The reading and the lecture both are about a policy option of working four days weekend instead of five working days. The author of the reading believes that it will benefit the economy, company and employee. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made in the article. He thinks that it is risky and will in fact reduce the benefits.
First of all, the author claims that having the short weekend will increase the company profit as employee feel more rested and alert so there will be less costly error. It is pointed out that the company profit will increase as only 80 percent of normal rate will be paid for four-day employee. This argument is challenged by the lecturer. He says that as the company has to hire new employee and there will be additional costs like training, office space, computer and medicines which will increase the costs of the company.
Secondly, the author states that working short weekend will reduce unemployment rate. He argues that as the workload has to be shifted to others new workers could be hired at the same rate. This argument is rebutted in the lecture. The lecturer observes that hiring new workers will be costly. He explains it further that rather it will be beneficial if they choose to work overtime instead. Rather, no additional job will be created as company force employee to do the work of five days within four days. This can result in more pressure to employees.
Finally, the author mentions that this policy will be beneficial for the individual employees. It is noted that this will increase the quality of lives by spending time with families and perusing private interest. The lecturer casts doubt on this by arguing that it will be risky as it decreases the job stability. He puts forth the idea that those employees will be the one to lose their job first during the economic downturn. It equally reduces the chances of promotion as employee has to work 5 days to be promoted in management position.
The reading and the lecture both are about a policy option of working four days weekend
instead
of five working days. The
author
of the reading believes that it will benefit the economy,
company
and
employee
.
The
lecturer
casts doubt on the claims made in the article. He
thinks
that it is risky and will in fact
reduce
the benefits.
First of all
, the
author
claims that having the short weekend will
increase
the
company
profit as
employee
feel more rested and alert
so
there will be less costly error. It
is pointed
out that the
company
profit will
increase
as
only
80 percent of normal rate will
be paid
for four-day
employee
. This argument
is challenged
by the
lecturer
. He says that as the
company
has to
hire new
employee
and there will be additional costs like training, office space, computer and medicines which will
increase
the costs of the
company
.
Secondly
, the
author
states that working short weekend will
reduce
unemployment rate. He argues that as the workload
has to
be shifted
to others new workers could
be hired
at the same rate. This argument
is rebutted
in the lecture. The
lecturer
observes that hiring new workers will be costly. He
explains
it
further
that
rather
it will be beneficial if they choose to work overtime
instead
.
Rather
, no additional job will
be created
as
company
force
employee
to do the work of five days within four days. This can result in more pressure to employees.
Finally
, the
author
mentions that this policy will be beneficial for the individual
employees
. It
is noted
that this will
increase
the quality of
lives
by spending time with families and perusing private interest. The
lecturer
casts doubt on this by arguing that it will be risky as it decreases the job stability. He puts forth the
idea
that those
employees
will be the one to lose their job
first
during the economic downturn. It
equally
reduces
the chances of promotion as
employee
has to
work 5 days to
be promoted
in management position.