It is currently 18 Jan 2018, 02:18

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.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 03 Jul 2015
Posts: 70

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 41

Concentration: Marketing, Finance
Re: Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Jun 2016, 08:11
Still confused among B C and D
I am not saying C cannot be the answer but on what basis can we eliminate answer choices B and D?

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 41

2 KUDOS received
Director
Director
User avatar
G
Joined: 26 Oct 2016
Posts: 688

Kudos [?]: 274 [2], given: 855

Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, International Business
Schools: HBS '19
GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V44
GPA: 4
WE: Education (Education)
Re: Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 May 2017, 05:33
2
This post received
KUDOS
P1: Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people in safety-sensitive jobs have drinking problems than when none do.
P2: Since, even after treatment, people who have had drinking problems are somewhat more likely than other people to have drinking problems in the future,
Conclusion: any employer trying to reduce the risk of accidents should bar anyone who has ever been treating for a drinking problem from holding a safety=sensitive job.

The argument goes as follows:
- accidents are more frequent when people in the safety business have drinking problems
- people who've had drinking problems stand a greater chance of have drinking problems in the future
- in order to reduce the risk of accidents, employers must not hire anyone who has been treated for drinking issues

B is definitely out because it does not touch on the issue of "people with drinking problems". The argument specifically discusses reducing risk of accidents as a result of having fewer employees with a history of alcohol abuse. In this respect, B is somewhat like A: it's an issue that's parallel to the argument itself.

OK so C presents an issue with such an unforgiving policy, i.e. not hiring anyone who's had treatment: this creates an incentive for people with issues to lie. If such a policy were not in place, then people might seek treatment and therefore fewer people with drinking problems will be on the job. However, if you make it clear that anyone who's been treated before is not welcome, such a drastic measure might discourage some from seeking help, which means that they'll do anything in their power to avoid being detected. In other words, such a policy (of not hiring someone who's received help in the past) might backfire because people now have an added incentive to lie about their condition. So C is a good option (not a perfect one).

Now D is one of my favorite options because it presents a different cause for something. It's the jobs themselves that are making people more likely to have drinking problems. So the idea you could derive from this option is that no matter what you do, you won't be able to eliminate the risk of accidents completely, since the job in itself is stressful and causes people to drink. However, you'd be missing a very subtle note here: the phrase that makes this option less convincing is "exacerbate problems that they may have". If you don't have drinking problems to begin with, then you won't necessarily develop them later. If you already do, then it get even worse and the potential for issues later on greatly increases. D actually supports the passage.




The correct answer is definitely choice C, as many have pointed out.

Choice C tells us that current workers may actually have a (current) drinking problem. So, by replacing them with those who have been treated for their drinking problem, we may actually decrease the risk of accidents, thereby weakening the argument.

That some companies' policy is to put drinkers in residential treatment is clealy irrelelvant. Thus, choice A is incorrect.

Because the argument was about reducing the risk of accident through a certain policy, that some accidents are attributable to an alternative explanation is irrelevant. Thus, choice B is incorrect.

We don't care that safety-sensiive job holders are more likely to become drinkers. We care about whether the policy against hiring them will lead to a reduction in the risk of accident. Thus, choice D is incorrect.

Choice E is wrong for the same reason that choice B is wrong: that some accidents are attributable to an alternative explanation is irrelevant.
_________________

Thanks & Regards,
Anaira Mitch

Kudos [?]: 274 [2], given: 855

Director
Director
User avatar
G
Joined: 26 Oct 2016
Posts: 688

Kudos [?]: 274 [0], given: 855

Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, International Business
Schools: HBS '19
GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V44
GPA: 4
WE: Education (Education)
Re: Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 May 2017, 11:12
lavya07 wrote:
Why is B wrong?


B is out because it does not touch on the issue of "people with drinking problems". The argument specifically discusses reducing the risk of accidents as a result of having fewer employees with a history of alcohol abuse. In this respect, B is somewhat like A: it's an issue that's parallel to the argument itself.
_________________

Thanks & Regards,
Anaira Mitch

Kudos [?]: 274 [0], given: 855

Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 04 Oct 2016
Posts: 171

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 11

Location: China
Concentration: Healthcare, Entrepreneurship
WE: Sales (Health Care)
Re: Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 Aug 2017, 21:01
durgesh79 wrote:
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument above?

Some companies place employees who are being treated for drinking problems in residential programs and allow them several weeks of paid sick leave
No connection with the question stem - Drop it

Many accidents in the workplace are the result of errors by employees who do not hold safety-sensitive jobs.
"many" does not give enough information. and i think it goes against the premise of the question - drop it

Workers who would permanently lose their jos if they sought treatment for a drinking problem try instead to conceal their problem and continue working for as long as possible.
If there is no record of any treatment of drinking problem, the employer wont bar workers from working in safety-sensetive jobs and still have the risk of accidents - keep it

People who hld safety-sentive jobs are subject to stresses that can exacerbate any personal problems they may have, including drinking problems.
This is a tricky / trap options. It says that stress can increase the risk of drinking problem (which employee already had). please see the word "exacerbate". it doesnt say that due to stress employee will start drinking. So in my opinion this option actually supports the conclusion. It gives another reason to emplyer not to put peeple with prior drinking problems on this job. Drop it

Some industrial accidents are caused by equipment failure rather than by emplyer error.
"some" doesnt give enough information - Drop it

u have made a clearance btw B C&D, very helpful~
_________________

LSAT CR is driving me mad

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 11

Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
V
Status: Greatness begins beyond your comfort zone
Joined: 08 Dec 2013
Posts: 1890

Kudos [?]: 1128 [0], given: 93

Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Schools: Kelley '20, ISB '19
GPA: 3.2
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Aug 2017, 12:05
Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people in safety-sensitive jobs have drinking problems than when none do. Since, even after treatment, people who have had drinking problems are somewhat more likely than other people to have drinking problems in the future, any employer trying to reduce the risk of accidents should bar anyone who has ever been treating for a drinking problem from holding a safety-sensitive job.

Type - weaken
Boil it down - Any employer trying to reduce the risk of accidents should bar anyone who has ever been treating for a drinking problem from holding a safety-sensitive job since people who have had drinking problems are somewhat more likely than other people to have drinking problems in the future

A.Some companies place employees who are being treated for drinking problems in residential programs and allow them several weeks of paid sick leave - Irrelevant

B.Many accidents in the workplace are the result of errors by employees who do not hold safety-sensitive jobs. - Incorrect - we are only concerned with safety- sensitive jobs

C.Workers who would permanently lose their jobs if they sought treatment for a drinking problem try instead to conceal their problem and continue working for as long as possible. - Correct

D.People who hold safety-sensitive jobs are subject to stresses that can exacerbate any personal problems they may have, including drinking problems. - Incorrect - this is just a nature of the job and does not undermine the plan

E.Some industrial accidents are caused by equipment failure rather than by employer error. - Out of scope - we are not concerned about accidents caused by equipment failure

Answer C
_________________

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

Kudos [?]: 1128 [0], given: 93

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 04 Feb 2014
Posts: 269

Kudos [?]: 134 [0], given: 164

Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 3
WE: Project Management (Manufacturing)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Sep 2017, 20:40
D is close but I would go for C....However still not clear why D is wrong...
_________________

Kudos if you like my post

Kudos [?]: 134 [0], given: 164

Manager
Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 14 Mar 2011
Posts: 147

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 313

GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Sep 2017, 03:06
anurag16 wrote:
D is close but I would go for C....However still not clear why D is wrong...


The whole scope of the passage deals with the result of the drinking problem [ and "ways" how those disastrous/unwanted result can be eliminated/reduced], so what caused the "drinking problems" at first place is irrelevant to the argument because the central assumption is that drinking problems do exist, and that's what matters. Therefore, reject D.

Cheers !!
_________________

If you find my posts/replies helpful, please take a moment to click on the "kudos" icon.

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 313

Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 21 Sep 2015
Posts: 61

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 29

Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Oct 2017, 05:59
Can we fix some of the ridiculous typos on this?

accidents should bar anyone hwo has ever been treating for a drinking problem from holding a safety=sensitive job

should be

accidents should bar anyone WHO has ever been TREATED for a drinking problem from holding a safety-sensitive job
_________________

Insanity at its finest.

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 29

Director
Director
User avatar
P
Joined: 28 Mar 2017
Posts: 818

Kudos [?]: 209 [0], given: 143

CAT Tests
Re: Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Oct 2017, 10:30
alimad wrote:
Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people in safety-sensitive jobs have drinking problems than when none do. Since, even after treatment, people who have had drinking problems are somewhat more likely than other people to have drinking problems in the future, any employer trying to reduce the risk of accidents should bar anyone hwo has ever been treating for a drinking problem from holding a safety=sensitive job.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument above?

A.Some companies place employees who are being treated for drinking problems in residential programs and allow them several weeks of paid sick leave

B.Many accidents in the workplace are the result of errors by employees who do not hold safety-sensitive jobs.

C.Workers who would permanently lose their jos if they sought treatment for a drinking problem try instead to conceal their problem and continue working for as long as possible.

D.People who hld safety-sentive jobs are subject to stresses that can exacerbate any personal problems they may have, including drinking problems.

E.Some industrial accidents are caused by equipment failure rather than by employer error.

Please provide some details with your choice.


C
_________________

Kudos if my post helps!

Helpful links:
1. Useful Formulae, Concepts and Tricks-Quant
2. e-GMAT's ALL SC Compilation
3. LSAT RC compilation
4. Actual LSAT CR collection by Broal
5. QOTD RC (Carcass)
6. Challange OG RC

Kudos [?]: 209 [0], given: 143

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
G
Status: Countdown Begins...
Joined: 03 Jul 2016
Posts: 308

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 76

Location: India
Concentration: Technology, Strategy
Schools: IIMB
GMAT 1: 580 Q48 V22
GPA: 3.7
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Oct 2017, 20:33
Verbal Moderators please clear the typos in the problem.

Thanks!
_________________

Need Kudos to unlock GMAT Club tests

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 76

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 11 Jun 2017
Posts: 84

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 8

Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Nov 2017, 08:20
alimad wrote:
Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people in safety-sensitive jobs have drinking problems than when none do. Since, even after treatment, people who have had drinking problems are somewhat more likely than other people to have drinking problems in the future, any employer trying to reduce the risk of accidents should bar anyone who has ever been treating for a drinking problem from holding a safety=sensitive job. .


Between C and D, it should be C. The argument states that since number of accidents in safety sensitive jobs are common in people having drinking problems, the employer should bar anyone who has drinking problems from holding such a job.

alimad wrote:
C.Workers who would permanently lose their jos if they sought treatment for a drinking problem try instead to conceal their problem and continue working for as long as possible .

If the workers begin to hide their drinking problems, the employers will not be able to identify these people and will not be able to bar them. This weakens. Although, I feel the argument says that employers "should" bar, this option focuses on the "could / could not" bar. It says that since they will conceal their problem, the employers just won't be able to identify them and bar. On the other hand, the argument focuses more on the fact that since they have drinking problems, they should be barred and something that says they should not be barred, could have been better.

alimad wrote:
D.People who hold safety-sentive jobs are subject to stresses that can exacerbate any personal problems they may have, including drinking problems.

This states that people holding a safety sensitive job can automatically worsen any personal problem, so even though it may have worsened other personal problems, the highest rate of accidents are still because of drinking problems, so this is not a weakener.

GMATNinja Hi
Can you please go through the argument and my reasoning and provide your comments. I definitely feel C is a better answer but it weakens the conclusion by stating that the employers won't be able to bar only. The argument says that that the employers SHOULD bar, so if an option, would have specifically been targeted at showing why they SHOULD NOT bar, wouldn't it have been better ?

Thanks in advance! :-)

Last edited by Poorvasha on 09 Nov 2017, 07:29, edited 2 times in total.

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 8

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 12 Aug 2017
Posts: 2

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 31

Re: Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Nov 2017, 09:02
As it is said in the argument that employer trying to reduce the risk of accidents should bar anyone who was/is being treated for the problem and would not be given the jobs. So the answer choice that would weaken the argument is that if the employer does not know about the problem of an employee then he cannot remove that employee. This brings us to option C that fits aptly.

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 31

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 29 Nov 2015
Posts: 1

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

Re: Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Nov 2017, 09:20
I don't think it's C.

The argument is companies should bar people from holding safety-sensitive job, not other jobs. This means they do not permanently lose their job. C brings in "permanently losing their job". Also, this true in real life, but in GMAT, questions always try to exploit your experience in real life to make you choose the wrong option. I can counter-argue by saying: these people don't lose their job, they can do non-safety-sensitive jobs... such as janitorial jobs.

In B, if accidents come from employees who don't hold safety-sensitive jobs, then the argument's assumption is wrong, and the conclusion is also wrong (it should be: barring employees from holding ALL jobs), so it weakens the argument.

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

Expert Post
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
G
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 7863

Kudos [?]: 18465 [0], given: 237

Location: Pune, India
Re: Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Nov 2017, 00:13
alimad wrote:
Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people in safety-sensitive jobs have drinking problems than when none do. Since, even after treatment, people who have had drinking problems are somewhat more likely than other people to have drinking problems in the future, any employer trying to reduce the risk of accidents should bar anyone hwo has ever been treating for a drinking problem from holding a safety=sensitive job.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument above?

A.Some companies place employees who are being treated for drinking problems in residential programs and allow them several weeks of paid sick leave

B.Many accidents in the workplace are the result of errors by employees who do not hold safety-sensitive jobs.

C.Workers who would permanently lose their jos if they sought treatment for a drinking problem try instead to conceal their problem and continue working for as long as possible.

D.People who hld safety-sentive jobs are subject to stresses that can exacerbate any personal problems they may have, including drinking problems.

E.Some industrial accidents are caused by equipment failure rather than by employer error.

Please provide some details with your choice.



Premises:
Industrial accidents are more common when some people in safety-sensitive jobs have drinking problems than when none do.
Even after treatment, people with a history are more likely to have drinking problems again

Conclusion: To reduce the risk of accidents bar anyone who has ever been treated for a drinking problem from holding a safety-sensitive job.

We need to weaken it.

Options (B), (C) and (D) seem to be causing trouble.

B.Many accidents in the workplace are the result of errors by employees who do not hold safety-sensitive jobs.

"Many accidents" are caused by employees who do not hold safety sensitive jobs. But we are given that Industrial accidents are MORE common when some people in safety-sensitive jobs have drinking problems than when none do. So the accidents become MORE common in our context. It doesn't matter how many take place in other circumstances.

C.Workers who would permanently lose their jos if they sought treatment for a drinking problem try instead to conceal their problem and continue working for as long as possible.
Our conclusion says that we should bar anyone "who has ever been treated". It doesn't say bar anyone who has a drinking problem (which might be far more difficult to identify anyway). If there is a policy in which workers who take treatment are barred from their jobs, workers with drinking problem may decide to not seek treatment at all. In that case, the risk of accidents will not reduce. Hence this is the answer.

D.People who hld safety-sentive jobs are subject to stresses that can exacerbate any personal problems they may have, including drinking problems.

Safety sensitive jobs could worsen the drinking problem. So that is more of a reason to not hire people with drinking problem (mind you, not those who have sought treatment) on such jobs. It doesn't weaken our conclusion.

Answer (C)
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for $199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Kudos [?]: 18465 [0], given: 237

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 09 Nov 2017
Posts: 5

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

Re: Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Nov 2017, 01:14
gmatnub wrote:
C

if people get fired by admitting that they have a problem and come to treatment, then they will not come to treatment or admit that they have a problem. Therefore you will have a bunch of people working with problems, and they create safety hazards.



create safety hazards?

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

Verbal Forum Moderator
avatar
B
Joined: 13 Feb 2015
Posts: 890

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 32

Premium Member
Re: Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Dec 2017, 17:33
Merged topics. Please, search before posting questions!
_________________

Please Read: Verbal Posting Rules

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 32

Re: Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people   [#permalink] 10 Dec 2017, 17:33

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   [ 56 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.