Recently, All Trees Lumber Company has been accused of racial discrimi

Question

Recently, All Trees Lumber Company has been accused of racial discrimination in hiring and promotion practices. The plaintiffs point to the fact that, of top executives, only 3 of 30 are people of color. At the same time, the majority of the people doing entry-level labor in the lumber mills are people of color. They assert that people of color are only hired to do lower-paid, high risk work at All Trees.

How could the lawyers for All Trees best refute the claims of racial discrimination?

A By showing that all executives at the same level make the same salary, regardless of race.

B By showing that people awarded promotions had the same or better qualifications than those rejected.

C By demonstrating that it is necessary to have a college degree to earn a promotion.

D By giving the statistics of the number of white employees doing entry-level jobs.

E By actively recruiting white applicants for entry-level jobs.

Adi93 · Answer

IMO B
it gives alternate reasoning that people get awarded because of better qualifications not because of racial discrimination.

jainan · Answer

Adi93

Hi, can you please explain why option C is incorrect. Can't option C mean that degree is the differentiating factor and not the color?

Thank you.

Regards,
Ankita

SonalSinha803 · Answer

Since, the argument has been developed on the basis of data, so only by means of data/statistics can this argument be weakened. B and C both provide alternative reasons, but argument has used data, so to oppose we better present our data of white men being hired and promoted.

Thus, after a lot of pondering between B,C and D ...I chose D.

Sent from my Lenovo K53a48 using GMAT Club Forum mobile app

Thus, after a lot of pondering between B,C and D ...I chose D.

Sent from my Lenovo K53a48 using  GMAT Club Forum mobile app

olito · Answer

This looks a bit different than usual, but it is nothing more than a weakening question.

Structure of the argument :

Premise 1  : only 3 out of 30 top executives are people of color
 Premise 2  : Majority of the people doing entry level labour are people of color 
 Conclusion  : People of color are only hired to do lower-paid and high risk work.

The assumption this argument makes is that  there is no other factor than race that gives people the opportunity to occupy higher positions.

The right answer choice will provide another factor to explain why people of color are a minority among higher positions.

A By showing that all executives at  the same level make the same salary, regardless of race .   The same salary doesn't impact the conclusion. What this answer choice is saying is that there is not privilege among top executives but we are looking for differences between entry level workers and executives. = Wrong

B By showing that people awarded promotions  had the same or better qualifications than those rejected .  This is it ! What this answer choice is essentially saying is that a better qualification is a factor for deciding who will get a promotion, regardless of the race.

C By demonstrating that it is  necessary to have a college degree  to earn a promotion.  What if entry level workers have a college degree ? This answer choice assumes that entry level workers have none. If entry level workers actually have a college degree this answer would even strengthen the argument. = Wrong

D By giving the  statistics of the number of white employees  doing entry-level jobs.  We don't know what the statistics looks like. Once more this answer choice wants us to assume that there are more white people than color people, but we don't know it. If there are no white entry level workers, or just a few, this would end up strengthening the argument. = Wrong

E By actively  recruiting white applicants  for entry-level jobs.  This is not helping in any way to showcase that the company is not treating employees differently. This is almost implying that the company is acknowledging that it had a discriminatory behaviour and it wants to make up for it. = Wrong

I hope this was helpful !

SonalSinha803 · Answer

But B says "same" or better ?? If same qualifications, then how do you justify ?? This point is unclear too.

OA and OE please.

Sent from my Lenovo K53a48 using  GMAT Club Forum mobile app

prerakgoel03 · Answer

SonalSinha803  I second that but then if you look at other options you would find this one the most probable and logical.

Sent from my iPhone using GMAT Club Forum

olito · Answer

The way thought of this was the following :

The implied information is that there is no other factor than race that gives people the opportunity to occupy higher positions. This other factor is the consideration of qualifications. If you say that "people awarded promotions had  lower or equal  qualifications than those rejected" that in would strengthen the answer.

But here you are told that the qualification is the  same or higher , which means they considered people regardless of color at first. On top of that you are told in the prompt that 3 top executives are people of color. This means that either : 
- These people got promoted because of better qualifications
- Or the people got promoted not because of a better qualification, but because of an other factor

This is how I thought of B ! I hope I made it clear !

Adi93 · Answer

Hi  jainan

IMO C actually strengthens the Argument by stating that it is necessary to have a College degree.
on the other hand B gives alternate reasoning.

Hope this helps!

Rollroll · Answer

ARGUMENT SAYS A CAUSES B 
AND BECAUSE ITS WEAKEN QUES ,WE NEED TO PROVIDE THAT ITS NOT A BUT CAUSES B
B DOES THE SAME , HENCE ANS IS B

jack2ky · Answer

But it says the Same or better. Since it says the "same" that led me to think that you can have the same qualifications but still not get the promotion and executive job. Meaning that there still is racism.

Posted from my mobile device

Mavisdu1017 · Answer

yes same here. B and C almost the same meaning to me. Maybe the question is a poor one.

sony1000 · Answer

Not fully agree with B, say that the 3 employees of colour had better qualifications than the other 27 whites and the 27 whites had same qualifications (stated on answer B) as other 27 blacks that had been rejected, wouldn´t these rejections factor in as discriminatory.

arya251294 · Answer

Exactly my point, IMO a correct GMAT choice can not be attacked by any argument, but here the keyword "same" makes this answer choice vulnerable to arguments such as yours.

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

Recently, All Trees Lumber Company has been accused of racial discrimi

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Recently, All Trees Lumber Company has been accused of racial discrimi

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards