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.
Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot
[#permalink]
Show Tags
Updated on: 04 Sep 2018, 22:57
7
48
00:00
A
B
C
D
E
Difficulty:
55% (hard)
Question Stats:
69% (01:36) correct 31% (01:45) wrong based on 2564 sessions
HideShow timer Statistics
In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot survive on minimum wage, the lowest wage an employer is permitted to pay. The government is proposing to raise the minimum wage. Many employers who pay their workers the current minimum wage argue that if it is raised, unemployment will increase because they will no longer be able to afford to employ as many workers.
Which of the following, if true in Stenland, most strongly supports the claim that raising the minimum wage there will not have the effects that the employers predict?
(A) For any position with wages below a living wage, the difficulty of finding and retaining employees adds as much to employment costs as would raising wages.
(B) Raising the minimum wage does not also increase the amount employers have to contribute in employee benefits.
(C) When inflation is taken into account, the proposed new minimum wage is not high as the current one was when it was introduced.
(D) Many employees currently being paid wages at the level of the proposed new minimum wage will demand significant wage increases.
(E) Many employers who pay some workers only the minimum wage also pay other workers wages that are much higher than the minimum.
This is an unusual argument in several ways. First, it includes three separate perspectives: those of the workers, the government, and the employers. Second, the conclusion you need to strengthen is actually in the question stem, not in the argument itself. That conclusion is that raising the minimum wage will not have the effects that the employers predict.
Step 3: Pause and State the Goal
Since this is a Strengthen question, the right answer will support the conclusion. That conclusion is that the employers are not correct about the minimum wage. The right answer will show that increasing the minimum wage might not increase unemployment.
Step 4: Work from Wrong to Right
(A) CORRECT. A living wage refers to a wage on which a worker can survive. In the argument, the workers state that the minimum wage is not a living wage. In order to resolve the workers’ complaint, the minimum wage would need to be raised to at least equal a living wage.
According to this answer choice, employers currently have difficulty finding and retaining employees if their positions do not pay a living wage. This difficulty increases employers’ costs. In fact, according to the answer choice, it adds just as much to employers’ costs as increasing wages would. If the minimum wage was raised, and employers kept the same number of employees, these employers would incur both an increase in costs (since they’d have to pay more in wages), and a decrease in costs (since they’d have to spend less on finding and retaining employees). These costs would balance out, meaning that employers would not need to reduce their workforce to save money. Thus, unemployment would not increase.
(B) This answer choice states that raising the minimum wage would not cause employers to incur another additional cost—the cost of increased benefits. However, the cost of employing the same number of workers would still increase, since the cost of wages would be higher and the cost of benefits would be the same. Therefore, the employers’ argument, that they would be unable to employ as many workers, is still sound.
(C) This answer choice suggests that the minimum wage proposal is generally reasonable. However, the conclusion specifically relates to the effect of the proposal on unemployment, not whether the proposal would raise wages to levels out of line with past practices. The answer choice does not give any information specifically regarding unemployment as it is unknown what unemployment levels were when the minimum wage was introduced.
(D) This would actually support the employers’ claim, since it would cause an even greater increase in the employers’ expenses.
(E) The employers claim that they would not be able to afford to employ as many workers after the minimum wage increase. This is still a reasonable argument even if some of the workers currently make much more than the minimum wage. The employers would have to pay at least some of their employees more than they do currently, and this would increase the employers’ costs, meaning that they couldn’t employ as many people.
Re: In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot
[#permalink]
Show Tags
17 Jun 2016, 12:35
3
2
Jahanzeb3313 wrote:
In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot survive on minimum wage, the lowest wage an employer is permitted to pay. The government is proposing to raise the minimum wage. Many employers who pay their workers the current minimum wage argue that if it is raised, unemployment will increase because they will no longer be able to afford to employ as many workers.
Which of the following, if true in Stenland, most strongly supports the claim that raising the minimum wage there will not have the effects that the employers predict?
A) For any position with wages below a living wage, the difficulty of finding and retaining employees adds as much to employment costs as would raising wages.
B) Raising the minimum wage does not also increase the amount employers have to contribute in employee benefits.
C) When inflation is taken into account, the proposed new minimum wage is not high as the current one was when it was introduced.
D) Many employees currently being paid wages at the level of the proposed new minimum wage will demand significant wage increases.
E) Many employers who pay some workers only the minimum wage also pay other workers wages that are much higher than the minimum.
Employers say that they will not be able to afford to employ as many employees as they today if there is an increase in min. wages. In order to strengthen the claim that raising minimum wages will not have have the effects that employers predict, we have to find a statement that says due to some reason employers will not be able to let go of employees even after minimum wages increase.
A) For any position with wages below a living wage, the difficulty of finding and retaining employees adds as much to employment costs as would raising wages.
Option A says it is not in the best interest of employers to let go of employees on minimum wage if the minimum wage increases, as it will be costly to find and retrain employees.
Re: In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot
[#permalink]
Show Tags
17 Jun 2016, 12:48
We have to strengthen the claim that raising minimum wages does not lead to an increase in unemployment.
A) For any position with wages below a living wage, the difficulty of finding and retaining employees adds as much to employment costs as would raising wages. - Correct. If the difficulty of finding and retaining employees whose wages are below a living wage leads to an expense that is similar to expense resulting from the increase in wages then the employer will be able to afford the increase in minimum wage. So employees are not removed by the employer.
B) Raising the minimum wage does not also increase the amount employers have to contribute in employee benefits. - Incorrect - Out of context
C) When inflation is taken into account, the proposed new minimum wage is not high as the current one was when it was introduced. - Incorrect - Out of context
D) Many employees currently being paid wages at the level of the proposed new minimum wage will demand significant wage increases. - Incorrect - This will lead to an increase in unemployment.
E) Many employers who pay some workers only the minimum wage also pay other workers wages that are much higher than the minimum. - Incorrect - Out of context.
Re: In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot
[#permalink]
Show Tags
17 Jun 2016, 13:24
4
Jahanzeb3313 wrote:
In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot survive on minimum wage, the lowest wage an employer is permitted to pay. The government is proposing to raise the minimum wage. Many employers who pay their workers the current minimum wage argue that if it is raised, unemployment will increase because they will no longer be able to afford to employ as many workers.
Which of the following, if true in Stenland, most strongly supports the claim that raising the minimum wage there will not have the effects that the employers predict?
A) For any position with wages below a living wage, the difficulty of finding and retaining employees adds as much to employment costs as would raising wages.
B) Raising the minimum wage does not also increase the amount employers have to contribute in employee benefits.
C) When inflation is taken into account, the proposed new minimum wage is not high as the current one was when it was introduced.
D) Many employees currently being paid wages at the level of the proposed new minimum wage will demand significant wage increases.
E) Many employers who pay some workers only the minimum wage also pay other workers wages that are much higher than the minimum.
Employer's statement- Unemployment will increase because they will no longer be able to afford to employ as many workers.
We have to find out that employer's prediction is not true. That means employment will not decrease or that employer can afford the employment.
A) For any position with wages below a living wage, the difficulty of finding and retaining employees adds as much to employment costs as would raising wages. It says that cost to maintain the employees at current wage = cost after raising wages.
If cost remains the same, then employee can afford it as there is no additional burden. Correct answer.
B) Raising the minimum wage does not also increase the amount employers have to contribute in employee benefits. Well, that's a good thing for an employer. But raising the wage will increase financial burden, leading to unemploymnet? No answer C) When inflation is taken into account, the proposed new minimum wage is not high as the current one was when it was introduced. Inflation is not talked about in the argument. D) Many employees currently being paid wages at the level of the proposed new minimum wage will demand significant wage increases. So will unemployement increase or decrease? No answer E) Many employers who pay some workers only the minimum wage also pay other workers wages that are much higher than the minimum. Good for employees, but it still doesn't address our concern.
_________________
I welcome critical analysis of my post!! That will help me reach 700+
Re: In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot
[#permalink]
Show Tags
23 Aug 2016, 04:33
1
(E) suggests that Employers can afford to increase the minimum wage, by adjusting wages of workers who are paid much higher than minimum now. So, there won't be unemployment because the min wage is raised. So, I thought it was E.
Re: In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot
[#permalink]
Show Tags
23 Aug 2016, 13:54
1
vikram.karthick@gmail.com wrote:
(E) suggests that Employers can afford to increase the minimum wage, by adjusting wages of workers who are paid much higher than minimum now. So, there won't be unemployment because the min wage is raised. So, I thought it was E.
Between A and E. The former directly states that costs will increase if employeers don't raise minimum wage. E says that employeers can pay more than minimum wage but "more" doesn't mean "more than workers need". So A is better
_________________
Re: In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot
[#permalink]
Show Tags
19 Sep 2016, 20:31
In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot survive on minimum wage, the lowest wage an employer is permitted to pay. The government is proposing to raise the minimum wage. Many employers who pay their workers the current minimum wage argue that if it is raised, unemployment will increase because they will no longer be able to afford to employ as many workers.
Which of the following, if true in Stenland, most strongly supports the claim that raising the minimum wage there will not have the effects that the employers predict?
Type- Strengthen Boil it down - Employers argue that if minimum wage is increased , unemployment will increase Goal - Support the claim raising the minimum wage there will not have the effects that the employers predict
A) For any position with wages below a living wage, the difficulty of finding and retaining employees adds as much to employment costs as would raising wages. There is no incentive to find cheaper workers as the total cost of employment will remain same . Correct
B) Raising the minimum wage does not also increase the amount employers have to contribute in employee benefits. No employee benefits is good for employer but still the employer has to pay extra wage . Incorrect
C) When inflation is taken into account, the proposed new minimum wage is not high as the current one was when it was introduced. Out of scope
D) Many employees currently being paid wages at the level of the proposed new minimum wage will demand significant wage increases. Irrelevant
E) Many employers who pay some workers only the minimum wage also pay other workers wages that are much higher than the minimum. Irrelevant - a few of the other workers may have a different skill set or experience . This statement does not help us in any way .
Answer A
_________________
When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane takes off against the wind, not with it. - Henry Ford The Moment You Think About Giving Up, Think Of The Reason Why You Held On So Long +1 Kudos if you find this post helpful
Re: In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot
[#permalink]
Show Tags
10 Oct 2016, 00:39
Hi chetan2u, My inference from the question was that we should have a choice which states that the number of employees can't decrease. Because if there is any possibility that the number of employees currently working is more than the number required, employers may fire extra people, thus increasing unemployment. Although there was no such choice.
But in choice A, it says that finding new people will take as much amount out of their pocket as raising minimum wage. But what if they can just fire some employees and they don't need to find new people.
Re: In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot
[#permalink]
Show Tags
10 Oct 2016, 06:56
1
Navinder wrote:
Hi chetan2u, My inference from the question was that we should have a choice which states that the number of employees can't decrease. Because if there is any possibility that the number of employees currently working is more than the number required, employers may fire extra people, thus increasing unemployment. Although there was no such choice.
But in choice A, it says that finding new people will take as much amount out of their pocket as raising minimum wage. But what if they can just fire some employees and they don't need to find new people.
Thanks
Hi, The question talks of not only new BUT also RETAINING employees.... So it is OK on that front...
Yes I do find " wages below living wage" slightly uncomfortable as it weakens the reasoning..
_________________
Re: In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot
[#permalink]
Show Tags
17 Jan 2017, 16:25
A) For any position with wages below a living wage, the difficulty of finding and retaining employees adds as much to employment costs as would raising wages.
correct choice as it states that the cost of finding new worker and other expenses also add to the burden of employers,so the chice is weakening the employers argument
B) Raising the minimum wage does not also increase the amount employers have to contribute in employee benefits.
out of scope C) When inflation is taken into account, the proposed new minimum wage is not high as the current one was when it was introduced. Out of scope D) Many employees currently being paid wages at the level of the proposed new minimum wage will demand significant wage increases. supports the empoyeers point E) Many employers who pay some workers only the minimum wage also pay other workers wages that are much higher than the minimum. the discussion is about the lowest payment and not the highest.
Status: Final Call! Will Achieve Target ANyHow This Tym! :)
Joined: 05 Jan 2016
Posts: 82
Location: India
GMAT 1: 620 Q49 V25
GPA: 3.8
Re: In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot
[#permalink]
Show Tags
13 Aug 2017, 23:02
In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot survive on minimum wage, the lowest wage an employer is permitted to pay. The government is proposing to raise the minimum wage. Many employers who pay their workers the current minimum wage argue that if it is raised, unemployment will increase because they will no longer be able to afford to employ as many workers.
Which of the following, if true in Stenland, most strongly supports the claim that raising the minimum wage there will not have the effects that the employers predict? Crux of the Question -- Raising the minimum wage will not lead to increase in unemployment.
A) For any position with wages below a living wage, the difficulty of finding and retaining employees adds as much to employment costs as would raising wages. The difficulty of finding and retaining employees adds as much to employment costs as raising the minimum wage so it supports the conclusion that raising the minimum wage there will not have the effects that the employers predict.
B) Raising the minimum wage does not also increase the amount employers have to contribute in employee benefits. As per the argument, Raising the minimum wage --> Increase in Unemployment. Are we really concerned with what else will simultaneously increase/decrease with the increase of minimum wage?? As per the argument we just know that raising the minimum wage will lead to an increase in unemployment. Raise in Minimum wage itself is causing employers to say that they will no longer be able to afford to employ as many workers. Anything in addition/extra thus, does not really matter.
Even if the amount employers have to contribute in employee benefits increases, it worsens the scenario. It acts as an addon to the problem of unemployment which is mentioned in the argument. Analogy, if I cannot afford a 5$ lead pencil, knowing that along with the purchase of a 5$ pencil, I do not need to pay for 2$ lead for after usage, makes the argument stand as it is.
The other case, if the amount employers have to contribute in employee benefits does not increase the amount employers have to contribute in employee benefits - it means the amount could be same or it decrease. But knowing this information does really matter?? No, Right? Because anyways, the minimum wage is still increased, so the argument stands as it is.
C) When inflation is taken into account, the proposed new minimum wage is not high as the current one was when it was introduced. Okay.. But so what? Do we really need to take inflation into account? Is the argument concerned about inflation?? Argument is just concerned with the fact that minimum wage would be increased, and whether after considering any other factor makes that cost seem less, that does not really matter because anyways, as a whole, the minimum wage is still increased, so the argument stands as it is.
D) Many employees currently being paid wages at the level of the proposed new minimum wage will demand significant wage increases. so what? are we concerned with those employees, who are currently being paid wages at the level of the proposed new minimum wage, and their demands.. No, right? So, irrelevant.
ALso, just demanding does not mean that their demands will be fulfilled. So, it adds nothing to the existing stimulus.
E) Many employers who pay some workers only the minimum wage also pay other workers wages that are much higher than the minimum. Definitely that's true. But we are not concerned with those workers. Our argument is basically concerned with increase in minimum wage. Not with the proportion of wages compared with the minimum paid workers. So, irrelevant.
Options D and E are totally irrelevant and could be quickly eliminated.
_________________
Regards, Varun
Trying my best..... will succeed definitely! :)
The Moment You Think About Giving Up, Think Of The Reason Why You Held On So Long. +1 Kudos if you find this post helpful. :)
Do Check OG 2017 SC Solutions -http://gmatwithcj.com/solutions-gmat-official-guide-2017-sentence-correction-questions/
Re: In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot
[#permalink]
Show Tags
08 Apr 2018, 23:30
hello expert
i am unable to comprehend option A let me first present my understanding of the argument as per the question stem, conclusion:increase in minimum wage will not lead to increase in unemployment employer:with increase in minimum wage,the employer will not able to employ as many workers.so unemployment increase pre-thinking: what if ,with increase in wage,the company reduces some benefits to the workers provided earlier,so the total cost to employee will be same and no firing in the office option A:cost of finding and retaining employees at min. wage=cost of increase in wage
doubt: in the argument the employer says it can not employ as many people.that means some people will be fired. option A:focuses on hiring new people
Re: In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot
[#permalink]
Show Tags
08 Apr 2018, 23:47
1
The employer says that he will not be able to afford the minimum wage once it is increased and therefore the unemployment will increase.
Yes, the employer assumes that he will fire few workers and hire new workers to compensate the wage increase. But, what if finding new workers costs as much as paying the increased wages? In that case, the employer will not fire his workers and hence there won't be a case for unemployment.
JAIN09 wrote:
hello expert
i am unable to comprehend option A let me first present my understanding of the argument as per the question stem, conclusion:increase in minimum wage will not lead to increase in unemployment employer:with increase in minimum wage,the employer will not able to employ as many workers.so unemployment increase pre-thinking: what if ,with increase in wage,the company reduces some benefits to the workers provided earlier,so the total cost to employee will be same and no firing in the office option A:cost of finding and retaining employees at min. wage=cost of increase in wage
doubt: in the argument the employer says it can not employ as many people.that means some people will be fired. option A:focuses on hiring new people
Re: In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot
[#permalink]
Show Tags
14 Apr 2018, 00:58
In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot survive on minimum wage, the lowest wage an employer is permitted to pay. The government is proposing to raise the minimum wage. Many employers who pay their workers the current minimum wage argue that if it is raised, unemployment will increase because they will no longer be able to afford to employ as many workers.
This is a strengthen the argument question. Like weaken, strengthen questions also require us to isolate the conclusion. As we will be looking for the answer that makes our belief stronger on the premise-conclusion relationship such as analogies, survey, reports, statistical data etc. Protect the missing information a) by keeping any option that fills the gap b) by eliminating the answer that attacks the missing information
Conclusion: "Unemployment will increase because ERs will no longer be able to afford to employ as many workers." We have to prove the opposite of it, which is "Unemployment will NOT increase because ERs WILL be able to afford to employ as many workers."
Which of the following, if true in Stenland, most strongly supports the claim that raising the minimum wage there will not have the effects that the employers predict?
(A) For any position with wages below a living wage, the difficulty of finding and retaining employees adds as much to employment costs as would raising wages. If the cost of finding and retaining EEs is same as raising wages then why would the ERs leave their current EEs. That means "Unemployment will NOT increase because ERs WILL be able to afford to employ as many workers." This is the answer.
(B) Raising the minimum wage does not also increase the amount employers have to contribute in employee benefits. This option may be an assumption but doesn't strengthen the argument. Although this covers the affordability part of the conclusion but doesn't make me believe stronger that the unemployment rate will not be higher.
(C) When inflation is taken into account, the proposed new minimum wage is not high as the current one was when it was introduced. This is out of scope. We are not talking about a specific situation. Eliminate.
(D) Many employees currently being paid wages at the level of the proposed new minimum wage will demand significant wage increases. Let them do so. It doesn't help me with my conclusion. I don't know whether it will have any impact on the unemployment.
(E) Many employers who pay some workers only the minimum wage also pay other workers wages that are much higher than the minimum. How many ERs? and How many workers? We don't know anything about this. Eliminate.
Re: In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot
[#permalink]
Show Tags
16 Apr 2018, 10:54
2
Vyshak wrote:
Because the focus of the argument is on unemployment and not on paying the minimum wages
JAIN09 wrote:
sir,as the employer is unable to pay minimum(new) wage to employees.so hiring new employees will lead the employer to pay new minimum wage so the company will come back to square one. from POE,only correct choice is A.but why we are considering hiring at all if the company have to pay increase minimum wage to the new workers
Posted from my mobile device
Kudos Vyshak for the replies! I'll add my two cents, too...
Quote:
(A) For any position with wages below a living wage, the difficulty of finding and retaining employees adds as much to employment costs as would raising wages.
Choice (A) refers to the CURRENT cost of finding and retaining employees. Let's say that an employer pays $5 per hour and that employees need $8 per hour to earn a "living wage." The employer might be saving money by paying $5/hour instead of $8/hour but, according to (A), there is another hidden cost: having to find and retain employees who are willing to work for such low pay is costly.
For example, workers would obviously prefer to work someplace that pays more. They might take the job for $5/hour when they are desperate, but as soon as they find something a little better, they will likely quit. (A) implies that the employer will constantly have to waste time and money finding and replacing workers. According to (A), this hidden cost is the same as the cost of raising wages to $8.
So changing the minimum wage to $8 will increase the amount the employer spends on wages but will DECREASE the amount the employer spends finding/replacing workers. If (A) is true, then implementing the minimum wage should have no net effect on the employer's bottom line.
Need an expert reply? Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja in your post. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.
Re: In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot
[#permalink]
Show Tags
13 Jul 2018, 12:48
Jahanzeb3313 wrote:
In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot survive on minimum wage, the lowest wage an employer is permitted to pay. The government is proposing to raise the minimum wage. Many employers who pay their workers the current minimum wage argue that if it is raised, unemployment will increase because they will no longer be able to afford to employ as many workers.
Which of the following, if true in Stenland, most strongly supports the claim that raising the minimum wage there will not have the effects that the employers predict?
(A) For any position with wages below a living wage, the difficulty of finding and retaining employees adds as much to employment costs as would raising wages.
(B) Raising the minimum wage does not also increase the amount employers have to contribute in employee benefits.
(C) When inflation is taken into account, the proposed new minimum wage is not high as the current one was when it was introduced.
(D) Many employees currently being paid wages at the level of the proposed new minimum wage will demand significant wage increases.
(E) Many employers who pay some workers only the minimum wage also pay other workers wages that are much higher than the minimum.
Argument Construction: Workers complain about not able to survive on existing min wage. Govt plans to inc min wage Employers Protest saying if min wage inc , they cant afford many employee So they conclude that inc in min wage would eventually inc unemployment. Govt says no effect on unemp after inc the min wage to be paid for employee
there are essentially two conclusions in the argument, one presented by employers and one stated by Govt.
Assumption made by employers while concluding their argument: The proportion of employees (min wage workers.) that they employee are high. ( because the wage in is only for min wage workers) The cost to the company for paying the increased wages would increase significantly such that costs would outweigh their budgets for employing the workers.
Govt while drawing this conclusion must have taken certain factors( assumption) into consideration. 1.if you remove workers from the job that would impact you negatively more than increasing the wages.
Option A essentially says: Even if you were to fire and hire new workers whom you wished to pay below that proposed min wage, it would turn out to be much difficult and cost of that( find the employee, induction cost, and all while loss due to unavailability of same during the period) would be much more or equal to that of raising wages for current employee.
So A actually strengthens Govt Position.
(B) Raising the minimum wage does not also increase the amount employers have to contribute in employee benefits.
Emp Cost = wage + emp benfits Option B essentially says the other component ( emp benfits) are not inc, but still the argument made by Employeers hold that inc in Wage would inc the employement cost , hence would have to let go many of them .
So, B is still in favor of Employers. Hence B is incorrect.
(C) When inflation is taken into account, the proposed new minimum wage is not high as the current one was when it was introduced.
So lets roll back to time when current min wage was imposed. At that time min wage implemented was high taking inflation into account. So Worker were already being paid little high considering the inflation then.
Today when we are to increase the min wage ( which was already high since last time it went to effect) could actually do more harm than good for employment.
So C is incorrect
(D) Many employees currently being paid wages at the level of the proposed new minimum wage will demand significant wage increases.
Lets say current min wage/hr is 30$ Proposed min wage is 45$ So D talks about Group of workers who's current wage is 45$/hr, will demand increase in wage. (Yes they sound Justified enough for asking the inc in wages) More money then employers have to bear. Hence D is incorrect
(E) Many employers who pay some workers only the minimum wage also pay other workers wages that are much higher than the minimum. Now Lets take a scenario No of Employees paid min wage 30 No Employees Paid greater than min 20 So if we increase minimum wage, then this effect would be for 60% employees of the company. Definitely costs will rise.
Re: In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot
[#permalink]
Show Tags
28 Jul 2018, 22:40
Premise: 1. workers have been complaining that they cannot survive on minimum wage 2. The government is proposing to raise the minimum wage. 3. Many employers who pay their workers the current minimum wage argue that if it is raised, unemployment will increase 4. they will no longer be able to afford to employ as many workers.
Pre-think: Why employers said that they will not able to afford to employ as many workers. May be they have fixed spendings on employee's salary. So they could not cross it. and if they did it will reduce their revenue/profit. this means they have to fire a few employees. lets think something against all this. Well if employer will fire the employees, the company will not survive. So either way if company will fail then company will like to keep employee, As this way they have a chance to suceed.
Which of the following, if true in Stenland, most strongly supports the claim that raising the minimum wage there will not have the effects that the employers predict?
(A) For any position with wages below a living wage, the difficulty of finding and retaining employees adds as much to employment costs as would raising wages. --- so if firing an employee orraising wage is adding same cost to company, they will like to retain the employee.
(B) Raising the minimum wage does not also increase the amount employers have to contribute in employee benefits.--- out of the scope.
(C) When inflation is taken into account, the proposed new minimum wage is not high as the current one was when it was introduced. --- well may be this is true, but it is still not changing the fact that employer have to retain the employees with higher wages.
(D) Many employees currently being paid wages at the level of the proposed new minimum wage will demand significant wage increases. --- well they dont have to company will have to do this or fire them.
(E) Many employers who pay some workers only the minimum wage also pay other workers wages that are much higher than the minimum. --- i think for such companies this will not be a trouble as already they are paying higher to some and others not. now they have to increase wages for rest of the employee or fire them. but this option is not explaning why not to fire these rest of the employee.
A is best of the lot. _________________
Thanks! Do give some kudos.
Simple strategy: “Once you’ve eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”
Re: In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot
[#permalink]
Show Tags
25 Sep 2018, 20:07
A) For any position with wages below a living wage, the difficulty of finding and retaining employees adds as much to employment costs as would raising wages. (C) When inflation is taken into account, the proposed new minimum wage is not high as the current one was when it was introduced.
Dear Team
I was very much lost between A & C, though I chose A as I felt it is stronger than C and also I might not have fully comprehended statement C
May I request if someone can help me understand what C means and how it fits into the argument ?
In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot
[#permalink]
Show Tags
04 Oct 2018, 01:47
1
proabhinav wrote:
A) For any position with wages below a living wage, the difficulty of finding and retaining employees adds as much to employment costs as would raising wages. (C) When inflation is taken into account, the proposed new minimum wage is not high as the current one was when it was introduced.
Dear Team
I was very much lost between A & C, though I chose A as I felt it is stronger than C and also I might not have fully comprehended statement C
May I request if someone can help me understand what C means and how it fits into the argument ?
Hi! I'm not an expert (at least until now), but trying to help.
In point C, we only talk about "how much is our minimum wage now -- especially in comparison with the first minimum wage (when it was introduced)"
Does this answer discuss about affordability of this new wage for employers? I don't think so.
The minimum wage can be HIGHER than the first minimum wage, but employers can easily afford it. The minimum wage also can be significantly LOWER than the first minimum wage, but employers cannot afford it.
Hope this helps!
_________________
There's an app for that - Steve Jobs.
gmatclubot
In Stenland, many workers have been complaining that they cannot &nbs
[#permalink]
04 Oct 2018, 01:47
close
69% (01:36) correct 
