 10,000 employees, about equivalent to the hiring in the department in the last two years.

Comparison error in A, B, and C it should be lay off with hiring. In option D the missing verb created the ambuiguity.

IMO E

A. equivalent to the hiring in

B. the equivalent of those hired in

C. as many as the hiring of

D. as many as the hiring in

E. as many as were hired in

A. equivalent to the hiring in
Use of hiring is wrong. As if it is used as noun, should be plural, parallel to employees


B. the equivalent of those hired in
Those? Incorrect use of pronoun

C. as many as the hiring of

Same as A

D. as many as the hiring in
Same as A
E. as many as were hired in
imo correct. Parallel "has laid-off","were fired"

Posted from my mobile device

According to a defense ministry circular, the Military Engineering Services has laid-off almost 10,000 employees, about equivalent to the hiring in the department in the last two years.

the employees are countable so cant use equivalent.
as many as is correct

A. equivalent to the hiring in

B. the equivalent of those hired in

C. as many as the hiring of.......hiring of is incorrect

D. as many as the hiring in.......hiring in dept doesnt make sense

E. as many as were hired in.......perfect removing all errors

Here we are comparing 10,000 employees laid off with the number of employees hired in the last two years. Use of equivalent is not proper here. Equivalent means two things are similar in function and other characteristics. Here we are comparing the two groups therefore, we can't say for sure that the two groups are equivalent.

A. equivalent to the hiring in................As explained above

B. the equivalent of those hired in..........Again use of equivalent & those are not proper

C. as many as the hiring of...............improper comparison.

D. as many as the hiring in................improper comparison

E. as many as were hired in................This is fine. ...10000 employees laid of as many as (employees) were hired in.

IMO option E should be the correct option.

-- 10,000 employees are being compared, only option B uses correct comparision.

A. equivalent to the hiring in

B. the equivalent of those hired in

C. as many as the hiring of

D. as many as the hiring in

E. as many as were hired in

IMO answer is B

A. equivalent to the hiring in
missing 'the'

B. the equivalent of those hired in
Can be correct

C. as many as the hiring of
of last two years is incorrect

D. as many as the hiring in
hiring does not directly present itself as a numeric variable

E. as many as were hired in
Best Answer - Correct

Answer Option - B

A. equivalent to the hiring in - INCORRECT COMPARISON

B. the equivalent of those hired in - CORRECT

C. as many as the hiring of - INCORRECT COMPARISON

D. as many as the hiring in - INCORRECT COMPARISON

E. as many as were hired in - INCORRECT COMPARISON

Posted from my mobile device

The intended meaning of the sentence is that the MES has laid-off almost 10k employees, a number almost equal to the number of people hired in the last 2 years.


Option A tries to equate the laid-off number to the hiring (and not the number of hires) in the last 2 years.

Option B looks quite decent, but the problem with option B is 'the equivalent'. Equivalent usually refers to equality in function/behavior, whereas the intended meaning is trying to achieve equality in numbers, which could be better represented with 'as many as'.

Options C & D compare the number of employees to the hiring ( 'as many as the hiring'). 'as many as' is typically used to compare countable nouns.

Option E correctly compares the number of employees laid-off to that of hired in the last 2 years.

Hence E is the answer.