GRE范文2

贡献者:竹林居士 类别:英文 时间:2021-02-27 23:51:41 收藏数:8 评分:0
返回上页 举报此文章
请选择举报理由:




收藏到我的文章 改错字
The following appeared as part of an article in a daily newspaper:
"Most companies would agree that as the risk of physical injury occurring on the job increases,
the wages paid to employees should also increase. Hence it makes financial sense for employers
to make the workplace safer: they could thus reduce their payroll expenses and save money."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line
of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider
what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or
counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would
strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically
sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
This argument states that it makes financial sense for employers to make the workplace safer
because by making the workplace safer then lower wages could be paid to employees. This
conclusion is based on the premise that as the list of physical injury increases, the wages paid to
employees should also increase. Howeveer, there are several assumptions that may not
necessarily apply to this argument. For example, the costs associated with making the workplace
safe must outweigh the increased payroll expenses due to hazardous conditions. Also, one must
look at the plausability of improving the work environment. And finally, because most companies
agree that as the risk of injury increases so will wages doesn\'t necessarily mean that the all
companies which have hazardous work environments agree.
The first issue to be addressed is whether increased labor costs justify large capital expenditures
to improve the work environment. Clearly one could argue that if making the workplace safe
would cost an exorbitant amount of money in comparison to leaving the workplace as is and
paying slightly increased wages than it would not make sense to improve the work environment.
For example, if making the workplace safe would cost $100 million versus additional payroll
expenses of only $5,000 per year, it would make financial sense to simply pay the increased wages.
No business or business owner with any sense would pay all that extra money just to save a
couple dollars and improve employee health and relations. To consider this, a cost benefit analysis
must be made. I also feel that although a cost benefit analysis should be the determining factor
with regard to these decisions making financial sense, it may not be the determining factor with
regard to making social, moral and ethical sense.
This argument also relies on the idea that companies solely use financial sense in analysing
improving the work environment. This is not the case. Companies look at other considerations
such as the negative social ramifications of high on-job injuries. For example, Toyota spends large
amounts of money improving its environment because while its goal is to be profitable, it also
prides itself on high employee morale and an almost perfectly safe work environment. However,
Toyota finds that it can do both, as by improving employee health and employee relations they
are guaranteed a more motivated staff, and hence a more efficient staff; this guarantees more
money for the business as well as more safety for the employees.
Finally one must understand that not all work environments can be made safer. For example, in
the case of coal mining, a company only has limited ways of making the work environment safe.
While companies may be able to ensure some safety precautions, they may not be able to provide
all the safety measures necessary. In other words, a mining company has limited ability to control
the air quality within a coal mine and therefore it cannot control the risk of employees getting
blacklung. In other words, regardless of the intent of the company, some jobs are simply
dangerous in nature.
In conclusion, while at first it may seem to make financial sense to improve the safety of the work
environment sometimes it truly does not make financial sense. Furthermore, financial sense may
not be the only issue a company faces. Other types of analyses must be made such as the social
ramifications of an unsafe work environment and the overall ability of a company to improve that
environment (i.e。, coal mine)。 Before any decision is made, all this things must be considered,
not simply the reduction of payroll expenses.
声明:以上文章均为用户自行添加,仅供打字交流使用,不代表本站观点,本站不承担任何法律责任,特此声明!如果有侵犯到您的权利,请及时联系我们删除。
文章热度:
文章难度:
文章质量:
说明:系统根据文章的热度、难度、质量自动认证,已认证的文章将参与打字排名!

本文打字排名TOP20

用户更多文章推荐