Is it more enjoyable to work only 3 days a week for short hours or to work 5 days a week for longer hours?
Opinions vary on what kind of working schedule is more appropriate, 3 days a week for short hours or 5 days for longer hours. While it is tempting to view the latter as less complicated, in this we should be cautious. After all, the former arrangement seems to foster loyalty and productivity.
Despite the fact that reduced working hour schedule seems to be more advantageous, it still has several shortcomings. The amount of work to be done almost doubles, which means that the work will require more effort, and personnel will be overwhelmed with work and may get exhausted. This may result in low efficiency and poor output. For example, oftentimes employees are laid off because they fail to handle the workload and work seamlessly. The example above allows the conclusion that short working schedule is not always beneficial.
Nonetheless, because of the shorter work schedule, people who work in business will be more loyal to the company they work for as it gives them more time to spend their spare time to rest. For example, when a friend of mine worked for a company called People Talk, the employer allowed him to return to this working arrangement. Because of this, my friend was able to spend more time with his family and friends. This means that many companies that are interested in their business efficiency would offer their employees the choice, thus being more lenient towards employees.
Equally important, the attractiveness of work means that employees will be more involved in the work as the company respects their interests and demands. For instance, my father worked for a long time as Deputy director of the Department of Education of the city of Moscow and because of this, he understood how much work is needed to prove himself as a highly qualified specialist and expert. But the head of the federal service department gave more time to rest, but my father did not relax and tried to give everything according to maxim. From this example we could generalize and say that employees will also leave the headquarters and stop being carried away by the intensity that their work has given them.
To sum up, it appears that both working arrangement have advantages and disadvantages. However, I believe that employees need to choose a job that will be suitable for their own priorities, as there will be no point in working except for the money, if the person does not like it.
- The table provides data on how people in five countries spent their money in the year of 2002 89
- Do you think it is better to start learning a new language as an infant as a child or as a teenager Provide reasons and examples to support your stance 80
- Some people think that children should be encouraged to compete whereas others claim that competition is not good for children Discuss both sides and give your own opinion 84
- The maps below show university sports courts in 1990 and now Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 89
- The chart below shows the percentage of households in owned and rented accommodation in England and Wales between 1918 and 2011 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Equally,
... being more lenient towards employees. Equally important, the attractiveness of work m...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, may, nonetheless, so, still, thus, while, after all, except for, for example, for instance, kind of, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 15.1003584229 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 9.8082437276 133% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 13.8261648746 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.0286738351 127% => OK
Pronoun: 44.0 43.0788530466 102% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 52.1666666667 90% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.0752688172 87% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2000.0 1977.66487455 101% => OK
No of words: 411.0 407.700716846 101% => OK
Chars per words: 4.86618004866 4.8611393121 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.50256981431 4.48103885553 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65388674001 2.67179642975 99% => OK
Unique words: 221.0 212.727598566 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.537712895377 0.524837075471 102% => OK
syllable_count: 604.8 618.680645161 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 9.59856630824 83% => OK
Article: 5.0 3.08781362007 162% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 3.51792114695 199% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.94265232975 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.6003584229 87% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.6843077949 48.9658058833 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.111111111 100.406767564 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8333333333 20.6045352989 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.44444444444 5.45110844103 137% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 11.8709677419 59% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 3.85842293907 233% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88709677419 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.374871454166 0.236089414692 159% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.122527357578 0.076458572812 160% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.139170478048 0.0737576698707 189% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.232517342733 0.150856017488 154% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0923097052925 0.0645574589148 143% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 11.7677419355 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 58.1214874552 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 10.1575268817 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.26 10.9000537634 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.11 8.01818996416 101% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 86.8835125448 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.002688172 110% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.0537634409 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.