TPO 1 integrated writing

The reading and the lecture are both about the four-day workweek policy in the United States. The author believes that this policy benefits individual companies, employees, and the economy as a whole. The lecturer, however, challenges this point by providing the following reasons.

First of all, according to the author, this policy increases company profits. Nevertheless, the professor states that it may end up costing companies even more. In order to ensure the same amount of work, they will have to add new workers, which requires more money to be spent on training, medical benefit as well as office space and computers. This directly refutes the idea made by the author.

Second, the passage claims that this policy helps in reducing unemployment rates. On the contrary, the speaker asserts that some companies will ask their employees to work overtime instead of hiring new workers. They may expect their employees to complete the same amount of work in less time. As a result, there will be no additional jobs created. Moreover, current jobs can be more unpleasant and stressful. Again, what the lecturer says contradicts the argument mentioned in the reading material.

Finally, while the writer is of the opinion that a four-day workweek increases the quality of life of individual workers, the professor objects to this point. He argues that this policy can put employees at risk. Working only four days a week might reduce their chances of advancing in careers. For example, they are likely to be passed over for promotion as companies prefer five-day employees. They can also lose their jobs during the economic downturn.
In conclusion, although the reading passage and the lecture are both about the four-day workweek policy, the three main points made in the reading are effectively challenged by the lecturer.