Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
Apr 2912:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
Learn how Kamakshi achieved a GMAT 675 with an impressive 96th %ile in Data Insights. Discover the unique methods and exam strategies that helped her excel in DI along with other sections for a balanced and high score.
Apr 3001:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
May 0111:00 AM PDT
-12:00 PM PDT
Free- full-length test + 15 concept videos + 150+ short videos + study plan!
May 0306:30 AM PDT
-08:30 AM PDT
Verbal trouble on GMAT? Fix it NOW! Join Sunita Singhvi for a focused webinar on actionable strategies to boost your Verbal score and take your performance to the next level.
24 Jun 2021, 20:48
Kudos
Bookmarks
Prompt:
The following appeared in the editorial section of a monthly business newsmagazine: “Most companies would agree that as the risk of physical injury occurring on the job increases, the wages paid to employees should also increase. Hence it makes financial sense for employers to make the workplace safer: they could thus reduce their payroll expenses and save money.”
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
My response:
The argument states that employers could reduce payroll expenses by making the work environment safer for employees, as wages should increase with increased risk of physical injury. As stated, the argument contains some serious flaws in reasoning, making the conclusion doubtful.
First, the argument does not consider the expenses associated with making the workplace safer for employees. There is a strong possibility that implementing various safety measures would have a much higher long-term cost than simply paying higher wages to employees. For example, purchasing, installing, and carrying out new safety measures may not be the ideal solution if the company’s goal is to save money. Additionally, employees may spend more hours completing their work with extra safety practices in place, which would cause increased labour costs in itself. In order to strengthen this argument, the author should clearly define the costs associated with making a workplace safer, and compare such costs to employee wages.
Second, the argument states that employee wages should increase with the risk of personal injury, not that it presently does. Thus, the argument suggests that some companies do not currently pay employees more for unsafe work, although they claim to support this idea. The argument is flawed in that it contains no proof or data supporting how implementing safety measures will save costs, as it relies solely on the opinion of some companies.
Lastly, the author references most companies, which is a generalization that may not apply to the whole market. This generalization suggests that certain companies may disagree with paying higher wages for unsafe work, and presently pay their employees lower wages. Since the argument suggests that implementing lower wages would be a cost-saving measure, this would not apply to all companies, thus disproving the argument.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed because it contains generalizations, states an unproven, hypothetical conclusion, and it does not consider specific expenses associated with implementing safety measures. In order to improve their reasoning and support their conclusion, the author should provide further evidence and details proving that it does indeed make the most financial sense for companies to improve safety measures, and ensure that the companies mentioned are representative of the whole population.
The following appeared in the editorial section of a monthly business newsmagazine: “Most companies would agree that as the risk of physical injury occurring on the job increases, the wages paid to employees should also increase. Hence it makes financial sense for employers to make the workplace safer: they could thus reduce their payroll expenses and save money.”
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
My response:
The argument states that employers could reduce payroll expenses by making the work environment safer for employees, as wages should increase with increased risk of physical injury. As stated, the argument contains some serious flaws in reasoning, making the conclusion doubtful.
First, the argument does not consider the expenses associated with making the workplace safer for employees. There is a strong possibility that implementing various safety measures would have a much higher long-term cost than simply paying higher wages to employees. For example, purchasing, installing, and carrying out new safety measures may not be the ideal solution if the company’s goal is to save money. Additionally, employees may spend more hours completing their work with extra safety practices in place, which would cause increased labour costs in itself. In order to strengthen this argument, the author should clearly define the costs associated with making a workplace safer, and compare such costs to employee wages.
Second, the argument states that employee wages should increase with the risk of personal injury, not that it presently does. Thus, the argument suggests that some companies do not currently pay employees more for unsafe work, although they claim to support this idea. The argument is flawed in that it contains no proof or data supporting how implementing safety measures will save costs, as it relies solely on the opinion of some companies.
Lastly, the author references most companies, which is a generalization that may not apply to the whole market. This generalization suggests that certain companies may disagree with paying higher wages for unsafe work, and presently pay their employees lower wages. Since the argument suggests that implementing lower wages would be a cost-saving measure, this would not apply to all companies, thus disproving the argument.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed because it contains generalizations, states an unproven, hypothetical conclusion, and it does not consider specific expenses associated with implementing safety measures. In order to improve their reasoning and support their conclusion, the author should provide further evidence and details proving that it does indeed make the most financial sense for companies to improve safety measures, and ensure that the companies mentioned are representative of the whole population.
24 Jun 2021, 22:58
Kudos
Bookmarks
AWA Score: 5 out of 6!
I have used a GMATAWA auto-grader to evaluate your essay.
Coherence and connectivity: 4.5/5
This rating corresponds to the flow of ideas and expressions from one paragraph to another. The effective use of connectives and coherence of assertive language in arguing for/against the argument is analyzed. This is deemed as one of the most important parameters.
Paragraph structure and formation: 2.5/5
The structure and division of the attempt into appropriate paragraphs are evaluated. To score well on this parameter, it is important to organize the attempt into paragraphs. Preferable to follow the convention of leaving a line blank at the end of each paragraph, to make the software aware of the structure of the essay.
Vocabulary and word expression: 4.5/5
This parameter rates the submitted essay on the range of relevant vocabulary possessed by the candidate basis the word and expression usage. There are no extra- points for bombastic word usage. Simple is the best form of suave!
I have used a GMATAWA auto-grader to evaluate your essay.
Coherence and connectivity: 4.5/5
This rating corresponds to the flow of ideas and expressions from one paragraph to another. The effective use of connectives and coherence of assertive language in arguing for/against the argument is analyzed. This is deemed as one of the most important parameters.
Paragraph structure and formation: 2.5/5
The structure and division of the attempt into appropriate paragraphs are evaluated. To score well on this parameter, it is important to organize the attempt into paragraphs. Preferable to follow the convention of leaving a line blank at the end of each paragraph, to make the software aware of the structure of the essay.
Vocabulary and word expression: 4.5/5
This parameter rates the submitted essay on the range of relevant vocabulary possessed by the candidate basis the word and expression usage. There are no extra- points for bombastic word usage. Simple is the best form of suave!
Good Luck
cnjames
Moderator:
