The reading asserts that a four-day week is more beneficial than regular five-day work, whereas the lecturer explains that none of the options that were pointed to are effective and refutes each of the author's reasons.
First of all, the article states that the company would benefit more if their employees make fewer errors. The speaker, however, dismisses this issue due to the fact that the more employees a company has, the more it should spend to train them. Also, the workers need medical insurance that adds up to the costs. Additionally, more money should be paid for additional computers and offices. Consequently, these costs directly cut into the profit of the company. Therefore, this idea is not economically reasonable for companies.
Second, the author highlights the view that the change would open more job positions for those who seek it. Conversely, the lecture brings up the idea that the companies might want their workers to work overtime. Also, the company might wrongly imagine that four-day work is enough to fulfill their requirements. As a consequence, job vacancies will decrease.
Finally, the reading passage holds the view that the more leisure time one has to spend with his or her family, the more their life quality elevates. On the contrary, the professor underlines the fact that more free-time necessarily do not boost the employees' spirit. Not only does this change reduce the workers' job stability, but it also would endanger those four-day workers to lose their job if their country faces any downturn economic situation. Likewise, companies prefer to pass over the management position to a person who can serve them continuous coverage and constant supervision. Thus, one who works a four-day workweek would be neglected by his or her bosses and lose their opportunity to improve their rank position.
The reading asserts that a four-day week is more beneficial than regular five-day
work
, whereas the lecturer
explains
that none of the options that
were pointed
to are effective and refutes each of the author's reasons.
First of all
, the article states that the
company
would benefit more if their employees
make
fewer errors. The speaker,
however
, dismisses this issue due to the fact that the more employees a
company
has, the more it should spend to train them.
Also
, the workers need medical insurance that
adds
up to the costs.
Additionally
, more money should
be paid
for additional computers and offices.
Consequently
, these costs
directly
cut
into the profit of the
company
.
Therefore
, this
idea
is not
economically
reasonable for
companies
.
Second, the author highlights the view that the
change
would open more
job
positions for those who seek it.
Conversely
, the lecture brings up the
idea
that the
companies
might want their workers to
work
overtime.
Also
, the
company
might
wrongly
imagine that four-day
work
is
enough
to fulfill their requirements. As a consequence,
job
vacancies will decrease.
Finally
, the reading passage holds the view that the more leisure time one
has to
spend with
his or her
family, the more their life quality elevates.
On the contrary
, the professor underlines the fact that more free-time
necessarily
do not boost the employees' spirit. Not
only
does this
change
reduce
the workers'
job
stability,
but
it
also
would endanger those four-day workers to lose their
job
if their country faces any downturn economic situation.
Likewise
,
companies
prefer to pass over the management position to a person who can serve them continuous coverage and constant supervision.
Thus
, one who works a four-day workweek would
be neglected
by
his or her
bosses and lose their opportunity to
improve
their rank position.