Four day working per week versus five day working per week
The reading states that the proposal of four days week with eighty percent of normal pay is beneficial for the company, for the country and also for the employee him/herself and provides three main reasons of support. However, the professor explains that there are problems with these arguments and refutes each of the author’s reasons.
First, the author claims that the reduced working hour with lower pay will increase the company’s profit. However, the lecturer opposes this argument by saying that four days per week working plan will raise the company’s expenditure. The company needs to hire more employees and this requires more space and computer. Medical expenditures for a five-day working employee and four-day working employee are also same. All these factors prove that this plan will increase the company’s expenditure and ultimately the company’s profit will decrease.
Second, the reading states that this plan will help the country to reduce the unemployment rate. The professor refutes this point. He states that the company might force the employee to do overtime. The company’s expectation from employee will also increase. The firm might expect same output from both category employees. This shows that unemployment will not necessarily go down.
Finally, the article claims that this plan will be beneficial for the employee. However, the lecturer refutes this claim by stating that it would increase the risk of loosing job for the employee, who works for four day in a week. For example, during economic down turn, the four day working group employee are more likely to loose their jobs. This clearly exhibits that this plan will create job instability.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-10-20 | Hello GRE | 80 | view |
| 2024-03-25 | TANVIR SIDDIKE MOIN | 70 | view |
| 2023-07-17 | nusybah | 78 | view |
| 2023-07-01 | Hrushikesh_Vaddoriya | 3 | view |
| 2023-07-01 | Hrushikesh_Vaddoriya | 3 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 6, column 327, Rule ID: LOOSE_LOSE[2]
Message: Did you mean 'lose' (= miss, waste, suffer the loss etc.)?
Suggestion: lose
...rking group employee are more likely to loose their jobs. This clearly exhibits that ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, however, second, so, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 10.4613686534 48% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 5.04856512141 238% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 20.0 30.3222958057 66% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1449.0 1373.03311258 106% => OK
No of words: 269.0 270.72406181 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.38661710037 5.08290768461 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0498419064 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70242581099 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 140.0 145.348785872 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.520446096654 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 423.0 419.366225166 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 43.0812381389 49.2860985944 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 85.2352941176 110.228320801 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.8235294118 21.698381199 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.17647058824 7.06452816374 45% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.230186505501 0.272083759551 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0774727390269 0.0996497079465 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.124598021427 0.0662205650399 188% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.140432993043 0.162205337803 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.103561449318 0.0443174109184 234% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 13.3589403974 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 53.8541721854 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.69 12.2367328918 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.84 8.42419426049 93% => OK
difficult_words: 59.0 63.6247240618 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.5 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.