"During the past year, Quiot Manufacturing had 30 percent more on-the-job accidents than at the nearby Panoply Industries plant, where the work shifts are one hour shorter than ours. Experts say that significant contributing factors in many on-the-job accidents are fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers. Therefore, to reduce the number of on-the-job accidents at Quiot and thereby increase productivity, we should shorten each of our three work shifts by one hour so that employees will get adequate amounts of sleep."
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
Quiot Manufacturing’s vice president has used faulty reasoning to reach the conclusion that shortening work shifts will reduce the number of on-the-job accidents at the plant. Fatigue and sleep deprivation certainly can contribute to workplace accidents, but so can a number of other factors. Before deciding to shorten the work shifts, the managers should consider all of the conditions that affect safety at Quiot<span style="font-size: 19.36px;"> Manufacturing</span>.
The vice president of the company assumes that worker fatigue is the culprit behind the high number of on-the-job accidents. Is there evidence of fatigue? Are workers falling asleep on the job? Are they coming to work late? Has anyone surveyed the employees? Without answers to these questions, his assumption may be erroneous. He may be basing his assumption on the fact that Panoply Industries, with its shorter work shift, has fewer workplace shifts, has fewer workplace accidents. The writer should examine the reasons behind panoply’s lower incidence of accidents at its facility.
If it turns out to be true that the workers at Quiot<span style="font-size: 19.36px;"> Manufacturing</span> are sleep deprived, what is the cause? Most workdays are eight hours, and that is likely the length of each shift at the company. If Quiot workers are not spending more time than the average worker on the job, the length of the workday is not the most logical cause of their fatigue. The nature of the work may be tiring. Is it arduous, physically taxing, or is it monotonous and boring? Regularly scheduled breaks may solve that.
Quiot manufacturing should examine its own culpability for creating an unsafe workplace. Has the company installed safety equipment that reduces accidents? Have the workers been trained to follow appropriate safety procedures? If the managers at Quiot were to question Panoply Industries, they may find that Panoply has recently reduced the number of accidents occurring at its plant. They may have installed safety features and instituted employee training that accounts for the lower incidence of accidents. On the other hand, safety features and training may be identical at both business, and the shorter shifts have led to a reduction in accidents.
This writer must discover the actual figures behind the 30 percent more accidents at Quiot Manufacturing. How many accidents did each company report? If panoply reported 3 on-the-job accidents, and Quiot has 30 percent more than that, then Quiot reported 4 accidents. This is hardly a number worth changing the structure of work shifts at the plant. On the other hand, if Panoply Industries reported 30 accidents, then Quiot Manufacturing would have had 39 accidents. An additional 9 accidents would be cause for concern, and the company should investigate the cause.
Shorter shifts may not improve either workplace safety or productivity. The vice president assumes that workers will rest more if they work less. The workers are just as likely to use the extra time to go shopping, socialize with friends, or watch television. Introspection may be a better approach than innovation to insure worker safety and increased productivity.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 33 15
No. of Words: 510 350
No. of Characters: 2610 1500
No. of Different Words: 230 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.752 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.118 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.697 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 206 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 151 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 104 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 77 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 15.455 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.123 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.455 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.274 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.465 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.058 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 372, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...rk shifts, the managers should consider all of the conditions that affect safety at Quiot<...> ^^^^^^^^^^
Line 25, column 501, Rule ID: BE_CAUSE[1]
Message: Did you mean 'because'?
Suggestion: because
...idents. An additional 9 accidents would be cause for concern, and the company should inv...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, may, so, then, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 12.9520958084 154% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 28.8173652695 104% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 55.5748502994 95% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2759.0 2260.96107784 122% => OK
No of words: 502.0 441.139720559 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.49601593625 5.12650576532 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.7334296765 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.23178302445 2.78398813304 116% => OK
Unique words: 232.0 204.123752495 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.462151394422 0.468620217663 99% => OK
syllable_count: 819.9 705.55239521 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 7.0 1.67365269461 418% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 33.0 19.7664670659 167% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 22.8473053892 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 44.5496596655 57.8364921388 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 83.6060606061 119.503703932 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.2121212121 23.324526521 65% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.24242424242 5.70786347227 22% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 18.0 6.88822355289 261% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.24677463988 0.218282227539 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.061415467389 0.0743258471296 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.056468005778 0.0701772020484 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.134568108174 0.128457276422 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0643023572325 0.0628817314937 102% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 14.3799401198 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 48.3550499002 116% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.197005988 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.03 12.5979740519 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.06 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 117.0 98.500998004 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 11.1389221557 72% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.9071856287 67% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.