Both the reading passage and the offered lecture focus on the possible advantages and disadvantages of a policy which requires companies to offer the employees the option of working four days a week instead of five days a week for four-fifth or eighty percent of their normal salary in the United States. Although the three hypothesizes presented by the author corroborates his finding, the speaker provides some evidence to refute them all.
First of all, the author claims that the policy would be beneficial for the company, since 4-day employees will be paid eighty percent of their normal salary and they are less likely to make costly errors since they are rested and more alert. However, the speaker believes that the company will have to spend a lot more money by adding new employees to accomplish the companies' goal, because the new employees will need training and medical benefits. Moreover, all employees need the same health benefits regardless of the number of the days they work. Plus more employees need more office space and equipment.
Secondly, the author asserts that the policy may lead to a lower unemployment rate for the whole country, since the companies would employ more people. Whereas, the speaker states that the companies would choose a less costly option like asking the employees to work over time or they will expect the 4-day employees to work as much as they did in 5 days. As a result, there won't be more jobs created and current jobs will become so unpleasant.
Finally, the author suggests that the policy may raise the quality of the employees' lives and they will be able to pursue their interests. On the contrary, the speaker mentions that the policy would decrease the employees' job stability and they may have lower chances of getting promotions. Also, they are more likely to lose their jobs on downturns.
Both the reading passage and the offered lecture focus on the possible advantages and disadvantages of a
policy
which requires
companies
to offer the
employees
the option of working four days a week
instead
of five days a week for four-fifth or eighty percent of their normal salary in the United States. Although the three hypothesizes presented by the
author
corroborates his finding, the speaker provides
some
evidence to refute them all.
First of all
, the
author
claims that the
policy
would be beneficial for the
company
, since 4-day
employees
will
be paid
eighty percent of their normal
salary and
they are less likely to
make
costly errors since they
are rested
and more alert.
However
, the speaker believes that the
company
will
have to
spend a lot more money by adding new
employees
to accomplish the
companies
' goal,
because
the new
employees
will need training and medical benefits.
Moreover
, all
employees
need the same health benefits regardless of the number of the days they work. Plus more
employees
need more office space and equipment.
Secondly
, the
author
asserts that the
policy
may lead to a lower unemployment rate for the whole country, since the
companies
would employ more
people
. Whereas, the speaker states that the
companies
would choose a less costly option like asking the
employees
to work
over time
or they will
expect
the 4-day
employees
to work as much as they did in 5 days.
As a result
, there won't be more
jobs
created and
current
jobs
will become
so
unpleasant.
Finally
, the
author
suggests that the
policy
may raise the quality of the employees'
lives and
they will be able to pursue their interests.
On the contrary
, the speaker mentions that the
policy
would decrease the employees'
job
stability and
they may have lower chances of getting promotions.
Also
, they are more likely to lose their
jobs
on downturns.