Please review My essay. thanks in advance

The following appeared as part of a memorandum from the vice president of Nostrum, a large pharmaceutical corporation:
“The proposal to increase the health and retirement benefits that our employees receive should not be implemented at this time. An increase in these benefits is not only financially unjustified, since our last year’s profits were lower than those of the preceding year, but also unnecessary, since our chief competitor, Panacea, offers its employees lower health and retirement benefits than we currently offer. We can assume that our employees are reasonably satisfied with the health and retirement benefits that they now have since a recent survey indicated that two-thirds of the respondents viewed them favorably.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Company memorandum suggests not to increase the health & retirement benefits. Editor gives multiple reasons for justifying such a move. Even though the justifications given by the editor seems plausible at first but reasoning is vague & from such vague reasoning one cannot infer such a conclusion.
One of the reasons given by the author to scrap health benefits is the decline in profits ,last year, from the year prior to it. It is implied that corporation is not doing financially good, yet decline in profit can be attributed to many external factors other than the performance of company such as decline in gross profits across pharmaceutical sector or new regulations. If Nostrum was having the highest gross profit then it is a indicator that Nostrum had the best financial performance. The claim that the company had bad financial performance does not hold ground.
Vice president compares the health benefit program of Nostrum to its Chief Competitor Panacea. Such a comparison is biased as it cherry picks only those benefit in which Nostrum does well compared to Panacea. There may be multiple other benefits provided by its competitor which are not provided by Nostrum such as huge bonus, paid vacation & many other benefits etc. A biased comparison which favors Nostrum only makes the argument vulnerable to other criticisms.

Finally, it is presumed that employees are reasonably satisfied with the retirement benefits as survey indicated two third respondents viewed them favorably. There is no indication that survey was conducted across employees of all levels & departments to represent everyone views . Even if the survey was assumed to be unbiased, the term 'favorably' is vague & not definite enough to conclude whether they are happy with overall retirement benefits or with only certain prospects.

Argument can be strengthened by showing few evidences which would reinforce the conclusion. Evidences which indicates the bad performance of company can bolster the argument. Providing a comprehensive comparison of benefits given by both companies would be a strong point that one cannot argue against. If such evidences are provided only then can we infer that better health benefits & increased retirement revenues should not implemented in Nostrum.