The reading and the listening are both about the employees preferring a four-day work week. More specifically, in regards to the passages, the author puts forth this idea and supports his opinion by providing three arguments. However, the lecturer is quick to point out that there are some serious flaws in the writer’s claims, and addresses, in detail, the trouble linked to each of the point in reading text.
To begin with, the author mentions that company’s profits will increase as workers will not be tired and they will not commit any expensive mistakes. Further, he adds that new employees can be hired for completing left over work without any extra cost, as the current employees will be paid 80 percent of their current pay. Nevertheless, the speaker contradicts this claim by stating that this proposal will lead to company’s being spending more in place of saving some money. Further, he explains that hiring new employees will bring more cost to company as these new employees will require health benefits and training to complete their tasks.
Secondly, the author claims that it will improve the country’s economic condition as unemployment rate will decrease. Next, he explains that with every 4 employees who adopts four-day work week policy, a new employee can be hired to complete the fifth day work. Yet, the speaker challenges this claim by revealing that hiring new employees is more expensive. Furthermore, he puts forward that in place of hiring new employees, companies will set expectations higher for their current employees or they will ask them to work over time, which will result in more difficult lives for the employees.
Finally, the author wraps up his arguments by positing that with reduction in work week, employees will have more time to devote to their families and to pursue their personal interests. Not surprisingly, in contrast to the author’s point, the lecturer contends that reduction in work week, will decrease the job stability of employees as they will be the first ones to be fired in state of economic crisis. He elaborates on this by bringing up that it will lead to reduction in chance to advance in their careers as promotions will be given to employees who work five days a week.
To sum up, the author and the lecturer has conflicting views regarding implementation of four day work week policy. It is clear that they will have trouble finding common ground on this.
The reading and the listening are both about the
employees
preferring a four-day
work
week
. More
specifically
,
in regards to
the passages, the
author
puts forth this
idea
and supports his opinion by providing three arguments.
However
, the lecturer is quick to point out that there are
some
serious flaws in the writer’s
claims
, and addresses, in detail, the trouble linked to each of the point in reading text.
To
begin
with, the
author
mentions that
company’s
profits will increase as workers will not be
tired and
they will not commit any expensive mistakes.
Further
, he
adds
that
new
employees
can
be hired
for completing
left
over
work
without any extra cost, as the
current
employees
will
be paid
80 percent of their
current
pay.
Nevertheless
, the speaker contradicts this
claim
by stating that this proposal will lead to
company’s
being spending more in place of saving
some
money.
Further
, he
explains
that hiring
new
employees
will bring more cost to
company
as these
new
employees
will require health benefits and training to complete their tasks.
Secondly
, the
author
claims
that it will
improve
the country’s economic condition as unemployment rate will decrease.
Next
, he
explains
that with every 4
employees
who
adopts
four-day
work
week
policy, a
new
employee
can
be hired
to complete the fifth day
work
.
Yet
, the speaker challenges this
claim
by revealing that hiring
new
employees
is more expensive.
Furthermore
, he puts forward that in place of hiring
new
employees
,
companies
will set expectations higher for their
current
employees or
they will ask them to
work
over time
, which will result in more difficult
lives
for the employees.
Finally
, the
author
wraps up his arguments by positing that with reduction in
work
week
,
employees
will have more time to devote to their families and to pursue their personal interests. Not
surprisingly
,
in contrast
to the
author’s
point, the lecturer contends that reduction in
work
week
, will decrease the job stability of
employees
as they will be the
first
ones to
be fired
in state of economic crisis. He elaborates on this by bringing up that it will lead to reduction in chance to advance in their careers as promotions will be
given
to
employees
who
work
five days a week.
To sum up, the
author
and the lecturer has conflicting views regarding implementation of
four day
work
week
policy. It is
clear
that they will have trouble finding common ground on this.