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.
Jul 1703:00 PM IST
-11:00 AM IST
Start your journey with a fully customized action plan and work with a dedicated mentor to achieve a 735+ score.
Jul 1808:30 AM PDT
-09:30 AM PDT
Wondering how to craft compelling Career goals for your "Why MBA" essay? In this video, Gunjan Jhunjhunwala, seasoned MBA expert at The Red Pen, will walk you through how to: Define clear short-term and long-term goals, and more.
Jul 1410:00 AM PDT
-11:59 PM PDT
GMAT Preparation Online - A limited time sale use code: EXPERTSGLOBAL10- Jul 19
09:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Struggling to stay on time during Multi-Source Reasoning (MSR) questions on the GMAT? In this video, GMAT expert Karishma Bansal (founder of ANA Prep) breaks down a 3-minute scanning strategy that can help you save critical time... - Jul 19
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment 
Jul 1911:30 AM EDT
-12:30 PM EDT
Struggling to find the right strategies to score a 99 %ile on GMAT Focus? Riya (GMAT 715) boosted her score by 100-points in just 15 days! Discover how the right mentorship, tailored strategies, and an unwavering mindset can transform your GMAT prep.- Jul 20
10:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Join us in a live GMAT Verbal practice session to solve 10 tough questions from the Reading Comprehension section tested in the GMAT Verbal section. Take this quiz with other test takers in timed conditions. - Jul 22
10:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
In our second video about test accommodations for the GMAT exam, GMAT Ninja’s founder chats with Jason Northrup, Test Accommodations Senior manager at GMAC, about the three main qualifying condition categories...
23 Oct 2023, 10:02
Kudos
Bookmarks
Understanding the argument -
We must strengthen the conclusion that the hourly wages must be higher at Yorco (Y) than at Zortech (Z). The facts given in the argument are
1. They pay their employees per hour
2. Both employ the same number of hourly wage workers.
Prethinking - In such a situation, the higher cost can occur mainly because of two reasons
1. Y's employees do a ton of overtime.
2. Work done by Y requires niche skills that are expensive to find, thus pushing the cost higher.
Option Elimination -
(A) Zortech spends a higher total sum per year than Yorco does to provide its hourly wage workers with benefits other than wages - Benefits other than wages are out of scope.
(B) the work performed by hourly wage workers at Zortech does not require a significantly higher level of skill than the work performed by hourly wage workers at Yorco does - It says Z's workers do not require a significantly higher level of skills than Y's workers. The trap is that "not significantly higher" does not mean it is lower. It can also mean it is somewhat higher but not significantly higher. In that case, it's the opposite of what we seek. So, at best, this option is a weakener.
(C) the proportion of all company employees who are hourly wage workers is significantly greater at Yorco than it is at Zortech - If we read the sentence carefully - it says the proportion (of all company employees who are hourly wage workers) is significantly higher than it (the proportion of all company employees who are hourly wage workers) at Zortech. The proportion is a percentage, i.e., per 100. So it's comparing the "employees who are hourly wage workers" to what? Are there any other kinds of workers as well? The premise states that two corporations employ "large numbers of" full-time workers paid by the hour. So it means that a large number is paid per hour, but a large doest means 100%. It means there is another category of employees which is not given in the argument. So, comparing proportion to another category of employees is not in the scope of our discussion here. We are mainly concerned about such workers (full-time employees who are paid hourly); the overall wage spent for such workers for company Y is more than Z. So, at best, this choice is out of scope.
(D) overtime work, which is paid at a substantially higher rate than work done during the regular work week, is rare at both Yorco and Zortech -perfect. In line with our pre-thinking.
(E) the highest hourly wages paid at Yorco are higher than the highest hourly wages paid at Zortech - We are concerned about the average wage. Distortion.
We must strengthen the conclusion that the hourly wages must be higher at Yorco (Y) than at Zortech (Z). The facts given in the argument are
1. They pay their employees per hour
2. Both employ the same number of hourly wage workers.
Prethinking - In such a situation, the higher cost can occur mainly because of two reasons
1. Y's employees do a ton of overtime.
2. Work done by Y requires niche skills that are expensive to find, thus pushing the cost higher.
Option Elimination -
(A) Zortech spends a higher total sum per year than Yorco does to provide its hourly wage workers with benefits other than wages - Benefits other than wages are out of scope.
(B) the work performed by hourly wage workers at Zortech does not require a significantly higher level of skill than the work performed by hourly wage workers at Yorco does - It says Z's workers do not require a significantly higher level of skills than Y's workers. The trap is that "not significantly higher" does not mean it is lower. It can also mean it is somewhat higher but not significantly higher. In that case, it's the opposite of what we seek. So, at best, this option is a weakener.
(C) the proportion of all company employees who are hourly wage workers is significantly greater at Yorco than it is at Zortech - If we read the sentence carefully - it says the proportion (of all company employees who are hourly wage workers) is significantly higher than it (the proportion of all company employees who are hourly wage workers) at Zortech. The proportion is a percentage, i.e., per 100. So it's comparing the "employees who are hourly wage workers" to what? Are there any other kinds of workers as well? The premise states that two corporations employ "large numbers of" full-time workers paid by the hour. So it means that a large number is paid per hour, but a large doest means 100%. It means there is another category of employees which is not given in the argument. So, comparing proportion to another category of employees is not in the scope of our discussion here. We are mainly concerned about such workers (full-time employees who are paid hourly); the overall wage spent for such workers for company Y is more than Z. So, at best, this choice is out of scope.
(D) overtime work, which is paid at a substantially higher rate than work done during the regular work week, is rare at both Yorco and Zortech -perfect. In line with our pre-thinking.
(E) the highest hourly wages paid at Yorco are higher than the highest hourly wages paid at Zortech - We are concerned about the average wage. Distortion.
14 Feb 2025, 00:39
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hi CrackverbalGMAT
Thanks for sharing the detailed explanation. I have a follow up on answer choice C. Answer choice C states - 'the proportion of all company employees who are hourly wage workers is significantly greater at Yorco than it is at Zortech'.
The 'Crack Verbal' explanation states - 'Option C contradicts one of the premises, which is that the two companies employ roughly the same number of employees. So, Option C can be eliminated.'
Lets assume that there are 1000 employees in Yorco, out of which 20% are hourly waged, that is 400 employees are hourly waged.
Zortech, on the other hand has 4000 employees, out of which 10%, that is 400 are hourly waged.
So, in this case, we see that the proportion of hourly waged employees in Yorco is more, even though the number of employees is the same in both organizations. Hence, Option C does not contradict the premise, it does not provide a logical reasoning for the wages to be higher at Yorco when compared to Zortech, but it doesn't contradict the premise in my opinion.
Please confirm if my line of thinking is correct. Thanks!
The conclusion of the argument is that hourly wages must be higher, on average, at Yorco than at Zortech.
The given premises are that Yorco and Zortech are two corporations that employ large numbers of full-time workers who are paid by the hour. The passage also gives us the information that Yorco employs roughly the same number of workers as Zortech does but spends a far higher total sum per year on wages for such workers.
The question requires us to complete the argument by providing a reason for the conclusion that the hourly wages must be higher at Yorco.
Option A mentions benefits other than wages. However, the point of comparison in this passage is the amount spent by each company on wages. So, Option A can be eliminated.
Option B mentions the skill required by the workers. If this option stated that workers at Yorco need a higher level of skill and therefore must be paid higher wages, this option could have completed the argument. However, this option states that workers at Zortech do not need a higher level of skill than workers at Yorco do. So, Option B can be eliminated.
Option C contradicts one of the premises, which is that the two companies employ roughly the same number of employees. So, Option C can be eliminated.
Since the conclusion mentions hourly wages on average, the highest hourly wage in each company is irrelevant. So, Option E can also be eliminated.
One possible expense for the companies is overtime wages. If the two companies employ roughly the same number of employees, then the other expense could be wages paid to workers for overtime work. Option D provides the reason for stating that hourly wages on average must be higher at Yorco by negating the other possible way in which the company would have to spend more money. Therefore, D is the most appropriate option.
Jayanthi Kumar.
Thanks for sharing the detailed explanation. I have a follow up on answer choice C. Answer choice C states - 'the proportion of all company employees who are hourly wage workers is significantly greater at Yorco than it is at Zortech'.
The 'Crack Verbal' explanation states - 'Option C contradicts one of the premises, which is that the two companies employ roughly the same number of employees. So, Option C can be eliminated.'
Lets assume that there are 1000 employees in Yorco, out of which 20% are hourly waged, that is 400 employees are hourly waged.
Zortech, on the other hand has 4000 employees, out of which 10%, that is 400 are hourly waged.
So, in this case, we see that the proportion of hourly waged employees in Yorco is more, even though the number of employees is the same in both organizations. Hence, Option C does not contradict the premise, it does not provide a logical reasoning for the wages to be higher at Yorco when compared to Zortech, but it doesn't contradict the premise in my opinion.
Please confirm if my line of thinking is correct. Thanks!
CrackverbalGMAT
pb_india
Which of the following most logically completes the argument?
Yorco and Zortech are two corporations that employ large numbers of full-time workers who are paid by the hour. Publicly available records indicate that Yorco employs roughly the same number of such hourly wage workers as Zortech does but spends a far higher total sum per year on wages for such workers. Therefore, hourly wages must be higher, on average, at Yorco than at Zortech, since _____.
(A) Zortech spends a higher total sum per year than Yorco does to provide its hourly wage workers with benefits other than wages
(B) the work performed by hourly wage workers at Zortech does not require a significantly higher level of skill than the work performed by hourly wage workers at Yorco does
(C) the proportion of all company employees who are hourly wage workers is significantly greater at Yorco than it is at Zortech
(D) overtime work, which is paid at a substantially higher rate than work done during the regular work week, is rare at both Yorco and Zortech
(E) the highest hourly wages paid at Yorco are higher than the highest hourly wages paid at Zortech
Yorco and Zortech are two corporations that employ large numbers of full-time workers who are paid by the hour. Publicly available records indicate that Yorco employs roughly the same number of such hourly wage workers as Zortech does but spends a far higher total sum per year on wages for such workers. Therefore, hourly wages must be higher, on average, at Yorco than at Zortech, since _____.
(A) Zortech spends a higher total sum per year than Yorco does to provide its hourly wage workers with benefits other than wages
(B) the work performed by hourly wage workers at Zortech does not require a significantly higher level of skill than the work performed by hourly wage workers at Yorco does
(C) the proportion of all company employees who are hourly wage workers is significantly greater at Yorco than it is at Zortech
(D) overtime work, which is paid at a substantially higher rate than work done during the regular work week, is rare at both Yorco and Zortech
(E) the highest hourly wages paid at Yorco are higher than the highest hourly wages paid at Zortech
The conclusion of the argument is that hourly wages must be higher, on average, at Yorco than at Zortech.
The given premises are that Yorco and Zortech are two corporations that employ large numbers of full-time workers who are paid by the hour. The passage also gives us the information that Yorco employs roughly the same number of workers as Zortech does but spends a far higher total sum per year on wages for such workers.
The question requires us to complete the argument by providing a reason for the conclusion that the hourly wages must be higher at Yorco.
Option A mentions benefits other than wages. However, the point of comparison in this passage is the amount spent by each company on wages. So, Option A can be eliminated.
Option B mentions the skill required by the workers. If this option stated that workers at Yorco need a higher level of skill and therefore must be paid higher wages, this option could have completed the argument. However, this option states that workers at Zortech do not need a higher level of skill than workers at Yorco do. So, Option B can be eliminated.
Option C contradicts one of the premises, which is that the two companies employ roughly the same number of employees. So, Option C can be eliminated.
Since the conclusion mentions hourly wages on average, the highest hourly wage in each company is irrelevant. So, Option E can also be eliminated.
One possible expense for the companies is overtime wages. If the two companies employ roughly the same number of employees, then the other expense could be wages paid to workers for overtime work. Option D provides the reason for stating that hourly wages on average must be higher at Yorco by negating the other possible way in which the company would have to spend more money. Therefore, D is the most appropriate option.
Jayanthi Kumar.
Moderators:
