Some employers offer their employees subsidized membership of gyms and sports clubs, believing that this will make their staff healthier and thus more effective at work. Other employers see no benefit in doing so.
Consider the arguments from both aspects of this possible debate, and reach a conclusion
There is a great number of employers offer their workers subsidized membership of gyms as well as sport clubs since they believe it boosts staff’s productivity while others claim that this method serves no purpose. I strongly agree that it is essential for the executives to take care of the employees’ health.
Paying part of the staffs’ membership has a host of merits. First and foremost, this encourages the employees to work out and have better physical and mental health, which contributes to a rise in productivity. In modern day life, many people devote too much time for work and forget to take care of themselves. This evidence can be seen in many countries such as Japan, Viet Nam, Singapore where youngsters have such hectic schedule. Secondly, this is also a method for companies to show their care to the staffs. With good treatment, the companies can keep talented workers as well as attract more required staffs, which brings a huge advantages compared to other companies.
However, there are many arguments suggesting this action is useless. Firstly, they reckon that offering subsidized membership of sporty clubs or gym centers leads to a plunge in annual income. Although this occupies a significant allocation in companies’ fund, workers with better physical condition can definitely work harder, which leads to a steep climb in profit. Secondly, it is a norm for the workers to take care of their health on their own. There is no doubt that they can do it by themselves, but showing care may enhance their relationship with the companies, which leads to them devote more time and effort in work.
In recapitulation, I am convinced that offering staff subsidized membership of gyms and sports clubs has huge perks that results in better productivity
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-01-13 | Nareia | 89 | view |
| 2021-05-02 | samdilnura | view | |
| 2021-04-30 | samdilnura | 50 | view |
| 2021-04-30 | samdilnura | view | |
| 2021-03-04 | Kathleen_119 | 84 | view |
- The graph below shows the number of tourists visiting a particular Caribbean island between 2010 and 2017 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparison where relevant 78
- The charts below show the percentages of readers who preferred to read certain types of book at A Z library in 2009 71
- The diagram below shows the development of cutting tools in the Stone Age Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparison where relevant 55
- The first chart below shows how energy is used in an Australian household The second chart shows the greenhouse gas emissions which result from this energy use Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons whe
- The diagram below shows the development of cutting tools in the Stone Age 30
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 638, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'advantage'?
Suggestion: advantage
...re required staffs, which brings a huge advantages compared to other companies. However,...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, well, while, no doubt, such as, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 13.1623246493 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 24.0651302605 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 36.0 41.998997996 86% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1490.0 1615.20841683 92% => OK
No of words: 294.0 315.596192385 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.06802721088 5.12529762239 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14082457966 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79425443312 2.80592935109 100% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 176.041082164 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.56462585034 0.561755894193 101% => OK
syllable_count: 446.4 506.74238477 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.5064471772 49.4020404114 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.428571429 106.682146367 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0 20.7667163134 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.78571428571 7.06120827912 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.271742164388 0.244688304435 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0917711368352 0.084324248473 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0772290292493 0.0667982634062 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.188853140076 0.151304729494 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0650980562227 0.056905535591 114% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 13.0946893788 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 50.2224549098 117% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.3001002004 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.13 12.4159519038 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.44 8.58950901804 98% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 78.4519038076 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.