Q.18/file CR2
The brief review: the Salcor receives the financial benefit from encouraging the people to have early treatment for high c. Then, Salcor do not need to insure the later-in-life possible heart attack cost. Salcor encourages Garnet. The conclusion: Salcor employees leave earlier-->Salcor has no financial incentive to do so to Renco. (unlike Garnet)
A. If early treatment is does not help to prevent later stoke, Salcor will not save for compensation cost. -->even strengthen the conclusion that there is no financial incentive to do so to R. (and G).
B. ppl get the treatment on their own.IMO, it is lightly neutral to irrelevant.
C. G hires employees significant # of employee from Renco--> it means that however, if the Renco em. are not early treated, Salcor has to pay for the compensation ANYWAY. (better treat early)--> there is financial incentive to do so now to Renco.--> weaken
D. # of employees is out of scope
E. Age of employee is out of scope
I think i could fall into A in the real test, just like you, since choice A. attacks the premise but may i humbly recommend you to stick with conclusion. I think this is what GMAT try to trick us on the hard Q.
donisback, hope this helps