It is currently 19 Sep 2017, 21:03

### 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

# In recent years, unions have begun to include in their

Author Message
VP
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 1262

Kudos [?]: 509 [0], given: 0

In recent years, unions have begun to include in their [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Jun 2008, 07:25
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 1 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

In recent years, unions have begun to include in their demands at the collective bargaining table requests for contract provisions which give labor an active voice in determining the goals of a corporation. Although it cannot be denied that labor leaders are highly skilled administrators, it must be recognized that their primary loyalty is and must remain to their membership, not to the corporation. Thus, labor participation in corporate management decisions makes about as much sense as allowing inmates to make decisions about prison security.
Which of the following represents the best continuation of the passage?

The author's reasoning leads to the further conclusion that

1. the authority of corporate managers would be symbolically undermined if labor leaders were allowed to participate in corporate planning.

2. workers have virtually no idea of how to run a large corporation

3. workers would not derive any benefit from hearing the goals of corporate management explained to them at semiannual meetings

4. the efficiency of workers would be lowered if they were to divide their time between production line duties and management responsibilities

5. allowing labor a voice in corporate decisions would involve labor representatives in a conflict of interest

Last edited by ritula on 05 Jun 2008, 21:08, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos [?]: 509 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 936

Kudos [?]: 327 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

05 Jun 2008, 07:29
E

Last edited by abhijit_sen on 05 Jun 2008, 07:31, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos [?]: 327 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 14 Aug 2007
Posts: 726

Kudos [?]: 208 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

05 Jun 2008, 07:31
ritula wrote:
In recent years, unions have begun to include in their demands at the collective bargaining table requests for contract provisions which give labor an active voice in determining the goals of a corporation. Although it cannot be denied that labor leaders are highly skilled administrators, it must be recognized that their primary loyalty is and must remain to their membership, not to the corporation. Thus, labor participation in corporate management decisions makes about as much sense as allowing inmates to make decisions about prison security.
Which of the following represents the best continuation of the passage?

The author's reasoning leads to the further conclusion that

1. the authority of corporate managers would be symbolically undermined if labor leaders were allowed to participate in corporate planning.

2. workers have virtually no idea of how to run a large corporation

3. workers would not derive any benefit from hearing the goals of corporate management explained to them at semiannual meetings

4. the efficiency of workers would be lowered if they were to divide their time between production line duties and management responsibilities

5. allowing labor a voice in corporate decisions would involve labor representatives in a conflict of interest

is it E?

Kudos [?]: 208 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 30 Apr 2008
Posts: 1870

Kudos [?]: 607 [0], given: 32

Location: Oklahoma City
Schools: Hard Knocks

### Show Tags

05 Jun 2008, 07:48
I think it's A.

See my reasoning in blue near each answer.

ritula wrote:
In recent years, unions have begun to include in their demands at the collective bargaining table requests for contract provisions which give labor an active voice in determining the goals of a corporation. Although it cannot be denied that labor leaders are highly skilled administrators, it must be recognized that their primary loyalty is and must remain to their membership, not to the corporation. Thus, labor participation in corporate management decisions makes about as much sense as allowing inmates to make decisions about prison security.
Which of the following represents the best continuation of the passage?

The author's reasoning leads to the further conclusion that

1. the authority of corporate managers would be symbolically undermined if labor leaders were allowed to participate in corporate planning.

Just like the authority of the prison admins/guards would be undermined if the inmates were allowed to be involved in security, the corporate managers would be undermined if unions had a voice. Remember, you don't have to agree with the statement or conclusion, but you do have to be able to extend the logic in the stem to the answer...even if you believe the underlying premise to be flawed. IMO, labor unions want the company to stay profitable and employed or their workers will be laid off on a massive scale.

2. workers have virtually no idea of how to run a large corporation

This goes against the statement that union leaders (i.e., also workers to an extent) are highly skilled. Furthermore, it goes against the analogy of inmates helping determine security. That has nothing to do with skill...it has everything to do with authority to manage prison security.

3. workers would not derive any benefit from hearing the goals of corporate management explained to them at semiannual meetings

way out of scope for what the stem actually discusses so this would be a leap of logic from what is actually stated.

4. the efficiency of workers would be lowered if they were to divide their time between production line duties and management responsibilities

Off topic and out of scope with the stem. Again, compared to the inmate exmaple, keeping with that logic, efficiency has nothing to do with who gets a voice. As you read the #4 & #5 choices, it is easy to forget the details of the passage itself because we just read 3 other answers not part of the actual stem. It might be a good idea to go back and either re-read the stem or at least skim it before reading #4 & #5.

5. allowing labor a voice in corporate decisions would involve labor representatives in a conflict of interest

While this might be plausible and even true on a certain level, it has nothing to do with what the stem says. The inmate analolgy really helped me focus on the idea conveyed by the stem. Inmates would not be in a conflict of interest because they have no loyalty to the prison, so concluding anything about a conflict of interest is off topic and out of scope.

_________________

------------------------------------
J Allen Morris
**I'm pretty sure I'm right, but then again, I'm just a guy with his head up his a\$\$.

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Kudos [?]: 607 [0], given: 32

Manager
Joined: 14 Mar 2008
Posts: 126

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 0

Schools: Chicago R2

### Show Tags

05 Jun 2008, 08:51
E for me. The author stated that labor representatives' participation is not a practice because unions leaders have to protect employees' interests not management's ones and not to manage the corporations. If leaders nevertheless become a part of top management they will be in conflict bitween interests of union members [who want to raise their wage, for example] and those of firms shareholders and top execs [who cut wages to increase a margin].
It's probably not a true but continuation of reasoning. Let's see OA.

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 30 Apr 2008
Posts: 1870

Kudos [?]: 607 [0], given: 32

Location: Oklahoma City
Schools: Hard Knocks

### Show Tags

05 Jun 2008, 09:02
You state "if leaders nevertheless become a part of top management..." The stem doesn't say anything about that. This question discusses giving the leaders a say, not a position in top management. For this reason, I believe this answer goes beyond the scope of the question and makes a leap unsupported by the stem.

BARFER -> Can you tell me why you believe A is wrong?

barfer wrote:
E for me. The author stated that labor representatives' participation is not a practice because unions leaders have to protect employees' interests not management's ones and not to manage the corporations. If leaders nevertheless become a part of top management they will be in conflict bitween interests of union members [who want to raise their wage, for example] and those of firms shareholders and top execs [who cut wages to increase a margin].
It's probably not a true but continuation of reasoning. Let's see OA.

_________________

------------------------------------
J Allen Morris
**I'm pretty sure I'm right, but then again, I'm just a guy with his head up his a\$\$.

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Kudos [?]: 607 [0], given: 32

Manager
Joined: 31 Jul 2006
Posts: 229

Kudos [?]: 48 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

05 Jun 2008, 11:24
Going for E. The analogy presented in the last statement of the argument would best be followed up by E which clearly points to a conflict of interest displayed in the analogy.

Kudos [?]: 48 [0], given: 0

CEO
Joined: 29 Mar 2007
Posts: 2554

Kudos [?]: 500 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

05 Jun 2008, 12:02
ritula wrote:
In recent years, unions have begun to include in their demands at the collective bargaining table requests for contract provisions which give labor an active voice in determining the goals of a corporation. Although it cannot be denied that labor leaders are highly skilled administrators, it must be recognized that their primary loyalty is and must remain to their membership, not to the corporation. Thus, labor participation in corporate management decisions makes about as much sense as allowing inmates to make decisions about prison security.
Which of the following represents the best continuation of the passage?

The author's reasoning leads to the further conclusion that

1. the authority of corporate managers would be symbolically undermined if labor leaders were allowed to participate in corporate planning.

2. workers have virtually no idea of how to run a large corporation

3. workers would not derive any benefit from hearing the goals of corporate management explained to them at semiannual meetings

4. the efficiency of workers would be lowered if they were to divide their time between production line duties and management responsibilities

5. allowing labor a voice in corporate decisions would involve labor representatives in a conflict of interest

BCD all do not make any sense.

I believe A is backwards in terms of which group the psg is focusing on.

Kudos [?]: 500 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 687

Kudos [?]: 577 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

05 Jun 2008, 12:13
E for me

Thus, labor participation in corporate management decisions makes about as much sense as
Quote:
allowing inmates to make decisions about prison security
.-> this clearly indicates the conflict of interest which is captured in E.
_________________

Persistence+Patience+Persistence+Patience=G...O...A...L

Kudos [?]: 577 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 30 Apr 2008
Posts: 1870

Kudos [?]: 607 [0], given: 32

Location: Oklahoma City
Schools: Hard Knocks

### Show Tags

05 Jun 2008, 12:31
Enough suspence....what's the OA? lol
_________________

------------------------------------
J Allen Morris
**I'm pretty sure I'm right, but then again, I'm just a guy with his head up his a\$\$.

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Kudos [?]: 607 [0], given: 32

VP
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 1262

Kudos [?]: 509 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

05 Jun 2008, 21:12
Thanks all for interesting discussion. well ...OA is E.

Kudos [?]: 509 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 30 Apr 2008
Posts: 1870

Kudos [?]: 607 [0], given: 32

Location: Oklahoma City
Schools: Hard Knocks

### Show Tags

06 Jun 2008, 05:51
The OA doesn't make sense in my opinion. If it does make sense, then the example of prison inmates in the stem doesn't make any sense. If there is a conflict of interest, that implies that the person with the conflict owes a duty. The prison inmates owe no duty to the prison authorities. They certainly have an interest in their own escaping (if they were to get a say in security procedures of the prison). If they were to get a voice in prison security, they have no interest in making security better, so who could that be a conflict?

What it would do is undermine that prison authorities. I can see where the OA is seeing a conflict of interest, but it doesn't seem like the best answer to me. IMO.
_________________

------------------------------------
J Allen Morris
**I'm pretty sure I'm right, but then again, I'm just a guy with his head up his a\$\$.

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Kudos [?]: 607 [0], given: 32

Re: CR-Unions (please give explanation as well)   [#permalink] 06 Jun 2008, 05:51
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
In recent years many cabinetmakers have been winning acclaim 0 09 Feb 2013, 01:03
2 We have heard a good deal in recent years about the 20 27 Oct 2008, 21:43
In recent years, many cabinetmakers have been winning 0 01 Apr 2013, 17:37
1 In recent years many retailers have begun using a sensory 16 26 Dec 2011, 02:00
1 In recent years, unions have begun to include in their 4 02 Aug 2008, 11:17
Display posts from previous: Sort by