In the United States,employees typically work five days a week for eight hours each day. However, many employees want to work a four-day week and are willing to accept less pay in order to do so. A mandatory policy requiring companies to offer their employees the option of working a four-day workweek for four-fifths (80 percent) of their normal pay would benefit the economy as a whole as well as the individual companies and the employees who decided to take the option.
The shortened workweek would increase company profits because employees would feel more rested and alert, and as a result, they would make fewer costly errors in their work. Hiring more staff to ensure that the same amount of work would be accomplished would not result in additional payroll costs because four-day employees would only be paid 80 percent of the normal rate. In the end, companies would have fewer overworked and error-prone employees for the same money,which would increase company profits.
For the country as a whole, one of the primary benefits of offering this option to employees is that it would reduce unemployment rates. If many full- time employees started working fewer hours, some of their workload would have to be shifted to others. Thus, for every four employees who went on an 80 percent week, a new employee could be hired at the 80 percent rate.
Finally, the option of a four- day workweek would be better for individual employees. Employees who could afford a lower salary in exchange for more free time could improve the quality of their lives by spending the extra time with their families, pursuing private interests, or enjoying leisure activities.
The reading and the lecture are both about allowing staff to work four days in a week. While the author of the reading feels that this approach would be of numerous benefits, the professor in the lecture counters the argument in the reading passage. He does not find any of the claims presented in the passage to be convincing.
First, the writer claims that the four days' work week plan would increase company's profits because staff would be more energetic and make fewer mistakes. Furthermore, it is stated that recruiting more staff would not require additional cost for payroll. In contrast, the lecturer argues that the four days' workweek plan would make the company spend more since hiring new staff would require providing training, and health insurance. Besides, health benefits remain the same whether a staff works four or five days a week. Additionally, employing new staff automatically requires more office space and computers, which would obviously reduce the company's profit.
Secondly, the author mentions that the shortened workweek plan would reduce unemployment rate because full time workers can shift their workload to others. On top of that, he adds that for every four employees with eighty percent week, a new employee could be hired at the eighty percent rate. However, the lecturer calls this argument into question by stating that this is unlikely to create more jobs because recruiting workers these days are expensive, and it is easier for organisations to ensure their staff work overtime in order to make up the difference. Further, he remarks that companies can as well raise expectations since employees can do the same amount of work in five days. Hence, no jobs would be created, and present jobs would be unpleasant.
Finally, the writer asserts that the four days' workweek plan would benefit employees since there will be improvement with their quality of life. In addition to that, the article mentioned that this plan would create time for them to spend with their families and also make it easier for them to pursue their private life. As opposed to the author, the lecturer holds that, even though an employee's quality of life would be improved, there are still some negative consequences such as decreased job stability, inability to pursue an advanced career. He highlights that when there is an economic downturn those working four days in a week are more likely to lose their jobs. Moreover, companies would prefer those working five days in a week in order to ensure continuity and supervision of work activities throughout the week.
| 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 |
- In order to get informed a person must get information from many news resources Do you agree or disagree u 76
- First as human populations and settlements continue to expand birds natural habitats will continue to disappear Forests wetlands and grasslands will give way to ever more homes malls and offices As the traditional areas suitable for birds keep decreasing 81
- Do you agree or disagree that films are much more beneficial for students than reading books 80
- in the United States it had been common practice since the late 1960s not to suppress natural forest fires The let it burn policy assumed that forest fires would burn themselves out quickly without causing much damage However in the summer of 1988 forest 68
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement people in today s world have become too dependent on automobile 76
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 6, column 103, Rule ID: EN_COMPOUNDS
Message: This word is normally spelled as one.
Suggestion: fulltime
... would reduce unemployment rate because full time workers can shift their workload to oth...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, finally, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, still, well, while, in addition, in contrast, such as, on top of that
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 5.04856512141 376% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 22.412803532 161% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 43.0 30.3222958057 142% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2169.0 1373.03311258 158% => OK
No of words: 426.0 270.72406181 157% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.09154929577 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54310108192 4.04702891845 112% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51099216719 2.5805825403 97% => OK
Unique words: 206.0 145.348785872 142% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.483568075117 0.540411800872 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 653.4 419.366225166 156% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.51907601 49.2860985944 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.5 110.228320801 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6666666667 21.698381199 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.16666666667 7.06452816374 130% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 4.33554083885 254% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.295449577552 0.272083759551 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.112094921087 0.0996497079465 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0865033728668 0.0662205650399 131% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.190919190962 0.162205337803 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0643098525239 0.0443174109184 145% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.3589403974 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 53.8541721854 105% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.54 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.48 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 63.6247240618 157% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.